If you had the top overall pick, would you take...? (Sam Adams)

[Abe Sargent]

Its interesting to see how you folks break down occasionally, like being split for Harman and having contention for Boselli.

As a reminder, you are being asked to pick a player for a team with a need at every position, and you know ahead of time what a particular rookie's career will be. Do you take the player who is a sure thing, or toss teh dice and take the random top rated rookie?

Today, your choice is:

Sam Adams.

He has longevity, was credited as one half of a DT tandem that just shut down offenses, knows what a Super Bowl ring looks like, and is a strong player at an important position. To be fair, in the latter half of his career, he's been a merc, shifting from team to team with great regularity, but if you wanted to keep him around for his entire career, it'd be easy.

[MikeVic]

I'd take someone else. I don't think I'd ever take a DT with 1.1.

[Toddzilla]

Is this a beer draft? I'm taking Guinness 1.1

[MikeVic]

I'll take the beer tent at 1.1.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I'd take someone else. I don't think I'd ever take a DT with 1.1.

Kidding right? Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, Alan Page, Merlin Olsen would all be no-brainers. Warren Sapp would even be a no-brainer for me as well.

[Daimyo]

DT who played forever and was among the best at his position for several of them? Yes please!

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Danny

Kidding right? Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, Alan Page, Merlin Olsen would all be no-brainers. Warren Sapp would even be a no-brainer for me as well.

They're good of course, but if I had a need at every position... I'd gamble with a lot of other positions before taking a decent sure-thing DT. That's my opinion.

[Abe Sargent]

Currently 2:1 against ol Sam.

[Pumpy Tudors]

But he's not even retired yet! How does this poll worked??

[chesapeake]

Adams is a fine player, but for 1.1 you should be getting a perennial pro-bowler.

If you are going to go with Seahawk DT draft picks for this question, might I suggest Cortez Kennedy? Much better player, but got stuck on awful teams.

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Adams is a fine player, but for 1.1 you should be getting a perennial pro-bowler.

In reality that just doesn't happen very often... how many of the players on this list were perennial pro-bowlers?

2007 1 1(1) JAMARCUS RUSSELL QB LSU
2006 1 1(1) MARIO WILLIAMS DE NORTH CAROLINA ST
2005 1 1(1) ALEX SMITH QB UTAH
2004 1 1(1) ELI MANNING QB MISSISSIPPI
2003 1 1(1) CARSON PALMER QB USC
2002 1 1(1) DAVID CARR QB FRESNO STATE
2001 1 1(1) MICHAEL VICK QB VIRGINIA TECH
2000 1 1(1) COURTNEY BROWN DE PENN STATE
1999 1 1(1) TIM COUCH QB KENTUCKY
1998 1 1(1) PEYTON MANNING QB TENNESSEE
1997 1 1(1) ORLANDO PACE OT OHIO STATE
1996 1 1(1) KEYSHAWN JOHNSON WR USC
1995 1 1(1) KI-JANA CARTER RB PENN STATE
1994 1 1(1) DAN WILKINSON DT OHIO STATE
1993 1 1(1) DREW BLEDSOE QB WASHINGTON STATE
1992 1 1(1) STEVE EMTMAN DT WASHINGTON
1991 1 1(1) RUSSELL MARYLAND DT MIAMI (FLA.)
1990 1 1(1) JEFF GEORGE QB ILLINOIS

[Izulde]

DT just doesn't strike me as a gamechanging position, so no for a 1.1 pick.

[SteveMax58]

Absolutely I take him. 3-time Pro Bowl DT who stays (relatively) healthy, absorbs multiple OLinemen, & allows my MLB to make tackles(not fight through blockers).

Absolutely...it all starts in the trenches.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Izulde

DT just doesn't strike me as a gamechanging position, so no for a 1.1 pick.

What I think is funny is that you say that just after a post that shows three DTs being picked 1/1 since 1990. More than any non-QB position.

[Abe Sargent]

It must strike someone as gamechanging.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

In reality that just doesn't happen very often... how many of the players on this list were perennial pro-bowlers?

This list is better than you think. Ignoring the last 4 picks, which are difficult to assess this soon, Palmer, Vick, P. Manning, Pace, Keyshawn and Bledsoe are multiple pro bowlers. Maryland has one. Wilkinson had a very solid career. Emtman and Brown got injured too badly to fairly assess their abilities. Leaving Carr, Couch and Carter as busts and George in his own category as very talented idiot who probably pissed away a promising career. So, 6 in 14 are perennial pro bowlers, which is a pretty good speculative ratio if you ask me.

That said, after reading about Adams' career in wikipedia, he was substantially better than I thought. 3 pro bowls and 2 as an alternate and 11 full years of high level production. I'm going to trade my 1.1 pick for 1.8, 2.8 and 1.x for next year to take Sam with the 8th pick like the Seahawks did.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

This list is better than you think. Ignoring the last 4 picks, which are difficult to assess this soon, Palmer, Vick, P. Manning, Pace, Keyshawn and Bledsoe are multiple pro bowlers. Maryland has one. Wilkinson had a very solid career. Emtman and Brown got injured too badly to fairly assess their abilities. Leaving Carr, Couch and Carter as busts and George in his own category as very talented idiot who probably pissed away a promising career. So, 6 in 14 are perennial pro bowlers, which is a pretty good speculative ratio if you ask me.

That said, after reading about Adams' career in wikipedia, he was substantially better than I thought. 3 pro bowls and 2 as an alternate and 11 full years of high level production. I'm going to trade my 1.1 pick for 1.8, 2.8 and 1.x for next year to take Sam with the 8th pick like the Seahawks did.

Says right in the rules you can't trade. Either take Adams or the top overall pick, period. Only choices.

[revrew]

This whole concept really shows the diversity in thought. Some people are saying 1.1 is nearly a sure thing superstar, so pass up a B+ player. Some people are saying DT isn't an impact position (wtf?).

As for me, if my team has the 1.1, I need value. I need steady production. I need a player I can build my team around, since I have a lot of rebuilding to do. A bust, the risk of a bust, is the scariest thing in the world to me at 1.1. That's what makes trading down so appealing to many of us. No way I risk more than I have to. Just make sure I get production and move the team forward. This one to me is a no-brainer. I'll take the steady production of Sam Adams with 1.1 and hope for booms from 2-4 rounders, rather than risk a bust at 1.1.

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

This list is better than you think. Ignoring the last 4 picks, which are difficult to assess this soon, Palmer, Vick, P. Manning, Pace, Keyshawn and Bledsoe are multiple pro bowlers. Maryland has one. Wilkinson had a very solid career. Emtman and Brown got injured too badly to fairly assess their abilities. Leaving Carr, Couch and Carter as busts and George in his own category as very talented idiot who probably pissed away a promising career. So, 6 in 14 are perennial pro bowlers, which is a pretty good speculative ratio if you ask me.

I don't know about using pro-bowls to judge a player's value. Its a popularity content and 1(1) picks tend to be popular.

From that list I think I'd take Manning, Palmer, Pace, and maybe Bledsoe over Adams (ignoring the most recent four drafts for the reason you mentioned). Carr, Brown, Couch, Carter, George were pretty poor and clearly worse than Adams. Vick will be controversial but I'd rather have Adams even ignoring the legal trouble. Johnson had a very good career, but I'd take a very good DT over a very good WR any day. Wilkinson and Maryland had solid career I guess, but not better than Adams. Emtman is tough because he showed flashes of being amazing before his injury... Add it all up and Adams is an easy pick over a random choice from that list IMO.