PDA

View Full Version : Peter King's Mock Draft 2012


Smilin Assassin
04-17-2012, 09:19 AM
http://cnnsi.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=Peter+King%27s+Mock+Draft+-+04.23.12+-+SI+Vault&urlID=476132891&action=cpt&partnerID=289881&fb=Y&url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1197390/index.htm

25 BRONCOS

WILL PICK

Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

SHOULD PICK

Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

Denver will be stunned that Brockers is still on the board. And delighted. The Broncos lost free-agent defensive tackle Brodrick Bunkley to the Saints a month ago, and this raw but promising 6'5" 322-pounder could play nose or a more versatile tackle role. "On potential," one coach told me, "Brockers deserves to be a top 10 pick."

socalorado
04-17-2012, 09:21 AM
Brockers also has the highest BUST potential.
If hes sooo freakin good, and a top 10, slam dunk pick,
why is hes still there at #25?

Smilin Assassin
04-17-2012, 09:26 AM
Brockers also has the highest BUST potential.
If hes sooo freakin good, and a top 10, slam dunk pick,
why is hes still there at #25?


Because we had McDaniels for almost 2 years in Denver and now God thinks he owes us one....

TheReverend
04-17-2012, 09:30 AM
That'd be cool but that might be the worst mock draft I've ever read in its entirety lol

vancejohnson82
04-17-2012, 09:33 AM
no way it goes down like that

Dedhed
04-17-2012, 09:48 AM
Brockers also has the highest BUST potential.
If hes sooo freakin good, and a top 10, slam dunk pick,
why is hes still there at #25?
I'm not a fan of Brockers at all. He falls into the "look like Tarzan, play like Jane" category for me.

He's a physical freak, but his play on the field isn't anywhere near as impressive as his measurables. If he's there @ 25 it will be because 24 teams trust what they saw on tape, and didn't over rely on what he looked like at the combine.

Bmore Manning
04-17-2012, 09:58 AM
I'm not a fan of Brockers at all. He falls into the "look like Tarzan, play like Jane" category for me.

He's a physical freak, but his play on the field isn't anywhere near as impressive as his measurables. If he's there @ 25 it will be because 24 teams trust what they saw on tape, and didn't over rely on what he looked like at the combine.

His combine and pro day were bad, his game tape is good, not to mention he was only a sophomore. My eyes must be bad, because he sure didn't play like Jane, he has great game tape.

Bmore Manning
04-17-2012, 10:00 AM
Brockers also has the highest BUST potential.
If hes sooo freakin good, and a top 10, slam dunk pick,
why is hes still there at #25?

He's only a sophomore with limited experience.
He did not perform well at the Combine or his pro day.
What his game tape shows is a freak, that brings the uncertainty.

gyldenlove
04-17-2012, 10:24 AM
His combine and pro day were bad, his game tape is good, not to mention he was only a sophomore. My eyes must be bad, because he sure didn't play like Jane, he has great game tape.

His pro day was decent, certainly an improvement over his combine results.

Brockers is all about upside, he is a physical freak with all the tangibles you want, he has limited experience which means he may have a really high ceiling with good coaching.

Bmore Manning
04-17-2012, 10:26 AM
His pro day was decent, certainly an improvement over his combine results.

Brockers is all about upside, he is a physical freak with all the tangibles you want, he has limited experience which means he may have a really high ceiling with good coaching.

Hey bro it sounds like you are supporting me and quoted the wrong person, because I want him to be the pick @25.

errand
04-17-2012, 10:58 AM
I'm not a fan of Brockers at all. He falls into the "look like Tarzan, play like Jane" category for me.

He's a physical freak, but his play on the field isn't anywhere near as impressive as his measurables. If he's there @ 25 it will be because 24 teams trust what they saw on tape, and didn't over rely on what he looked like at the combine.


Mike Mamula effect?

bendog
04-17-2012, 11:01 AM
King was drinking beer and eating a burger while doing that one.

socalorado
04-17-2012, 11:06 AM
He's only a sophomore with limited experience.
He did not perform well.

Hilarious!

LonghornBronco
04-17-2012, 11:10 AM
Brockers would be a steal at 25. We have the coaching to knock it out of the park.

Bigdawg26
04-17-2012, 11:10 AM
Because we had McDaniels for almost 2 years in Denver and now God thinks he owes us one....

Hilarious! Sad but so true!!

Rohirrim
04-17-2012, 11:22 AM
I sure as hell wouldn't have a problem at all with Brockers even though he's young and probably will take some time to get his legs in the NFL. The upside is tremendous.

gyldenlove
04-17-2012, 11:31 AM
Hey bro it sounds like you are supporting me and quoted the wrong person, because I want him to be the pick @25.

It was more your statement that his pro day and combine were bad, his pro day really wasn't bad at all.

Bigloco
04-17-2012, 11:35 AM
I dont think there's a chance he'll be there at 25. You can watch his BCS champ game highlights vs Alabama on you tube...contrast that to Jerel Worthy's game film vs WI...

If he's there at 25, I'd grab him and not look back.

BroncoBen
04-17-2012, 11:42 AM
http://cnnsi.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=Peter+King%27s+Mock+Draft+-+04.23.12+-+SI+Vault&urlID=476132891&action=cpt&partnerID=289881&fb=Y&url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1197390/index.htm

25 BRONCOS

WILL PICK

Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

SHOULD PICK

Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

Denver will be stunned that Brockers is still on the board. And delighted. The Broncos lost free-agent defensive tackle Brodrick Bunkley to the Saints a month ago, and this raw but promising 6'5" 322-pounder could play nose or a more versatile tackle role. "On potential," one coach told me, "Brockers deserves to be a top 10 pick."

Yeah.. I am not to sure the Broncos want to draft on 'Potential'.. the Broncos have a win now attitude, so whoever they draft at #25 better contribute as a starter, not a part time player, or a special teams player... but a starter.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
04-17-2012, 11:58 AM
I'd love to have Brockers. But for different reasons. I don't see him ever getting 8-10 sacks a season kind of a guy. I see him being a run stuffer . If he did that for us, I'd be happy. Unfortunately most people would consider that as a bust.

Dedhed
04-17-2012, 12:08 PM
He's only a sophomore with limited experience.
He did not perform well at the Combine or his pro day.
What his game tape shows is a freak, that brings the uncertainty.

I'm talking purely about his physical frame. His game tape does not show a freak, and his poor performances show another likely red flag that he'll never perform to the level of his Tarzan build.

Ronnie Tsunami
04-17-2012, 12:09 PM
I'd rather have Devon Still - still the best 3-tech guy out there outside Cox. Not sure why he's gone from top 20 on most experts boards to around 40, but my DT rankings still go:

1. Cox
2. Still
3. Brockers
4. Poe (bust, huge potential he won't reach)

Dedhed
04-17-2012, 12:12 PM
I'd love to have Brockers. But for different reasons. I don't see him ever getting 8-10 sacks a season kind of a guy. I see him being a run stuffer . If he did that for us, I'd be happy. Unfortunately most people would consider that as a bust.
If you're looking for a run stuffer you're far better off with Worthy or Thompson. Brockers gets moved around all the time.

lonestar
04-17-2012, 12:15 PM
Yeah.. I am not to sure the Broncos want to draft on 'Potential'.. the Broncos have a win now attitude, so whoever they draft at #25 better contribute as a starter, not a part time player, or a special teams player... but a starter.

I'm guessing you forget that any and ALL DL types are part timers in DEN at altitude, for all the whiners that pissed and moaned about bunkley only playing 43% of the time..

Few if any DL types play more than 50% at mile high..

SO even if he is a starter you may only get a few plays in each possession.. hopefully because it was 3 and out.. If not then probably will not play more than two sets of firsts down without being rested..

Bigloco
04-17-2012, 12:18 PM
sacks are why you have von miller and Elvis. No DT got 8 sacks last year

Bmore Manning
04-17-2012, 12:22 PM
SoCal that's pretty cool how you take excerpts from my quote.
I don't give you much credit anyway with that bums you like.

Deadhead I'm not sure which game or player your watching but Brockers looks and plays like a man amongst boys. How could he have a bad combine, an average pro day, but still be considered a top DT pick? I promise you it's not from how he looks.

To everyone else who thinks Brockers has bust written all over him, I guess it would be better to take Worthy, he plays 100 Percent every play and doesn't have major questions. Talk about a bust waiting to happen look no further than Worthy.

CEH
04-17-2012, 12:39 PM
Denver needs to get into this Browns trade up for Weedlen
I've seen this trade up in several national mocks this week so it must have some legs. As usual it's NE doing it again

Someone remind me again who plays DT for the NYG?

Heyneck
04-17-2012, 12:40 PM
I'd love to have Brockers. But for different reasons. I don't see him ever getting 8-10 sacks a season kind of a guy. I see him being a run stuffer . If he did that for us, I'd be happy. Unfortunately most people would consider that as a bust.

Wait... what DT gets 8-10 sacks yearly in the league?! Anything from 6-8 is awesome from a DT.

OrangeSe7en
04-17-2012, 03:48 PM
Brockers also has the highest BUST potential.
If hes sooo freakin good, and a top 10, slam dunk pick,
why is hes still there at #25?

Denver is one of those teams where people look to dump guys that need to go somewhere. This is why someone always has a TE going to Denver no matter how little it makes sense.

Lestat
04-17-2012, 04:36 PM
i definitely would not mind Brockers becoming a Bronco. he came out early and has a lot of upside. Cox would be my #1,Coples #2 and then Brockers.

Rohirrim
04-17-2012, 05:14 PM
Please no Coples. That guy has bust written all over him. He'd be worth a gamble with a third round pick.

Drunken.Broncoholic
04-17-2012, 05:23 PM
If you're looking for a run stuffer you're far better off with Worthy or Thompson. Brockers gets moved around all the time.

Yes. One season wonder. Lots of one season wonders turn out busts.

cutthemdown
04-17-2012, 06:08 PM
I'd rather just take one of the players who doesn't really fit our defense but is awesome. Like Reyes or Mercilus.

cutthemdown
04-17-2012, 06:10 PM
Denver needs to get into this Browns trade up for Weedlen
I've seen this trade up in several national mocks this week so it must have some legs. As usual it's NE doing it again

Someone remind me again who plays DT for the NYG?

Giants make due with who is healthy. If it turns out the have 4 DE that are best players they work them into the starting lineup and design defense accordingly. They have nothing at dback to start yr etc etc. I doubt though copying them is a good idea. Broncos just need to grab great football players, then find spots for them to play. Finding the spot you need then trying to get the player seems like a boondoggle to me.

Tombstone RJ
04-17-2012, 06:20 PM
I'm not a fan of Brockers at all. He falls into the "look like Tarzan, play like Jane" category for me.

He's a physical freak, but his play on the field isn't anywhere near as impressive as his measurables. If he's there @ 25 it will be because 24 teams trust what they saw on tape, and didn't over rely on what he looked like at the combine.

you're talking about Poe right? I'd be tickled if the Broncos got Brockers at 25. I'd be extremely satisfied with that pick. Over-the-top happy. Lov'n it.

CEH
04-17-2012, 06:30 PM
Giants make due with who is healthy. If it turns out the have 4 DE that are best players they work them into the starting lineup and design defense accordingly. They have nothing at dback to start yr etc etc. I doubt though copying them is a good idea. Broncos just need to grab great football players, then find spots for them to play. Finding the spot you need then trying to get the player seems like a boondoggle to me.

Exactly my Point if de is the better player and will make an impact this year I'd rather draft de than dt

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
04-17-2012, 07:16 PM
If you're looking for a run stuffer you're far better off with Worthy or Thompson. Brockers gets moved around all the time.

The thing is everybody has us drafting a pass rushing DT. I see us drafting a run stuffing ST.But I don't see the value of a run stuffing DT at. The reason I say this is because I'm looking at Del Rio defense and I see two big DT. I don't see an UT.

uplink
04-17-2012, 07:46 PM
If Brockers or another projected top 20 defender falls, I expect Denver will trade the pick maybe for a high second and a third.

Br0nc0Buster
04-17-2012, 07:58 PM
lol at us drafting Brockers
our staff has come out and said they prefer multiple year starters

We are probably going to draft Worthy
he fits what our FO is looking for
multiple year starter and productive player
has the measureables they look for for his position
has the ability to pressure the qb

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
04-17-2012, 08:29 PM
Wait... what DT gets 8-10 sacks yearly in the league?! Anything from 6-8 is awesome from a DT.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1198/trevor-pryce

Everybody is going to compare him to Trevor Pryce. And he had 8.5 the year Broncos won their second SB.

rugbythug
04-17-2012, 08:54 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1198/trevor-pryce

Everybody is going to compare him to Trevor Pryce. And he had 8.5 the year Broncos won their second SB.

Thanks I had forgotten how awesome he was.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
04-17-2012, 09:11 PM
Thanks I had forgotten how awesome he was.

The funny thing is. He was a "convertion" guy. He went from DE to DT by adding 15-20 lbs. 285 to 300? The bad thing was Shannahan went to that trick to many times and people grew tired of it.

Bmore Manning
04-17-2012, 09:17 PM
I don't get the love affair with Worthy. He can only time the snap count! In the NFL it will be first and five all day! He has few moves in his repotuare and has a below average motor.. Talk about bust or stud only.

I feel like there are some bigger DEs who could add some weight and play UT.. Cam Johnson, Guyton, Crawford, Baquette, or Malik Jackson all have played inside and out but may benefit from adding a few pounds and playing DT. I like all their upside over Bust Worthy, and then can be had in the 4-5 range!

Heyneck
04-17-2012, 09:46 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1198/trevor-pryce

Everybody is going to compare him to Trevor Pryce. And he had 8.5 the year Broncos won their second SB.

If he is anything close to Pryce... DO IT!!! A question... Brockers would be for DT right? Pryce had his best years as DE... but he transitioned to a solid DT too. Dammit Shanny... this was one we should have never let go!

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
04-17-2012, 09:58 PM
If he is anything close to Pryce... DO IT!!! A question... Brockers would be for DT right? Pryce had his best years as DE... but he transitioned to a solid DT too. Dammit Shanny... this was one we should have never let go!

Actually.....no. Pryce doesn't move to DE til '02 or '03. His best year was '99 with 13 sacks. He also had one great year after he left the Broncos with the ratbirds with 13 sacks but never gets better than 6.5 sacks the rest of the.

Heyneck
04-17-2012, 10:11 PM
Actually.....no. Pryce doesn't move to DE til '02 or '03. His best year was '99 with 13 sacks. He also had one great year after he left the Broncos with the ratbirds with 13 sacks but never gets better than 6.5 sacks the rest of the.

Thanks for the correction! Damn... that is some sweet production. Sucked that he got injured.

lonestar
04-17-2012, 10:38 PM
The funny thing is. He was a "convertion" guy. He went from DE to DT by adding 15-20 lbs. 285 to 300? The bad thing was Shannahan went to that trick to many times and people grew tired of it.

Actually he mainly played LB in college.. Not sure he was ever over 300 mostly while here in the 288-295 range..

great player until he got his first fat contract, then about 4 times a year had to be called out by mikey or Rod to not take plays off..

though his crap did not stink until mikey cut him because he would not redo his contract, went from about 6-8 mil per year to just over a mil..

to BAd we never had a legit DT or two to play with him we could have put Errand back as DB's and still looked great on D..

ZONA
04-18-2012, 12:00 AM
I'd love to have Brockers. But for different reasons. I don't see him ever getting 8-10 sacks a season kind of a guy. I see him being a run stuffer . If he did that for us, I'd be happy. Unfortunately most people would consider that as a bust.

No, just most people would never take a "run stuffer" in the 1st round. If you think a guy won't be dynamic in all phases of the game for his position, you simply don't take him in the 1st. There are a host of DT's in this draft that can stuff the run just fine that can be had in rounds 2, 3 and 4. I'm not saying Brockers won't be able to by dynamic, I'm just saying if you're drafting crew thinks he's basically a run stuffer, they won't have him on their boards as a 1st rounder.