Dolphins may select Edwards at 2

[inFINSible]

Coming to a team like Miami, who have two established starting WRs, is more condusive to having an immediate impact than going to a team that needs a starting WR. Playing the role of third WR should be relatively simple for someone as talented as Edwards due to the fact that the coverages won't be geared towards him, most of his routes are going to be go routes or easy hitches, and he won't be pressured to carry the load. This is the role that CC thrived in during his rookie season. Evans last year with the bills, also played this role to the "T". It's a great role for big plays. Quick strikes that put points on the board. A WR like Braylon could definately pay off in his first season.

 

[KB21]

Mel Kiper's Draft Board:

http://espn.go.com/melkiper/index.html

#2 - Ronnie Brown
#3 - Braylon Edwards

GBNReport's Draft Board:

http://www.gbnreport.com/2005top100.htm

#1 - Braylon Edwards
#2 - Ronnie Brown

Pro Football Weekley:

#3 - Braylon Edwards
#4 - Ronnie Brown

They have Alex Smith and Cedric Benson #1 and #2.

 

[KB21]

Coming to a team like Miami, who have two established starting WRs, is more condusive to having an immediate impact than going to a team that needs a starting WR. Playing the role of third WR should be relatively simple for someone as talented as Edwards due to the fact that the coverages won't be geared towards him, most of his routes are going to be go routes or easy hitches, and he won't be pressured to carry the load. This is the role that CC thrived in during his rookie season. Evans last year with the bills, also played this role to the "T". It's a great role for big plays. Quick strikes that put points on the board. A WR like Braylon could definately pay off in his first season.

So, you would rather have a third wide receiver with the second pick in the draft rather than a starting tailback who can affect the game running the ball as well as catching the ball?

 

[lsdean]

I wouldn't have a problem with Edwards at #2. I'd just be mad we couldn't trade down.

This is how I feel. I would really like to have Edwards but getting several extra picks would be great.

 

[inFINSible]

So, you would rather have a third wide receiver with the second pick in the draft rather than a starting tailback who can affect the game running the ball as well as catching the ball?

I don't recall saying I wanted anything, I'm just making a case.

What I want and what we get, may be two different things and I want to feel that if we don't get what I want, it's still okay.

To answer, your question, I want to trade down and pick up a RB....if we have to make a pick at number two, taking Edwards is the only way there will still be be any chance of trading down....and if we get stuck with him, oh well, just a stud WR on the team.

It's win win.

 

[KB21]

I don't recall saying I wanted anything, I'm just making a case.

What I want and what we get, may be two different things and I want to feel that if we don't get what I want, it's still okay.

To answer, your question, I want to trade down and pick up a RB....if we have to make a pick at number two, taking Edwards is the only way there will be any chance of trading down....and if we get stuck with him...oh well, just a stud WR on the team.

It's win win.

Logic doesn't follow that view either. Picking a player with the intent of trading him is a mistake. If we can't get value for the pick in a trade, what makes you think we will get value for the player we take with that pick. It's this simple. Minnesota either gives the Dolphins both first round picks and a mid round pick, or they can watch Cleveland take Braylon Edwards with the third pick. If Washington wants Edwards, then they can give us their two first round picks, a mid round pick, and a late round pick. If not, then they can kiss Edwards good bye.

Miami will simply take the player they have their eye on anyway, and that player is Ronnie Brown.

 

[inFINSible]

Logic doesn't follow that view either. Picking a player with the intent of trading him is a mistake. If we can't get value for the pick in a trade, what makes you think we will get value for the player we take with that pick. It's this simple. Minnesota either gives the Dolphins both first round picks and a mid round pick, or they can watch Cleveland take Braylon Edwards with the third pick. If Washington wants Edwards, then they can give us their two first round picks, a mid round pick, and a late round pick. If not, then they can kiss Edwards good bye.

Miami will simply take the player they have their eye on anyway, and that player is Ronnie Brown.

I could certainly live with that too but, there are many people who say Braylon is the BPA.

 

[finjim]

Brown was so good he couldn't even start for his OWN team


wow !

:shakeno:

 

[KyPhinfan13]

I'm trying to figure out why some of you believe taking a running back with the second pick is such a bad thing but are perfectly content with taking a wide receiver with the second pick.

Logic does not fit that opinion. A wide receiver doesn't and never will affect the game the way a running back does. Plus, wide receivers almost never make the immediate impact that running backs make.

Because the drop-off from the top 3 running backs to the next group of running backs is not as much as the drop-off between the top tier wide receivers and the second tier group. Plus the fact that Linehan runs a lot of 3 WR sets makes me think that we should take Edwards.

Maybe Ricky comes back :eek: and decides he likes playing for someone with an IQ higher than a bag full of hammers!!!!

Seriously, we can get a RB later. RB's are a dime a dozen and unless they just stand out as major studs, you don't spend the #2 pick in the draft on one of them. If we trade with Minnesota, yes you might see us go RB in round #1.

I still have a feeling we're not going to unload the pick and will get Edwards (or Smith if he falls to #2).

 

[AZStryker]

I'm trying to figure out why some of you believe taking a running back with the second pick is such a bad thing but are perfectly content with taking a wide receiver with the second pick.

Logic does not fit that opinion. A wide receiver doesn't and never will affect the game the way a running back does. Plus, wide receivers almost never make the immediate impact that running backs make.

Thank you! Finally someone who understands football.

 

[nick1]

we are going to trade down in my opinion and should end up with something like this:

2 1sts (trade down with Minn.)
1 2nd (Surtain trade)
2 3rds (1 of these 3rds would be part of a Minn. deal)
1 4th
1 5th
1 7th

that would give us a total of 8 draft picks, we currently only have 5 though

 

[KB21]

Because the drop-off from the top 3 running backs to the next group of running backs is not as much as the drop-off between the top tier wide receivers and the second tier group. Plus the fact that Linehan runs a lot of 3 WR sets makes me think that we should take Edwards.

Maybe Ricky comes back :eek: and decides he likes playing for someone with an IQ higher than a bag full of hammers!!!!

Seriously, we can get a RB later. RB's are a dime a dozen and unless they just stand out as major studs, you don't spend the #2 pick in the draft on one of them. If we trade with Minnesota, yes you might see us go RB in round #1.

I still have a feeling we're not going to unload the pick and will get Edwards (or Smith if he falls to #2).

Sorry, but wide receiver is the dime a dozen position in this instance. There is no way on this earth that a wide receiver has more value than a running back. Wide receivers simply do not impact the game the way running backs do.

If we are just going to sit here and take a player based on the idea that his position doesn't derserve to go that high, then we should just take whichever quarterback drops to that spot. Because in that case, there isn't a position on the field that has more value than the quarterback position.

 

[KB21]

we are going to trade down in my opinion and should end up with something like this:

2 1sts (trade down with Minn.)
1 2nd (Surtain trade)
2 3rds (1 of these 3rds would be part of a Minn. deal)
1 4th
1 5th
1 7th

that would give us a total of 8 draft picks, we currently only have 5 though

I can't believe that there are still people who are willing to accept just a 2nd round pick for arguably the best cornerback in the NFL when Philip Buchanan got a 2nd and a 3rd in a trade.

 

[CrunchTime]

I'm trying to figure out why some of you believe taking a running back with the second pick is such a bad thing but are perfectly content with taking a wide receiver with the second pick.

Logic does not fit that opinion. A wide receiver doesn't and never will affect the game the way a running back does. Plus, wide receivers almost never make the immediate impact that running backs make.

I agree with you but I think Saban is playing all the angles to increase his chances at trading down.He was using Smith as bait before and now that there is talk that the Niners might draft Smith he has switched baits to Edwards.

I too believe a QB is the only position that makes long term value sense considering the 15 million plus signing bonus involved at the No 2 spot .

 

[DrAstroZoom]

I'm hoping this is more Saban Sorcery. Not that I wouldn't be content with Edwards, but there are three players I'd be happier with at #2: Smith, Brown and (yes, even)Benson.