Discussion in 'Mock Draft Talk' started by El Tejano, Apr 22, 2011.
Would they want our pick and what would we have to do to make it happen?
I wouldn't move that far down. All the great players will be gone. There will be ZERO starting calibre players from picks 19 on and not a single pro-bowler. I can't believe we won those 6 meaningless games last year to put us in this awful situation.
Who exactly would the Giants be targeting at #11? I don't know any of their needs.
c'mon now Clay Matthews was selected #26
Anthony Castonzo, if cowbabies take Tyron Smith #9
Six meaningless games? How about 1? The last one. Our starters should of been sitting that game. We would be picking 7 if it wasnt for that absolutely meaningless game. Well Kubiak did get to keep his job so I guess it wasnt so meaningless if you support him.
I'm just making fun of the mentality that it's "Top 5 pick or bust". If I'm not mistaken, Demarcus Ware was selected #11 overall...
And if we would have just lost 2, then we'd be picking Top 5 instead of 7 and have an even better chance at Von Miller. Super Bowl here we come. I know it was a "meaningless" game but Jacksonville didn't have Gerrard OR Jones-Drew. Andre Johnson and Mario Williams were both out. Demeco was out. Barwin was out all season. It's not like we were 100% that game and playing all our top guys.
In all seriousness, the Giants could use OL help and possibly trade up to get the guy they covet, afraid teams behind us may take him or another team trades in front of them. Additionally, we may be easier to trade with than some of the other teams.
My problem is the mindset that the draft is such a predictable process that it's a given that there's a huge difference between the 6th spot (where we would be drafting if we'd lost the J'ville game), and the 11th spot. Yeah, all things being equal, I'd rather have a higher draft choice, but when you look at the drafts since the Texans entered the league, you'll notice that it is far from automatic that the higher pick guarantees the better pick.
Here's the 6th/11th picks for the nine previous drafts the Texans have participated in. Draw your own conclusion how much those 5 spots the J'ville loss cost us might be worth.
2010 Russell Okung/Anthony Davis
2009 Andre Smith/Aaron Maybin
2008 Vernon Gholston/Leodis McKelvin
2007 LaRon Landry/Patrick Willis
2006 Vernon Davis/Jay Cutler
2005 Pacman Jones/DeMarcus Ware
2004 Kellen Winslow/Ben Roethlisberger
2003 Johnathan Sullivan/Marcus Trufant
2002 Ryan Sims/Dwight Freeney
2011 Patrick Peterson/Aldon Smith
This kind of reinforces what I'm talking about. History suggests there's at least a decent possibility that Smith (or anyone else taken at 11) could be better than Peterson (or anyone else taken at 6) in the long run for any number of reasons. For some reason lots of folks are oblivious to that, choosing to believe in the predictability of something that has proven to be unpredictable.
There is also a decent possibility that Peterson will be gone by the 6th pick, again, making that 5 spot difference less significant.
Look at 2009: We had the 15th pick and far from getting one of the elite players. We need a LB? Why not trade up to get Aaron Curry, a can't miss elite LB that's sure to be a pro bowler. Okay then, let's swap 1sts, give up our '09 2nd and '10 2nd... because Curry is elite.
Is Aaron Curry THAT much better than Brian Cushing, Connor Barwin and Ben Tate? I take my chances in how it really played out.
What really bothers me about trading up, is Texans cannot make up their mind on defensive direction. Its unwise to throw away four years invested into a 3-4 or 4-3 scheme, which they've now successfully done (Capers 3-4 02-05 & Smith/Bush 4-3 06-10) now back to the 3-4 again this time with another proven 3-4 guy in Wade Phillips.
The Texans are not 1 or 2 players away, more like 5-6-7 or 8. so they need all their picks plus to address conversion back to the 3-4
They spoke of this the other day on NFL Network but almost in a reverse fashion. They were saying that Patrick Peterson should be considered for the #1 pick because of how good he is. The two that are being considered for the #1 pick do have question marks on them and Peterson really doesn't have any. Only problem is tradition/history shows that a CB doesn't get picked with the #1 pick. Therefore, people will rank Peterson as a #6 and lower pick. However when you go and look back at alot of drafts you will see that alot of the CB that doe get drafted in the 1st round really have better percentages of actually being a good pick vs. the other positions. The example they used was how, in his draft, he was like a #10 pick but if you go back and look at the top 5 picks either one of those teams having hindsight vision would gladly take Rod Woodson over who was considered a elite talent. Those top 5 picks were:
Tampa - QB Vinny Testaverde
Indianapolis - OLB Cornelius Bennet
Houston - RB Alonzo Highsmith
Green Bay - RB Bren Fullwood
Cleveland - ILB Mike Junkin
It's unpredictable if you are going to pick a hall of famer. Being in the #1 or #10 spot doesn't guarantee anything.
Thanks for posting this Champ. I hadn't seen that before. Intersting indeed.
Separate names with a comma.