Commander PK Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Pete Prisco at NFL.com has set up a Mock Draft. He has Washington taking Tommie Harris, DT, Oklahoma as the 5th pick overall? What do you guys think, good or bad?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TODD Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 at #5? No way. He'd be a good pick if we traded down to 7-12. I think he's a top ten talent, but too much in the top 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Bad. Not anything against harris. But there's a lot of good Dt prospects. We can get one in the second or third. or even trade down in the first, picking up other picks and still take a DT in the first. There are not a ton of DE prospects that carry high grades. And we need a DE more than we need a DT. (although Dt is critical as well). When you've got the chance to get the best DE, you should do it. Especially when it's your biggest need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sir Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 I think Randy Starks it the best DT in the draft, and he's probably not going to be the first DT selected. I'm hoping we can either acquire a pick and draft him or trade down. Its going to be hard to miss with whoever we pick. As long as we don't reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Yes absolutely, his talent is great enough to warrant a #1 overall selection in many years. Luckily for us his stock is down (if you can call still being in the top 10 "down" and those who argue that #5 is too high but #7 is not need to reevalute their statement...its two draft slots people...hardly quantifiable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Originally posted by Yomar Yes absolutely, his talent is great enough to warrant a #1 overall selection in many years. Luckily for us his stock is down (if you can call still being in the top 10 "down" and those who argue that #5 is too high but #7 is not need to reevalute their statement...its two draft slots people...hardly quantifiable Thanks yomar for being the first person to make some sense on this thread .. I agree 100%. Starks isn't on the same level as Harris, but OU haters/homers are going to make him out to be I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 He's not that impressive to be a #5 pick. You gotta be a game breaker that can turn the tide of a game, dominate the line of scrimmage to be #5 DT. He is not that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 yes he is, and time will prove me right and you wrong in fact, if you want to place a wager of some sort I'd be all for it...something like a humiliating sig line or something would seem like the best idea. In fact all Tommie Harris doubters are welcome to take part, the idea of a board full of people with "Ask Yomar he knows football and I don't" sig lines is intriguing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WM_Marylander Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 He is a solid prospect. He's easily in the top half of the first round on anyone's mock boards. But... he would be a pick of need at #5, not taking the best player available. He should go around 7-9... pending on his workouts. Which could go up. He's going to be a solid player in the NFL, with his projections, but i'm not sure he'll be a world beater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redblazer00 Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 290 pounds and runs a 4.67 40 I say heck yeah! Not impressive? How many guys do you know that big that can run that fast? Plus he benches close to 500 pounds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 No way we take a non-playmaker at any position at #5 in the draft. The only two ways i see us gettis Harris is if A: he makes it to the second round, which won't happen, or be we trade down. I don't see y we should do that, more likely then not we're goin to solve our DT situation in FA, and Sean Taylor is a playmaker on defense. If we lose Champ we have to get Taylor to make up for it. Or our defense is toast. There's only so much a d-line can do. ----------------------------------- 0-16, 19-0, skins fan till i die!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 If Harris was a year older and came out last year, he would not have been a 1st round pick. At #5? No thanks. Maybe if we get another 1st round pick for Champ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atloldskin Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 A joke at #5 IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 I'd be extremely disappointed if Harris goes #5 to us. I think he is not big enough or enough of a playmaker. SOme have speculated that he will play DE in the NFL. This pick is way too high for him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citigent Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 no way taylor or kw2 are the only two possiblitys i see the skins thinking about at five to be worth it , however once the whole champ thing works out and if the skins get a lower pick that he be available at yeah take him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Originally posted by WM_Marylander he would be a pick of need at #5, not taking the best player available. He should go around 7-9... pending on his workouts. Which could go up. Again, how anyone can say something like this with a sytraight face is beyond me. We are talking about a highly speculative process, yet to say that any player picked #5 overall would be a reach or a need yet that the same player selected 2-4 picks later would be appropriate is ridiculous. Seriously, does anyone understand this or are you all so confident in your abilities to assign value at such a refined level that you can't grasp the fact that the difference between #5 and #7 or #9 is too small to quantify? Again, taking all bets as far as Tommie Harris is concerned. Put your sig line where your mouth is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 I think Harris will be an average NFL player, not a star. If that's the bet you want to make I'm willing to take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 ok, its a bet, the parameters will be common sense and general board opinion if there is disagreement over Harris's NFL starpower. The only question is how long before we make a judgement. I'm willing to go with an evaluation at the end of the 2004 season and if the results are unclear, we can extend it from there the loser has to give up his sig rights for 365 days, agreed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WM_Marylander Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Originally posted by Yomar Again, how anyone can say something like this with a sytraight face is beyond me. We are talking about a highly speculative process, yet to say that any player picked #5 overall would be a reach or a need yet that the same player selected 2-4 picks later would be appropriate is ridiculous. Seriously, does anyone understand this or are you all so confident in your abilities to assign value at such a refined level that you can't grasp the fact that the difference between #5 and #7 or #9 is too small to quantify? Again, taking all bets as far as Tommie Harris is concerned. Put your sig line where your mouth is Yes, you can quantify the difference in those picks, there have been many people trading out of the top 5, to move down to the area you're talking about. In moving down, most of those teams pick up at least a 3rd round pick, sometimes more. That is a quantifiable difference between picking at 5 and picking at #9. If you want to put a difference in the spaces, there's one. a pick in the top 5, which would be Harris, if we took him at 5, would mean he either wouldnt' be attainable at the later pick, or no trade partner could be found to move down. He might be a pick of need at that level, but if the Front Office is smart, they move out of the top five, let a team who's drooling over either Roy Williams, or someone else that is left, a Big Offensive Tackle, or KW2, or whatever they might want at that spot, and take our shot at 9-10 of Harris being there, while adding another pick to drop back a few spots. And I'll second the idea that in last years draft, Harris might not even be considered prior to #20... All of that said, I think Harris will be a solid player, as I've said. I'm just not sure he fits for this team at that spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Originally posted by WM_Marylander If you want to put a difference in the spaces, there's one. a pick in the top 5, which would be Harris, if we took him at 5, would mean he either wouldnt' be attainable at the later pick, or no trade partner could be found to move down. This is not the same as saying that he is not worth a #5 but is worth a #7. What you are talking about in this quote is maximizing your return by analyzing the market for Tommie Harris. If the Skins don't take him, how far does he fall? Frankly as of right now I would not expect him to fall past the Lions or Falcons so trading down isn't really an option. But this doesn't speak to the evaluation of a player's talent and effectively saying he is worthy of the #7 but not the #5 which is what you said before and is a ridiculous statement: Originally posted by WM_Marylander he (Harris) would be a pick of need at #5, not taking the best player available...He should go around 7-9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 i think tommy harris will turn out to be a lot like richard seymour. an DT who can lineup as a DE and get to the QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagletooth Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I agree with Yomar. Harris has abilities that demand double and triple teams, at least at the college level. We need to control the line of scrimage more than anytyhing. More than we need a PLAYMAKER! In terms of ability only, there doesn't appear to be a huge gap between between the 5th best player and the 10th player. The difference in salary between the two, however, is exuberant. If we can trade down a few spots and still get Harris all the better. If taking Harris at #5 is considered reaching for a need then I would have to say Winslow or Taylor at #5 is reaching for a PLAYMAKER considering that Saftey and TE and not taditonally primary builiding blocks for a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I just call 'em like I see 'em, and the way I saw it, the best DT in the BCS Championship Game was not Tommie Harries, but Chad Lavalias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 the level of certainty with which you can predict a player's success in the NFL increases significantly as you increase the number of games you take into consideration from his college career. if you agree with this statement, then you would agree that basing an evaluation off of one game is not the most reliable sample size from which to draw a conclusion that being said, he did not have a bad game in the BCS although he may or may not have been the best DL on the field that day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.