Im with you. I might end up being very wrong, but i see no way the Browns take Tannehill at #4. No way.

When the Lions passed on Joe Thomas they felt they had a franchise LT in Jeff Backus. You can use multiple receivers on the field, but not multiple LTs. Unless they had plans to do away with Backus (Millen would have NEVER done that) there was no reason for them to pick a LT, but there was a reason for us to get Calvin.

That said, I agree that the talent of the player is what should be considered more than anything else. And the fact is that in this draft there is no WR available that is rated higher than Kalil by most. Blackmon is rated slightly higher by a couple that I've seen, but not by much (1 point) and for a team like Minnesota, a LT automatically becomes the primary need to address.

And I find it interesting, Pablo, that you say the position shouldn't be focused on, after you had declared that the Lions should have used their first round picks in every draft until they found a franchise QB. Isn't that an example of focusing on a position?

Care to backpedal a wee bit?

Actually, I care to backpedal a whole bit - there is an exception to every rule and in the NFL the QB is the exception to every rule!

cough cough J. Russel cough cough


oh man I think I caught a cold or something....anyone got any purple drink?

Yes, there is an exception to every rule...and Calvin over Joe Thomas was the exception to the rule that generally a team in need at both WR and LT should not pass on the LT. But again, the Lions didn't really need a LT. I think they knew at that point Roy Williams wasn't all that as a receiver.

So tell me, if the Lions hadn't resigned Backus, and let's say that Calvin just up and retired, for whatever reason, and the Lions were picking third....who would you select? Blackmon or Kalil?

I'm not sold on Blackmon in the pros, although he was awesome in college, so based on talent (not position) I'd pick Kalil. In addition, if I had them rated the same I'd take Kalil because I think that is more of a critical position. If however, I needed both and had Blackmon rated righer on my board I'd take the WR.

OK, I agree with that.

Question: In your estimation, how much benefit do you give to a player who plays a more "critical" position?

This is something I have wondered about. When I put together my top 100 list, I tend to give extra points to positions like QB, LT, DE....just due to the position. So how much markup would you give to a LT over a WR who are basically rated the same based solely on talent and upside?

wouldnt that depend on teh quality of who you have at hand? seems like need would greatly influence those positions. do you have Backus at LT or stocker MCdougal? if you got the fatty all of a sudden LT rates significantly higher IMO.

I don't like this approach. I think team like the Lions should put together a draft board without any regards to existing talent. Once that is together, then you can nix a few positions out (like QB, Kicker).

Now combining your question with M2K, there is another big factor - where in the draft are we talking about. IMO - there is a pretty big grade difference for the players in the top 12-15 picks. In those spots, I really way talent heavily.

After that my grades start to get closer and that gap gets closer and closer the further down the draft you go. I think Mayhew takes a somewhat similar approach and that is why he always goes BPA early in the draft - after that you will see him weigh things like importance of position and need into account.

That said, I believe Mayhew takes need into account at a significantly discounted rate compared to most fans. I also think this is smart, you build teams with talent over years - fans tend to want stop gap talent to fill a whole. Good for the short run, not as good a philosophy over the long run to really increase the talent level on your team overall.

So M2K, the factor missing is where you pick in your question. Early on, say the top 1/2 of the draft I go pure talent and only break that based on tie with positional importance. That is why last year I was all for Julio Jones if he fell to the Lions even though he was a WR.

I don't think the Browns will pick Tannehill at #4 either. But, I do believe that they are cooperating in the duping of Miami because it will allow 1 more player to be available to them at #22.

Question:

If Miami does move up to #3 and picks Tannehill, would that be the 1st time ever that 3 QB's go 1,2,3?

1999 draft. Tim Couch Donovan McNabb and Akili Smith

WOW. And out of them only Donovan McNabb amounted to anything. LOL.

Kinda related to the topic....it was just reported that APPARENTLY the Vikings most likely will NOT take Kalil at #3. If that is true that will be very interesting and most definetly will scramble things up for the next few picks.

I don't believe anything until draft day. If the Vikings pass on Kalil, it will be one of the dumbest things they could possibly do. Blackmon is a good receiver, but certainly not a better pro prospect than Kalil or Morris Claiborne. If they take Claiborne they got better value than with Blackmon, but you have to wonder what their plans are for having a LT. Do they think Mike Adams will fall into their lap in round 2? Or maybe Jon Martin?

I'd be shocked if the reports are accurate.

I agree M2. I think not drafting Kalil would be a bad move for them. If it turned out to be true and I was Christian Ponder, I wouldn't be too happy.

Also, letting this information out right now, what is that going to get them? They are in the drivers seat at #3.

Like u said, I don't think I'd believe anything until draft day anyway.