cphil006 Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 You have a WR who in 2005 broke the franchise recieving record catching passes from Mark Brunell for gods sake . Just because you draft a WR in the first as opposed to the second or third doesn't garuntee anything . The same goes for any position you draft. I just think at #21, they are the best options, Sweed or Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 I disagree with you that there are some good receivers in this years draft class. The one I think is the best is James Hardy from Indiana. I can't believe the skins wouldn't be interested in a guy that is big and fast. I wouldn't mind getting him in the 2nd round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 sweed and kelly are the only first roundersdevin thomas is a 1st round talent had a great year last year,but he did nothing at all before that. Kelly's stock has fallen IMO,he's said to have been having issues with his knee which had been recsontructed before and the other one is arthritic,while Sweed's wrist has gotten better. I agree. Sweed and Kelly have the size, speed, and hands. Its not like we are going to draft one of these guys in the top 10. I mean, this is LATE first round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 BPA in my opinion. If the FO thinks that's a WR then so be it but I believe there are more talented D guys at that pick. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWCREDSKINS Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 My money is on this guy being our Number 1 pick. And he was a great player at Oklahoma but after the failurs that were Rod Gardner and Desmond Howard I'm scared to draft a receiver Number 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 I believe you can get better value from the draft if you pick a WR in rounds 2-5 there are injury concerns about Sweed and Kelly and we are not looking for a No.1 WR with Moss and ARE probably the starters . The other thing that makes me laugh is people are willing to throw millions at Sweed or Kelly etc but wont take a chance on Mix because he is "unproven" . What have Sweed or Kelly done to prove they are NFL ready ? I wouldn't take a WR in the first round unless there were no DL, OL, LBs or CBs of value . I think it is the least of our needs . We shouldn't throw millions at a promising Rookie in light of the fact that we have an unproven WR on our team, but we should draft OL and DL, while ignoring the fact that we've got young but unproven talent on those positions too, right? :doh: WR is more pressing of a need than LBs and CBs. We need DEPTH at CB, not a starter. Why would you draft depth in the 1st? Drafting 1 DE in the 1st is amazingly silly, when you could draft 2-3 in teh 4-6th rounds, where they tend to do well. WRs and OL in the 1st are a better idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valenski Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 2 thumbs up for Malcom Kelly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateSkinFan616 Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 After seeing numerous debates about 'who-to-draft-in-the-first-round' and browsing scout.com on my own time, I've come to the conclusion that Sweed is the better choice over Kelly if we're to pick a WR in the first round. But if both are gone by the time we pick, I think we should go with Brandon Albert if he's available or the best DE. Now some may not like the idea of drafting a OG in the first round, but he would be the safest bet if we're to make our first round pick count like we did with Landry last year. And if we don't pick him, then the Steelers surely will. Having Albert will definitely inject some youth into the OL and provide a protege for Randy Thomas and Pete Kendall to groom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbnva Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 ]']Sweed and Kelly warrant top 20 picks. Let me guess' date=' the only answer to everything is draft either a DE or an OL, right? And anyways, Sweed>Kelly.[/quote'] Personally I don't think the skins even need a 1st, we should trade it for 2 late round picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 After seeing numerous debates about 'who-to-draft-in-the-first-round' and browsing scout.com on my own time, I've come to the conclusion that Sweed is the better choice over Kelly if we're to pick a WR in the first round. But if both are gone by the time we pick, I think we should go with Brandon Albert if he's available or the best DE. Now some may not like the idea of drafting a OG in the first round, but he would be the safest bet if we're to make our first round pick count like we did with Landry last year. And if we don't pick him, then the Steelers surely will. Having Albert will definitely inject some youth into the OL and provide a protege for Randy Thomas and Pete Kendall to groom. I am slowly leaning toward Brandon Albert ... but as long as we go BPA in the first I will be happy. We have plenty of needs to go around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 ]']We shouldn't throw millions at a promising Rookie in light of the fact that we have an unproven WR on our team' date=' but we should draft OL and DL, while ignoring the fact that we've got young but unproven talent on those positions too, right?:doh: WR is more pressing of a need than LBs and CBs. We need DEPTH at CB, not a starter. Why would you draft depth in the 1st? Drafting 1 DE in the 1st is amazingly silly, when you could draft 2-3 in teh 4-6th rounds, where they tend to do well. WRs and OL in the 1st are a better idea.[/quote'] We are not looking for a starter at WR either . We hope that they will become a starter but as it stands Moss and ARE are the No1 and 2 guys and I would expect to see them on the field in 2 WR sets . I think this debate will go on untill the draft and some will be diapointed and others not . I am not sure there is a single right option. That is an advantage returning 22 starters . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins3021 Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 I was just watching some youtube videos of sweed and kelly and they both look like great big targets for campbell and would be awesome to have in the red zone. The one thing I did notice though that made me like Sweed a little more is his run after the catch and playmaking abilities. Sure Kelly has great hands and is very athletic but he doesn't quite have the explosiveness sweed has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Okay as it stands . WR we have Moss and ARE starting right now. LB - that would be a reach to pick here the starters are okay at the moment OL- Other than Heyer I am not aware of a single "young" guy we are developing on the roster right now DL - The youth movement is there I am not keen on DT/DE but we do need replacements for Daniels and Griffin. CB - Who do you have starting ? Smoot ? Springs ? can either of them be relied on ? Rogers may come back this year but don't count on it and then we have Torrence - THAT is it - Two broken down players on the backside of their careers, one maybe starter and a practice squad prospect. Not the strongest of units . I am not saying we MUST draft CB. I still say the BPA at a possition of need but focusing on 2 players because they have a collage highlight reel is short sighted . If Sweed or another WR is the BPA at 21 take them. If not look elsewhere... that is all I am saying The BPA SHOULD be Branden Albert then. Suppose, if you will, that we somehow are faced with the dilemma of choosing Sweed, DRC, Albert, or harvey, who do we choose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 If we must draft a WR, I'd rather try to land a guy like Hardy in the 2nd than use our first rounder for that. I just don't like the idea of using our first day draft picks on anything other than linemen, or possibly defensive secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Best available player on the draft board, DL, OL, or WR. Is Malcolm Kelly as good a WR as Branden Albert is a OL? Comparatively speaking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Best available player on the draft board, DL, OL, or WR. Is Malcolm Kelly as good a WR as Branden Albert is a OL? Comparatively speaking? I haven't had time to read up as much as some this draft, but what I've read about Albert is very, very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt3d Posted March 19, 2008 Author Share Posted March 19, 2008 ]']The BPA SHOULD be Branden Albert then. Suppose' date=' if you will, that we somehow are faced with the dilemma of choosing Sweed, DRC, Albert, or harvey, who do we choose?[/quote'] DRC in a heart beat. For one thing, he's slated a top-10 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 I'm just not sold on ANY of the three of Kelly, Sweed or Hardy. I see injury problems from some, inconsistancy from others and none of them really DOMINATED the college ranks, say like a Larry Fitzgerald or Braylon Edwards did. I see alot of Rod Gardner in all of them IMO. I'd rather go CB (Springs is 33, Carlos is hurt and Smoot can't be a dependable 16 gamer) or OL (Rebuild like the 81 team did when we got Grimm, May and Jacoby). The 81 team became an offensive powerhouse when the O-line was rebuilt. Riggins and Joey T were not considered pro-bowlers until the HOGS showed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Do any of these 4 WR's stats POP OUT at you that make you think we should pick them at #21 and throw a boatload of money their way? Please make an argument as to why we should.Sweed Texas 2004 23 263 11.4 37 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2005 36 545 15.1 45 5 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2006 46 801 17.4 60 12 0 5 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 19 306 16.1 52 3 1 -1 -1.0 0 0 0 0 Kelly OK 2005 33 471 14.3 42 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2006 62 993 16.0 73 10 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 49 821 16.8 65 9 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Hardy Indiana 2005 61 893 14.6 83 10 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2006 51 722 14.2 48 10 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 79 1125 14.2 79 16 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 D. Thomas Mich St. 2006 6 90 15.0 38 1 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 79 1260 15.9 80 8 27 177 6.6 23 0 0 0 Hardy probably has the best as far as catches. Kelly has the best YPC. But none of them to me are what I'd call a true blue chipper. Sorry, I'd rather have a great O-Lineman or a good CB. You can get these guys in the later rounds for less money and rebuild the trenches Nelson KSU 2005 45 669 14.9 80 8 1 -2 -2.0 0 0 0 0 2006 39 547 14.0 74 1 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 122 1606 13.2 68 11 3 -7 -2.3 1 0 0 0 Bowman OK St. 2004 18 329 18.3 52 3 1 -4 -4.0 -4 0 0 0 2006 60 1181 19.7 75 12 1 1 1.0 1 0 0 0 2007 67 1006 15.0 77 8 3 9 3.0 5 0 0 0 Bennett Vandy 2005 79 876 11.1 41 9 5 11 2.2 14 0 0 0 2006 82 1146 14.0 77 6 5 11 2.2 11 0 0 0 2007 75 830 11.1 54 5 10 22 2.2 15 0 0 0 Doucet LSU 2004 18 257 14.3 27 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2005 26 389 15.0 40 5 1 5 5.0 5 0 0 0 2006 59 772 13.1 58 8 8 59 7.4 17 2 0 0 2007 57 525 9.2 34 5 3 -3 -1.0 4 0 0 0 Steve Jackson Kentucky YEAR REC YDS AVG LNG TD ATT YDS AVG LNG TD FUM LST 2006 12 159 13.3 51 1 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 2007 61 1052 17.2 57 13 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Is it just me, or is this year's draft a bit on the unimpressive side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 We are not looking for a starter at WR either . We hope that they will become a starter but as it stands Moss and ARE are the No1 and 2 guys and I would expect to see them on the field in 2 WR sets .I think this debate will go on untill the draft and some will be diapointed and others not . I am not sure there is a single right option. That is an advantage returning 22 starters . How are we not looking for a starter at WR? The WCO style passing game generally uses more 3 wide sets. We need more than just Moss nad ARE who have also have injury concerns and I don't think we should bank on Mix becoming great...maybe we'll get amazingly lucky but it is unlikely. Thrash is a #4 and Caldwell is not bad but also hasn't even signed with us yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Best available player on the draft board, DL, OL, or WR. Is Malcolm Kelly as good a WR as Branden Albert is a OL? Comparatively speaking? That is it in a nutshell. Albert mauls people while Kelly, Sweed and Hardy do not excel at their positions. Pretty average numbers IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 We need to draft CB. Just look at the great/good cornerbacks out there, its gotta be one of the rarest positions to find talent outside of the first round. Hopefully Cromartie makes it down to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.