Looking Ahead to the 2010 NFL Draft.
It is just passed mid-season and NFL Mock drafts are starting to come out as team needs start to become obvious. The Cardinals have already shown this season what their biggest problems seem to be, as Bezekira pointed out a little while ago here. So far the biggest problem has been protecting Warner, especially off the tackles. This seems to be the biggest area of need right now. Other areas of need, not in any order, tight end, outside linebacker, inside linebacker (if Karlos Dansby is gone), and defensive tackle. Looking at some of the major sites mock drafts they throw some surprises at you.
One mock draft that I follow every year is by Scouts.com. Their first mock draft has some interesting picks but has some nice guesses that look like they could happen. So lets take a gander at this and analyze the NFC West picks.
The St. Louis Rams get the number one overall pick and no real surprise here that they go with quarterback Sam Bradford. With Mark Bulger not really playing well the past few seasons and being injury prone it makes sense that the Rams go QB here. Bradford has shown that he is a pretty accurate quarterback with a decent arm and has the mobility to move around. The problem with going with Sam Bradford is that he has been injured a lot during his junior year, two same should injuries this year. Despite his injuries Bradford still has a lot of upside here and even though I would personally go with Jake Locker here, I think he is the best QB in the draft, you cannot go wrong with pick.
Grade: B+, they get one of their many needs taken care of here.
Picking 9th overall is the Seattle Seahawks. The Seahawks have had tons of injury problems on their offensive line and it has shown and that is why Scouts has them taking offensive tackle Trent Williams. Williams is not an elite blocker by any means but he has the ability to become a very good blocker in this league. He gets set quickly in pass blocking and can get blocks against the quicker defensive ends. Williams is much better in run blocking with his footwork but his problem has been the angles he takes to protect. Overall, not a bad pick with the best OT off the board, Russell Okung.
Grade: A, they take care of their biggest need, replacing the aging offensive tackle Walter Jones.
Picking 10th overall is the San Francisco 49ers. With their first pick they take quarterback Jake Locker. Earlier in the year this probably would not have been a surprise with Alex Smith looking like a bust and Shaun Hill just a fill in until they could get someone in the draft. Now this is not looking like a lock as Alex Smith has come out and played pretty good for them. If they could get him some protection he could become something for them. Locker plays for not that great of a program right now in Washington. He does not really have a whole lot of talent around him but yet he has still been able to play well. He has leaded his team to wins over the ranked USC and a very good, ranked, U of A team. He has mobility to move around if he gets in trouble and has a good strong arm. His accuracy is just at 57 % but that can be attributed to not having protection and not the greatest receivers. Put him on a good team like USC and your probably talking about a number 1 overall pick. For the Niners I would have gone with offensive tackle Bryan Bulaga.
Grade: B-, they get a quarterback filled with potential but not there biggest need.
San Francisco has a 2nd 1st round pick which they acquired from Carolina for a second round pick. This pick would be 13 overall and they would use it on defensive tackle Terrance Cody. This pick fills a void on a defensive line that has played pretty well this season. He won't wow you with athleticism but he has a ton of bulk to clog up the middle so that others can get to the QB or stop the run. Like the site says this pick is a reach, I have 5 DT's listed ahead of him but he brings what you want in a tight end, take up as many blockers as you can.
Grade: B, they get a need here with Cody.
The Arizona Cardinals are picking 21st overall. Kind of a surprise here as they take tight end Jermaine Gresham. Gresham has everything the Cards want in a tight end with his speed and bulk. Over the past 2 seasons for Oklahoma he has had 103 catches going for 1468 yards (14.3 yards per catch) and 25 touchdowns. He has the ability to stretch the field and add another weapon to Warner's arsenal. The one problem that he needs to really work on is his blocking. He misses too many assignments and sometimes just seems lost when trying to block. Other than his blocking he has the potential to become one of the better tight ends in the league. Even though Whiz loves him some good tight ends, this still comes as a surprise with other pressing needs. They have bigger needs at offensive tackle and outside linebacker. Now Gresham is more talented than some of the offensive tackles still on the board but I have Sergio Kindle rated higher and he is still on the board. My feeling is that the Cards go with Kindle in this situation. Even if we do not this is not a bad pick.
Grade: B, they get a player in Jermaine Gresham that can help in making this offense a much bigger threat in the passing game.
The Seahawks get a second 1st round pick in which they acquired from Denver for a 2nd round pick in last years draft. They are picking 29th with this pick and they choose Jahvid Best. This guy is a beast of a runner and should bring some instant credibility to a bad running game. He has the athleticism to just tear up a defense and that is exactly what Seattle wants here.
Even though he gets injured during that play, that is just amazing how high he jumped there.
Grade A, they get a very talented back which they needed.
Overall, all the teams get players that seem to have loads of potential and if done right all of them should bring something to their respective teams. How do you guys grade these teams? Do you like the pick the Cards went with? Or do you believe they should have gone with someone else?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Revenge of the Birds' (ROTB) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of ROTB's editors.
1 recs |
36 comments
| Add comment
Comments
Tight end will be a big need in the draft regardless of how this season goes
Although getting an offensive tackle would be tempting.
What? I didn't break it, I was just testing its durability, and then I placed it in the woods becuase it's made out of wood and I just thought he should be with his family.
Revenge of the Birds
by Andrew602 on Nov 13, 2009 11:45 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
TE is a big need but bigger than OLB?
With Okeafor, Haggans, and Berry getting old I think we need to get another OLB early in the draft again this year. If Kindle is there I would think we would grab him.
by Pyromnc on Nov 13, 2009 12:07 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Neither should be highest priority
Remember, we took Brown second last year at OLB. Another high pick at the spot doesn’t make sense when we have equally obvious holes at ILB, OT, and NT.
TE and OLB are needs, but I see us retaining Patrick as the starter at TE. For OLB, we just took Brown and Davis this year.
It depends a lot on who we re-sign (Dansby).
by tw3kr on Nov 15, 2009 8:48 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
how is OLB not a "priority" need
Next year Okeafor and Berry will be gone so we’re looking at Haggans and Brown as the starters. Considering Brown has nearly zero experience at the position and Davis is our only backup, I’d list OLB pretty high on our needs list.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 16, 2009 6:28 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Even though Brown has no NFL experience and will be coming back from injury,
By taking another OLB in the first couple rounds, we’d basically be wasting the Brown pick. As we’ve seen with Branch, Dykes, etc., Whiz is willing to give the guys time to come around. I’m not saying OLB isn’t a priority — I just don’t think it’s as important as the other spots. Especially considering the lack of experience we’ll have at the position next year, I see us looking more in free agency for depth here and crossing our fingers for Brown to get the job done.
by tw3kr on Nov 16, 2009 12:41 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Understood on Brown....we obviously can't give up on him
But even if he does turn into a decent starter, we still have to worry about the other side. Haggans is average, at best, and he’s getting older by the second.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 16, 2009 1:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that's certainly true
Hmm… Think I was taking the other side for granted =b
Still though, I think experience is a valid point — how likely is it that we will have Brown, effectively playing his first year, on the one side, with a rookie on the other? And if Dansby leaves, well… Highsmith will have a couple years under his belt, but not a lot of experience to show for it. It’s hard for me to imagine going from like the oldest starting LB corps in the history of the game to an almost-totally fresh crop.
If OLB is best on the board, then I can still see it, but I am convincing myself that it’s more likely we’ll look to free agency or keep Haggans (for the starter).
But you guys are talking depth, so I will, too. We need starters at OT and NT. At OT, Gandy will be gone, leaving House and Keith, neither of whom are close enough to being ready to activate on game-days. At NT, Robinson is just as old as Haggans, and his contract is up this year. I don’t know whether or not Watson has shown himself up to the challenge of taking over the position, and who’s behind him?
Realistically, we’ll need a starter at ILB. Dansby will be gone and we’ll have Hayes, Highsmith, and Walker. Highsmith’s play hasn’t been exactly encouraging up to this point — functional, I guess, but probably the only real positive step he’s taken is that he hasn’t gone down to an injury in the last two weeks. Will he be ready by then? Crapshoot.
At OLB we need a depth guy who we can expect to step into the starting lineup a year down the road, when Haggans is gone. Right? I guess the best-case scenario here would be someone who could push Haggans for the starting job, (assuming Brown earns the other spot) potentially relegating Haggans to the depth role immediately. But again, that leaves the starting LB corps looking awfully green, and to my mind is not a more pressing need than those other areas.
by tw3kr on Nov 17, 2009 1:53 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ali Highsmith
If we’ve learned anything from the past two games, it’s that Highsmith is not ready to play with the regular defense. He’s been sub-par filling in for Hayes and I can only imagine if was trying to fill Dansby’s shoes. He’s simply to small to play on the inside.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 17, 2009 6:33 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he should just stick to special teams.
He has shown he is very good on special teams, but lacks everything needed to really be an effective a ILB. He’s nice to have as depth there but I really would not want to replace Hayes or Dansby with him.
by Pyromnc on Nov 17, 2009 7:03 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
yep....we should sign Beisel
Hayes back injury scares me and Beisel is much better than Highsmith
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 17, 2009 9:09 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Would feel much more comfortable with Beisel as the backup than Highsmith.
by Pyromnc on Nov 17, 2009 9:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
+2
I was about to say the same thing about Beisel then I looked a little further and saw this. I also think Davis will get plenty of action this year as our aging OLBs will probably miss action from time to time. We will know soon enough what we have in him (I’m already on record as saying that Davis will be a better pro than Brown). Brown will be like a rookie again next year with one slight difference. He will have a year of film room time to mentally prepare for opposing offences. I think he will adjust quite nicely when its his turn.
Life's too short. Be a fan. Orlando Magic, Arizona Cardinals,Tampa Bay Rays and of course "the U"! What a winning combo.
by hevchv on Nov 17, 2009 3:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
With the 32nd pick in the 2010 NFL draft the arizona cardinal's select:
????
by CardsDefense on Nov 13, 2009 11:53 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Who Cares we just won the freaking Super Bowl!
Since Kindle is not off the board yet, and I doubt Gresham makes it to the 32nd pick, I would think Kindle. He is an OLB that should fit in well in a 3-4 system.
by Pyromnc on Nov 13, 2009 12:05 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice
I like the sound of that. Even hearing 31st this past year sounded kind of odd.
What? I didn't break it, I was just testing its durability, and then I placed it in the woods becuase it's made out of wood and I just thought he should be with his family.
Revenge of the Birds
by Andrew602 on Nov 13, 2009 12:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to have to disagree with your ratings.
You say the #1 overall pick should be Jake Locker, yet give the 49ers a B+ for selecting him with the 10th pick? If you’re getting the best QB in the draft for considerably less money, that’s an A+ to me, even if the need isn’t that great.
by LantermanC on Nov 13, 2009 1:40 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
I'd give the Cards a C with this pick.
A good TE wouldn’t be a bad pick, but it would be ignoring our biggest needs in the 1st round, which the Card’s coaching/ personnel staff wouldn’t do. If we pick up a TE in the draft I see it coming in the 4th-5th rounds. First of all, wether or not Dansby leaves, I think we should get a 1st round, NFL ready MLB (Brandon Spikes?), 2nd round OL, 3rd round OLB/ DL. Then I would go with a TE and depth for the rest of the picks (probably safety/ CB/ DL). I don’t see OLB as a great need ( we still haven’t seen what Cody Brown can do), but we definately need youth in that group. I would go OL/ MLB in the 1st round, and which ever one of those they don’t get in the 1st round should be addressed with the 2nd pick. Even if Dansby doesn’t leave, it would be nice to have that other dynamic playmaker in the middle and vamp up the linebacking corps. But on the other hand, it would be nice to draft an anchor for the O-line, but I think we have good young depth already that could strengthen the O-line if given the chance (Keith and Johnson). The Cards are set as far as their starters are concerned, we just need a couple of key positions, then draft for depth (which we’ve developed over the last couple of years).
by lifeinthepit00 on Nov 13, 2009 2:59 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Cards need Linebackers
I agree that the Cardinals most pressing need is linebackers. Whether, or not one is available when they pick remains to be seen.
by WeiWuWei on Nov 13, 2009 3:47 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
LOL
how about the 2011 Draft? any thoughts on that one yet? Personally, I’m looking forward to the 2015 Draft.
"If there's nothing wrong with me, maybe there's something wrong with the universe!"
by unnamedDBacksfan on Nov 15, 2009 9:36 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
It really is not that early to be taking a gander at the 2010 draft.
by Pyromnc on Nov 15, 2009 1:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I know, just
giving you a hard time
"If there's nothing wrong with me, maybe there's something wrong with the universe!"
by unnamedDBacksfan on Nov 15, 2009 5:59 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
1st rd TE = luxury pick.
Granted, it wouldn’t look as bad for us to do it as it did the Lions, but still, why? Patrick is the man, and I think management has already confirmed that with their off-season moves and roster strategy through the year so far.
Let’s look at our potential contracts coming up (* = Starter:
QB St. Pierre
FB Kreider*
WR Breaston (RFA)
WR Morey
WR Urban
TE Patrick* (RFA)
TE Becht
TE Spach (RFA)
K Rackers*
G Lutui*
G/T Bridges
T Gandy*
C Sendlein* (RFA)
C Claxton
NT Watson
NT Robinson*
ILB Dansby*
OLB Berry
OLB Okeafor*
CB Brown
CB Adams (RFA)
S Ware
2011 notables:
QB Warner
RB Hightower (RFA)
WR Boldin
G Wells
CB McFadden
FS Rolle
P Graham
Any names on that list worry you guys? How about the 9 starters? Next year’s Cardinals could look drastically different.
For the draft, I think ILB or OT, then NT. I think looking for a QB and secondary help later on makes a lot of sense, possibly along with a FB. The TE corps is looking to empty out in dramatic fashion, but again, I see us bringing Patrick back as the incumbent, and he shouldn’t bring a huge contract based on his body of work to this point. C and G pops out for me next, with all three starters coming up soon, but we have a good stock of young players being brought up and from what I hear it’s not going to be a strong draft for the positions. Still, with so many shipping out, it makes sense to bolster depth (another House or Keith) for the future, be it through the draft or free agency.
Believe it or not, I envision us going after another WR, albeit very late — a special teamer or potential guy we can sneak through on the practice squad for a year. Gant, our practice squad WR right now, could actually be the guy we bring up to #5 — he’s been around a while (3 years as a journeyman, I believe) and stood out for me on special teams during the preseason, as well as making all the catches thrown his way (not too many, but still a good sign). Breaston is going to get PAID by somebody, and it might not be us. Morey will probably ship out, and I doubt they will retain Urban, based on depth. Doucet and Boldin will be free agents the next year… you see where this is going.
by tw3kr on Nov 15, 2009 8:44 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
couple of corrections
Unless a new CBA is agreed upon sometime soon (which no one expects to happen), guys like Lutui and Watson will be RFA. All of the RFA’s will be easy to keep. I could see Breaston getting the highest “tender” so we’d get a first and a third if anyone signed him away from us and Watson might get the second highest tender.
Overall though this does stress our need for linebackers and tackle depth.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 16, 2009 6:32 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I didn't really feel like putting the time into getting all of those correct based on the unknown element
Retaining those guys you mentioned as RFA’s would help. And like you said, it points out some things…
What do you think we’ll do about Rackers? Teams seemed to have success drafting K’s this year, but there are usually a few decent ones floating around free agency, and everybody loves Rackers nowadays so I’m not sure what to think.
by tw3kr on Nov 16, 2009 12:45 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd try to resign Rackers.
The guy is great with onsides and those pooch kicks. He also is not afraid to go in and make a tackle. He usually makes most of his field goals. I think he is worth resigning.
by Pyromnc on Nov 16, 2009 12:53 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I bet he stays
He’s not good enough that other teams would overpay but good enough that he’s worth keeping around.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 16, 2009 1:10 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
That's about how I feel
He’s starting to get up there in years, as well (really, who isn’t on this team?), but the leg appears to be in fine shape. Kickers tend to last longer, also. Definitely worth bringing back.
by tw3kr on Nov 17, 2009 1:55 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
If you're SF, do you really take a QB first?
I get the impression that that team has enough holes that it needs a sure pick — O-line, probably — rather than a huge-risk option like a QB. I realize that Smith and Hill are far from sensational, but they have both been more serviceable than the JaMarcus Russell’s or Derek Anderson’s of professional football, and they do have Nate Davis sitting around…
On the other hand, they’ve got Gore at RB and Crabtree at WR — what’s missing?
I’m not as familiar with the 49ers as I could be, but am interested in some opinions here. I know QB is considered their weak point, but I also know they have other problems, too. Would gambling on another QB be better than hitting on another position?
by tw3kr on Nov 17, 2009 2:05 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Yea, I think they go with and OL and probably a DL with their 1st round picks.
Alex Smith has been pretty good since becoming the starter again and I think he will get better. Does not really make sense for them to draft a QB when they have bigger needs right now.
by Pyromnc on Nov 17, 2009 6:15 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
yea agreed
They also might look somewhere in the secondary considering how beat up they are this year.
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Nov 17, 2009 6:34 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point.
They have some old players also in that group too. Wouldn’t be surprised at all if they went that route.
by Pyromnc on Nov 17, 2009 7:02 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I'm thinking makes the most sense, as well
Also considering Singletary wants to forge a smashmouth, run-first, win-in-the-trenches team.
by tw3kr on Nov 18, 2009 1:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say they're off
on this pick. Gresham was probably a lock to go in the first-round but a season-ending injury has never helped anyone’s draft stock. I think he goes to a team that will see him as a steal, relative to the draft position, and #21 wouldn’t qualify for that (of course, since we’ll be picking 32nd it’s a bad mock to begin with…)
The other thing is that we’ve been seeking a tight end who’s strength is an ability to block, and if Gresham’s blocking is in question I just don’t see us picking him – healed knee or not.
by Long Beach on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
That's kind of what I was thinking about Gresham, too
He can definitely do at most half of his job! Um… what?
by tw3kr on Nov 18, 2009 1:46 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
mock drafts
before we know the actual picking order, before the combine zzzzz
by TBru on Nov 23, 2009 10:57 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

by 



















