2006 NFL Draft Do Over (1 Viewer)

[GroveDiesel]

USA Today

USA Today goes back and redoes the 2006 NFL Draft 1st round based on who teams SHOULD have taken looking back.

Some interesting stuff there. Really interesting to me is to see them have the Bills picking Donte Whitner. After the flack the Bills got after taking Whitner at 8, it's nice to see someone looking back and saying that it was the right pick.

 

[Despyzer]

Some interesting stuff there. Really interesting to me is to see them have the Bills picking Donte Whitner. After the flack the Bills got after taking Whitner at 8, it's nice to see someone looking back and saying that it was the right pick.

It seems to have worked out well for them, but that doesn't necessarily make it the right pick. There was every indication that they could have slid down ten to twenty or more picks and Whitner would still have been there.

 

[zadok]

I really enjoyed that. They should have one of those every year.

Also a FBG "do over" of fantasy picks from the prior year...

 

[nerangers]

Based on the premise of that draft, shouldn't the Patriots have a different Running Back? Shouldn't it be Addai or Marice-Drew? Just curious.

I saw something like this last year, and like the premise. I agree, it would be nice to see something like this based on the FBG rankings before the season, and after the season.

 

[corpcow]

Here's who they could have taken had they known how the season would go and how injuries went? I mean... come on. How about Colston *anywhere* before the 7th, as opposed to 7th overall? Would he have been nearly as successful as a rookie in San Fran as opposed to a high-powered Saints offense with Drew Brees who loves his big targets? Just saying - in a lot of cases the success was directly related to the situation.

Hindsight is sometimes, not always, 20/20. Right now, we can say "here's what you should have done", but what about their future careers? Maybe, just maybe, Colston looks like Clayton next year.

This whole thing is uninteresting and classic overreaction.

Just my :(

 

[Giggity]

Some interesting stuff there. Really interesting to me is to see them have the Bills picking Donte Whitner. After the flack the Bills got after taking Whitner at 8, it's nice to see someone looking back and saying that it was the right pick.

It seems to have worked out well for them, but that doesn't necessarily make it the right pick. There was every indication that they could have slid down ten to twenty or more picks and Whitner would still have been there.

Everyone is obsessed with "value". Getting "value". Picking a guy before his ADP is a BAD BAD move. Bills should have traded down, gotten "value".What if Whiter got taken? Then what? They really wanted him, he was a perfect fit, in a big need position. Risk that for "value"? Everyone is so worried about "reaching". Overpaying. Buy low. Sell high.There's a ton of FF people who only draft people who slip past their ADP. Good value they call it. Too bad that means you've had Jamal Lewis on your team the last 3 years. Every year there's a point Lewis becomes "great value". Just say no.Back to the point, I've seen numerous people get burned by trading down. Assuming RBs/WRs will go before QBs in rookie drafts. That extra 2nd doesn't do you much good if you don't get your biggest need area filled. If you can hit on a pick like they did by reaching, reach every time. This whole value play stuff is so overrated, and usually not even realistic. The Bills knew better then anyone else (shocking I know) what they need, and who. They didn't want to risk missing out, so they got their man. And it worked out beautifully. I always encourage people to overpay, reach, go get the man you want. If you believed MJD was the real deal last year, and took him before Addai/DWill you would have been labeled a moron. Trust your gut, go get your man, and don't let the herd drive you. It's so laughable that someone suggested looking back, the Bills still should have traded down. Don't let the draft experts tell you who should you take. Don't let FBGs/AntSports tell you who you should take. Everyone who "reached" for VY/MJD, you go tell them to go back and trade down for "value". They'd laugh in your face. Everyone is so scared to look stupid. Go down with your picks, don't go 6-7 with Dodds picks.Rant over.

 

[-OZ-]

11. DENVER — TAMBA HALI

14. PHILADELPHIA — MARIO WILLIAMS



30. INDIANAPOLIS — JERIOUS NORWOOD

I know, they needed a RB, but shouldn't they have just traded for Turner?

 

[BGP]

Here's who they could have taken had they known how the season would go and how injuries went? I mean... come on. How about Colston *anywhere* before the 7th, as opposed to 7th overall? Would he have been nearly as successful as a rookie in San Fran as opposed to a high-powered Saints offense with Drew Brees who loves his big targets? Just saying - in a lot of cases the success was directly related to the situation. Hindsight is sometimes, not always, 20/20. Right now, we can say "here's what you should have done", but what about their future careers? Maybe, just maybe, Colston looks like Clayton next year. This whole thing is uninteresting and classic overreaction.Just my

It is interesting to see just how wrong the highly-paid professionals can be at the pseudo-science of drafting.

 

[BGP]

Everyone is obsessed with "value". Getting "value". Picking a guy before his ADP is a BAD BAD move. Bills should have traded down, gotten "value".

I'm not obsessed with value. Although perhaps it might be more accurate to say that how I value football players is different than what you usually read about. I value winning at the line of scrimmage, and having top offensive and defensive lines to the extent that I'm willing to not worry about other positions to get there. This is modeled after what I've seen for years in the NFL. Its all about the line of scrimmage. A classic example is Jeff Garcia. He sucks in Cleveland and Detroit. The talking-head analysts who don't understand the game laugh and say he's washed up. Then those same analysts are shocked when goes to the Eagles and plays well. Well, he finally is playing behind a good line in philly. If you build a quality offensive line, you can find QBs and RBs to play behind it. There's lots of talented guys out there who never get a chance because they don't have the horses up front.

 

[Despyzer]

It's so laughable that someone suggested looking back, the Bills still should have traded down. Don't let the draft experts tell you who should you take.

Yeah.... Whitner + picks > Whitner alone is so laughable. Thanks for your insight.

 

[GroveDiesel]

It's so laughable that someone suggested looking back, the Bills still should have traded down. Don't let the draft experts tell you who should you take.

Yeah.... Whitner + picks > Whitner alone is so laughable. Thanks for your insight.

There were several reports that the Bills did in fact attempt to trade down but that no teams in the area that they felt comfortable trading down to actually wanted to trade up to where the Bills were. You are making the assumption that a lot of people made in believing that there were teams that desperately wanted to trade up and there's very little evidence to back that up. They didn't want to trade down past 16 because then you start risking the Vikings, Cowboys or Chargers taking him. And they weren't trading down to 16 with the Dolphins. So which team between 9 and 15 do you think really wanted desperately to trade up to #8? Everyone assumes that it's easy to trade down and stockpile extra picks and that's just simply not always the case. Teams have to feel comfortable that they're still going to be able to get their guy and another team has to like a guy enough that they're willing to give anything up to move up. And just because all of the mock drafts and "experts" believed that Whitner would be there in the bottom third of the draft doesn't make it so. They're wrong about guys all the time. What's really funny is listening to somebody chastise the Bills for making a good pick instead of trading down when he has no idea what actually went on in the draft room.

 

[pettifogger]

Enjoyable read but I think it misses the point when it has the 49ers taking Colston at number 7. If we are using 20-20 hindsight then we know he's available for 6 more rounds. A better test would be who each team should have taken from players that would have been gone by their next pick.

 

[-OZ-]

It's so laughable that someone suggested looking back, the Bills still should have traded down. Don't let the draft experts tell you who should you take.

Yeah.... Whitner + picks > Whitner alone is so laughable. Thanks for your insight.

There were several reports that the Bills did in fact attempt to trade down but that no teams in the area that they felt comfortable trading down to actually wanted to trade up to where the Bills were. You are making the assumption that a lot of people made in believing that there were teams that desperately wanted to trade up and there's very little evidence to back that up. They didn't want to trade down past 16 because then you start risking the Vikings, Cowboys or Chargers taking him. And they weren't trading down to 16 with the Dolphins. So which team between 9 and 15 do you think really wanted desperately to trade up to #8? Everyone assumes that it's easy to trade down and stockpile extra picks and that's just simply not always the case. Teams have to feel comfortable that they're still going to be able to get their guy and another team has to like a guy enough that they're willing to give anything up to move up. And just because all of the mock drafts and "experts" believed that Whitner would be there in the bottom third of the draft doesn't make it so. They're wrong about guys all the time. What's really funny is listening to somebody chastise the Bills for making a good pick instead of trading down when he has no idea what actually went on in the draft room.

nobody knows except those that were there. The only players that would have been worth trading up for were Cutler and Leinart.At the time, I thought AZ would trade up, but they didn't have to.Aside from maybe Cleveland, which had and has so many holes to fill that they couldn't afford to trade up (and they wanted to go D-heavy), I don't see a team that should have. So in the end, he's a good pick, regardless of whether he would have dropped 8 or more slots, if Buffalo couldn't make a move.

 

[-OZ-]

Enjoyable read but I think it misses the point when it has the 49ers taking Colston at number 7. If we are using 20-20 hindsight then we know he's available for 6 more rounds. A better test would be who each team should have taken from players that would have been gone by their next pick.

you're thinking that only that team has hindsight. If each team has 20/20 hindsight, Colston would not have lasted past #10 at most.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

It's so laughable that someone suggested looking back, the Bills still should have traded down. Don't let the draft experts tell you who should you take.

Yeah.... Whitner + picks > Whitner alone is so laughable. Thanks for your insight.

There were several reports that the Bills did in fact attempt to trade down but that no teams in the area that they felt comfortable trading down to actually wanted to trade up to where the Bills were. You are making the assumption that a lot of people made in believing that there were teams that desperately wanted to trade up and there's very little evidence to back that up. They didn't want to trade down past 16 because then you start risking the Vikings, Cowboys or Chargers taking him. And they weren't trading down to 16 with the Dolphins. So which team between 9 and 15 do you think really wanted desperately to trade up to #8? Everyone assumes that it's easy to trade down and stockpile extra picks and that's just simply not always the case. Teams have to feel comfortable that they're still going to be able to get their guy and another team has to like a guy enough that they're willing to give anything up to move up. And just because all of the mock drafts and "experts" believed that Whitner would be there in the bottom third of the draft doesn't make it so. They're wrong about guys all the time. What's really funny is listening to somebody chastise the Bills for making a good pick instead of trading down when he has no idea what actually went on in the draft room.

Couldn't agree more. So many of these mock drafts by "experts" are just continuous rehashes of each other. Half of the posters on this board have mock drafts. I'm not knocking anybody, it's all for fun. But just because Kiper and couple other guys say Whitner is a 2nd rounder or whatever doesn't mean 32 NFL scouting staffs agree. For all we know 20 other teams loved this kid and would have taken him arond the same position or just a smidge lower.

 

[Despyzer]

There were several reports that the Bills did in fact attempt to trade down but that no teams in the area that they felt comfortable trading down to actually wanted to trade up to where the Bills were.What's really funny is listening to somebody chastise the Bills for making a good pick instead of trading down when he has no idea what actually went on in the draft room.

Sorry... didn't realize you were there.

 

[massraider]

Considering the Raiders got Thomas Howard in the 2nd round, I honestly think I'd rather have Mario Williams. Heck, I'll take Kiwi there, and everyone can call it a reach. RE is a gaping hole for OAK.

 

[trader jake]

This redraft will probably look just as "incorrect" as the real draft does to us today.

Knowing what we know now does anyone believe that Colston at #6, Devin Hester at #18, and Richard Marshall at #19 are great selections? Each of them had outstanding rookie seasons but they each benefitted greatly from the system and talent playing around them (which makes them a great pick by their GM). I highly doubt they would have near the same success with their redraft teams.

On the other end Mario Williams at #14 and Vernon Davis at #17 in particular scream overreaction to their disappointing rookie years. Super Mario showed some nice skills last season but had verry little around him to take pressure away and Vernon Davis suffered an injury.

And why would DeAngelo Williams and Jerious Norwood be first round selections at all? Each has some skills and may develop, but we can already tell that neither is a full time 20+ carry a game back. Some may disagree with that but IMO neither of these guys will be "the man" and carry an offense in the NFL and at the RB position you better be able to do just that or the value isn't there with a 1st round selection.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

The Titans are probably the team really kicking themselves in their keister.

They called Devin Hester and told him they were taking him in Round 2. Then selected that fat gob of goo from USC.

Seeing as they don't have Bobby Wade or Pacman Jones this year - don't you think they could have used a punt returner / situational WR and scrub CB?

 

[Jous]

I hate stories like these...especially about the 2006 draft... because it seems the media has already decided for sure that Young will be an all-star, and Mario Williams a bust.

It could still go either way. But frankly, I find it more likely that Young will be a bust than Williams.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Curious about the Saints taking Bush over Colston. I wonder if the majority of Saints fans would rather have Bush than Colston for the rest of their careers, if they could only keep one.

 

[Routilla]

The Titans are probably the team really kicking themselves in their keister.They called Devin Hester and told him they were taking him in Round 2. Then selected that fat gob of goo from USC.Seeing as they don't have Bobby Wade or Pacman Jones this year - don't you think they could have used a punt returner / situational WR and scrub CB?

I'm sure that stings everytime they think about it and it probably didn't help watching Sportscenter last year and seeing DH running back kicks for TDs.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Curious about the Saints taking Bush over Colston. I wonder if the majority of Saints fans would rather have Bush than Colston for the rest of their careers, if they could only keep one.

Really Chase? Are you that disappointed in Bush?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Curious about the Saints taking Bush over Colston. I wonder if the majority of Saints fans would rather have Bush than Colston for the rest of their careers, if they could only keep one.

Really Chase? Are you that disappointed in Bush?

It's not a knock on Bush. Colston got 1,000 receiving yards as a rookie in 12 games. That's incredibly rare. He's a stud. He was your number 1 fantasy WR through 10 weeks this year. He had a dominant rookie season, the likes of Moss, Boldin, Glenn, Galloway and Clayton. Moss and Boldin were/are top WRs; Glenn and Clayton had injury problems, and I think Galloway was an excellent and probably the most underrated receiver of this generation.Colston's going to be a stud. He was better than Bush last year. Maybe Bush will be a stud, and maybe Bush will be better than Colston...but I don't think it's very clear cut.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Counting playoffs, in 14 games Colston had 80/1156/8.

In 12 regular season games, Colston had 1,038 yards, an average of 87 YPG. That's the most receiving yards per game by any wide receiver since the merger. Only Moss and Boldin topped 80 RYPG as rookies.

 

[Despyzer]

He had a dominant rookie season, the likes of Moss, Boldin, Glenn, Galloway and Clayton.

You left out Michael Clayton. Oh, wait...

 

[Chase Stuart]

I also think the 2006 Saints were more like the 1995 Seahawks or the 1998 Vikings than the 1995 Patriots or 2004 Bucs, making the comparisons to Moss and Galloway the best ones. Colston was on a team that had four different players top 650 receiving yards, and he still was dominant. Good stuff.

Maybe this should be a poll.

 

[Bluesbomber]

Being a Bears homer I looked to see who the Bears would've drafted but alas they had no pick

Instead Jerry Angelo drafted in later rounds 2 players Devin Hester and Mark Anderson that the writer speculated should have been first round picks.

Nice job Angelo.

 

[cstu]

This redraft will probably look just as "incorrect" as the real draft does to us today.

Knowing what we know now does anyone believe that Colston at #6, Devin Hester at #18, and Richard Marshall at #19 are great selections? Each of them had outstanding rookie seasons but they each benefitted greatly from the system and talent playing around them (which makes them a great pick by their GM). I highly doubt they would have near the same success with their redraft teams.

On the other end Mario Williams at #14 and Vernon Davis at #17 in particular scream overreaction to their disappointing rookie years. Super Mario showed some nice skills last season but had verry little around him to take pressure away and Vernon Davis suffered an injury.

And why would DeAngelo Williams and Jerious Norwood be first round selections at all? Each has some skills and may develop, but we can already tell that neither is a full time 20+ carry a game back. Some may disagree with that but IMO neither of these guys will be "the man" and carry an offense in the NFL and at the RB position you better be able to do just that or the value isn't there with a 1st round selection.

Just my 2 cents.

I'm not getting you here. What makes you so sure neither can be full-time backs?