Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

26 Apr 2006

Michael David Smith Chat Transcript

MDS answered draft questions tonight over at a chat hosted by our partners at Baseball Prospectus. Mike Tanier will be chatting there at noon on Sunday, right as the fourth round gets started, so you can ask all your questions about the first three rounds and what to expect on day two. Also, don't forget MDS posting at Deadspin.com during the first round, and there will be recaps after each round by Mike and Mike over at FOXSports.com.

Posted by: admin on 26 Apr 2006

13 comments, Last at 27 Apr 2006, 4:16pm by Jamie

Comments

1
by BillWallace (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 1:53am

Good stuff.

2
by brin (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 2:57am

you say you can't see anyone trading up with the texans- is this because no-one wants bush or no-one wants to give up what you'd need to get the pick?

i've also noticed that as the draft has gotten closer people have stopped questioning whether bush will be a good pro, is he that much of a lock?

3
by Michael David Smith :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 8:11am

Brin, I think it's because no one wants to give up what they'd have to give up to get to No. 1.

I think Bush is extremely talented, but I don't think he's a sure thing. I don't really think a sure thing exists, although if I had to pick one guy I'm really, really confident won't be a bust, I'd pick A.J. Hawk.

4
by BlueStarDude (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 9:05am

It's too bad for the Texans they're stuck with the number one pick (in most year's it really does seem a penalty for finishing last). Why would anyone want to spend all of that cash on a running back? Especially when you already have a decent tandem like Davis and Morency.

5
by Michael David Smith :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 11:42am

I definitely agree that it's a penalty for finishing last. The one advantage, though, is getting to negotiate with all the prospects and sign your pick before the draft. I'm surprised more teams don't take advantage of that. The Bengals reached an agreement with Carson Palmer before the draft and convinced him to take a relatively small contract. In fact, the Lions actually gave Charles Rogers, who went after Palmer, a better contract than Palmer got. (Although Palmer has already gotten a monster new deal and Rogers might have to pay back about $10 million because of his drug suspension.)

6
by Jamie (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 11:51am

Great chat...

Do you see the Packers taking Ferguson or Williams over Hawk if either of them falls? What are the chances of either of them falling to 5?

7
by Scott de B. (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 11:54am

Brin, I think it’s because no one wants to give up what they’d have to give up to get to No. 1.

This seems a bit circular reasoning. The Texans should trade down. But they can't trade down because nobody can afford the price. But the Texans set the price.

It seems to me that if the #1 pick is really not all that, that the Texans should be willing to trade with, say, the 49ers for the #6 and a third round pick, the Dallas chart be damned.

On the other hand, if the Texans would really be foolish to give up the #1 pick for anything less than two #1s, a #2, and a #3, then there is nothing wrong with just using the pick on whoever.

8
by Michael David Smith :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 12:12pm

Jamie, I think Hawk is the perfect fit for the Packers. (Which means, as a Lions fan, I hope they don't take him.) But yes, if Ferguson or Williams is on the board at No. 5, I think there's a pretty good chance that the Packers would pass on Hawk.

Scott de B., I wasn't saying I agree with the reasoning, I was just speculating about what the Texans might be thinking.

9
by PatsFan (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 12:29pm

ESPN's Michael "Word" Smith was on WEEI today saying the Pats are in the thick of the Jevon Walker hunt. Do you really think they'd trade away the picks necessary to make the trade?

10
by Nate (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 12:39pm

Why would the Packers even consider drafting Ferguson? OT has to be the strongest position on that team (Clifton and Tauscher are a very good tandem). People see "Green Bay had a bad o-line last year, let's give them an o-lineman," when in reality it was only the interior o-line that blew.

11
by jebmak (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 1:26pm

MDS, as a Lions fan, why do you blame the Lions woes on Millen? I have always attributed them to Ford as that has been the constant over the past 40 years. Of course, I understand that you can't fire an owner and maybe you can luck into someone good if they fire Millen.

12
by Michael David Smith :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 1:31pm

No question, Ford deserves a lot of blame, but as bad as they've been with Ford as the owner, these five years with Millen have been the worst five years in the history of the franchise.

13
by Jamie (not verified) :: Thu, 04/27/2006 - 4:16pm

RE: #10, Tauscher could very easily be moved to guard, his more natural position, thus solidifying the interior line.