Lou Pickney's 2024 NFL Mock Draft

National Football League
Draft King Mailbag

Reader feedback is always welcomed here at DraftKing.com. Send your thoughts to me at LouPickney@gmail.com.

Do you ever consider putting up a 2 round Mock? I just think the first 2 rounds play intricately with each other with regards to a teams needs. Also the first 2 rounds are where solid talent lie. Just a question. Such as Cleveland-Edwards in 1st then who do they go for in the second? Big Browns Fan George.

Lou: I have contemplated putting a two round mock on here, but to this point I haven't. Why? Because it's a collosal pain to update. Due to the cause-and-effect nature of the draft, a change of just one pick toward the top of the draft can cause a ripple effect that can be felt all the way down the first round. The same logic applies to the second round. I might do a two-rounder the next time I do a long-form mock draft (where I explain the logic behind every pick selection). The same logic applies to there on why I don't have explainers by every pick: when you start switching players, you have to write new explainers, and that can take forever and a day.

I'm inclined to think that as the draft progresses, teams lean more toward the "best player available" mindset versus need. In round two this isn't as pronounced as, say, round six, but it's still there to a degree. When you add in anticipated trades, it makes projecting what will happen all the more difficult.

Look at last year's second round and you'll see how many players went in odd positions. There were some picks that made sense from a need standpoint (i.e. RB Julius Jones to Dallas, DEs Travis LaBoy and Antwan Odom to Tennessee, C Jake Grove to Oakland, etc.), but others were a bit out there from a need standpoint (LB Daryl Smith to Jacksonville, DT Dwan Edwards to Baltimore, etc.)

I think Cleveland will trade down, but I can't guarantee that, so I have to mock this as if they won't. Without knowing if they'll have two first rounders by trading down (or a first and a high second), projecting the team's moves in the second round becomes quite difficult to do with much of a degree of accuracy.

If Cleveland sticks at #3 and goes with Braylon Edwards at WR, obviously this will impact what it will do it rounds two and three. I still think that Mike Williams is the better prospect of the two, but for some reason I have a gut instinct that the Browns will want to go with the guy who has more game experience, and that advantage goes to Edwards. But it won't fill the DE, CB, OT and QB holes. Even if Romeo Crennel thinks the QBs in-house are serviceable, the prime DE prospects will be picked over by the second round. If the Browns go WR/CB, then they'd have to wait until round three to go DE, and by then who knows who will be on the board. So therein lies the challenge of this entire process, both for me as a draft mocker (is that a word?) and the respective teams in doing the actual planning for the draft.

From: Darren Larson
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 11:08 PM
To: LouPickney@hotmail.com
Subject: Thomas Davis dropping...

I have read Vic Carucci on NFL.com has Thomas Davis dropping from a number 10-15 pick to a second round choice now because of a slow 40 yard dash time. This seems a little harsh. I am wondering if there is anything else that scouts have discovered that have made them sour on him that isn't being reported...

Can you clear this up for me, please? I have to admit I find it a little comical how a player that had great speed through his college career can now be considered too slow. It sounds like shades of Anquan Boldin all over again. Is this just one man's improper opinion, or has his stock actually dropped dramatically? I am a major Chargers fan and if it is true, then this is what I would like:

At #12, pick a DE/LB to help them in their 3-4 scheme such as Dan Cody, Marcus Spears (maybe even Shawne Merriman) and then,

At #28, grab Thomas Davis,S, in the steal of the draft, as I see it. If he's not there I would go for Mark Clayton,WR, if he's available or David Pollack, if we went a different direction than DE at#12.

Then, at#61, go after an OT such as Adam Terry or a good WR. If there wasn't great value at those positions then I would use that pick to get Kirk Morrison, LB as we have no 3rd round choice this year.

Lou: From what I've read, Davis ran between a 4.48 and a 4.50 at the University of Georgia pro day. There are some (apparently including Vic Carucci) who, based on Davis' 4.58-4.65 time at the Indianapolis combine, believe that he is too slow to play safety in the NFL. I don't buy it, and Davis' performance at the Georgia pro day should seal things. Worst case he'll be converted to an OLB (which should suit the Chargers fine if they go with him) and play that position. Either way, I'd bet the house that Davis will go in the first round, barring injury.

The Chargers in all likelihood will go with a D. Cody or Spears or Merriman at #12. There are some talented DE and DE/OLB hybrids in this draft, but the crop will dwindle considerably from #12 to #27. If Troy Williamson is still on the board, San Diego will have to give him some consideration, though realistically they'd be far better off going with defense there.

At #27 there will be receiving talent on the board. I don't know if Mark Clayton will fall that far, but if he does then certainly the Chargers should jump all over that opportunity. Right now I project them taking UAB WR Roddy White, but the options should be plentiful. If OT Jammal Brown falls, it is possible that the Chargers might snap him up there and go WR in round two.

As for OT possibilities at #61, San Diego would need some luck for Adam Terry to fall that far, but with the second round being so much of a crapshoot, it is possible. Someone like Michael Munoz is also a possibility to fall that far. If the Chargers were 10 spots higher I'd feel better about their chances there, but that's outside of their control. Don't write off San Diego perhaps taking OT Khalif Barnes at #27 and then going for someone like WR Fred Gibson at #61. They have some options, but if the second round ends with a DE/OLB, a WR and a OT in the fold for the Chargers, it should be a successful draft for the team.

From: Shomari Wills
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 12:40 PM
To: "LouPickney@hotmail.com"
Subject: Ranking the QB's

I have enjoyed you site for quite sometime now, and I wanted to write you ask you about this years QBs. I know Rogers and Smith are the consensus top two but I've been hearing different things on how the remaining QBs are ranked after that. Where do you think Fyre, Orton and Campell will come off the board? I know Clevland and Miami are two teams who will be looking for a QB later in the first day, towards which QBs do you see them leaning? Also, I can you see Denny Green taking a young, extremely gifted, yet troubled prospect like Adrian McPherson, as he did with Randy Moss. Arizona will probably take a RB in the first round and will be looking to add another young QB prospect to takeover in 2006 and McPherson seems to have the biggest upside after the big 2 QBs. This quarterback class has often been characterized as weak, and with the monster class thats coming next year( Lienhart, Omar Jacobs, Vince Young), do you think teams in need of youth at the possition like the Redskins, Packers Raiders will hold off on drafting young QBs to wait for next years crop? Thanks for you time.

Lou: I could see Charlie Frye going in the early second round (to Cleveland perhaps?), with Kyle Orton coming off not too long after that. Jason Campbell I think will also be a second rounder, though down towards the bottom of the second round. He had a very impressive 2004, but the long-term success shown by Frye and Orton can't be overlooked.

I hadn't given much thought to an Adrian McPherson-to-Arizona situation, but it would be right down Dennis Green's alley. The Cardinals don't have to worry about a QB this year per se (with next year's bumper crop waiting for the 2006 draft), but if the Cards can land McPherson with a day two pick and he pans out... then lookout. If not, then that was a chance taken that didn't work. Plenty of QBs have been given much more money before having taken a single NFL snap and turned into busts, and while McPherson brings with him a massive amount of baggage from his Florida State days, he has managed to steer clear of the law while in the Arena Football League. And there's no denying McPherson's physical talents.

Of the teams you mentioned, the Packers seem to have the least amount of time available. 2006 may be too long to wait, whereas Green Bay could land Orton or Campbell and have them spend a year learning under Brett Favre with the understanding that they'd be challenging for the starting job when Favre decides to retire. The Packers can make it clear that Favre isn't being pushed out, so Favre won't be resistant to help the rookie QB learn the system. Meanwhile, Green Bay won't feel the tremendous pressure of a first round QB needing to start SOON, which is a trap that many teams fall into (see the 2004 Cincinnati Bengals for evidence of that).

Oakland might get in on the QB fun, and I could see Al Davis bringing in Adrian McPherson as well. Imagine if McPherson and Maurice Clarett both ended up in Oakland?

I could see the Washington Redskins waiting until 2006 to go QB. They have a former first rounder in Patrick Ramsey and a playoff-experienced veteran in Mark Brunell on the roster, and Coach Gibbs might be inclined to give it one more time around with them. But if that doesn't work... think how that team would be with Vince Young running the show. But we'll have plenty of time to think about that on down the line.

Draft King NFL Mock Draft

NFL Draft Prospect Profiles

Draft King is owned and operated by Lou Pickney. © 2003-2024, all rights reserved.
Unless otherwise noted, the views expressed here are those of Lou Pickney alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any media company.