Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WindyCity

James Daniels vs the Jets

Recommended Posts

I went back and watched James Daniels against the Jets. The scoring breakdown is as follows,

++: dominant rep
+: good rep
x: push, or nothing to do
-: bad rep
--: brutal rep that effected the play

Run

++:5
+:14
X: 5
-: 7

-There were a number of plays where Daniels flat out destroyed people in the run game. His lower body power is really impressive and he digs DLmen out and moves them.
-The long Cohen run he pancakes Henry Anderson and Cohen cuts right behind him.
-Howard TD he blocks down like a snow plow and Howard goes off his *** into the endzone.
-He had a couple of vicious pull blocks and a couple where he missed guys running underneath him
-His bad reps were mostly technique breakdowns where he lost his feet and did not generate any drive.
-He also needs to slow down at the 2nd level as he got there out of control and missed the speedy Jets LB.

Overall impression: He may be the Bears most physical run blocker right now after 1 start.

Pass

+: 20
X: 6
-: 6
--: 1

-I was impressed with the consistency I saw in his pass blocking. He did a really nice job of setting his base and landing his punch and his long arms are evident on tape.
-When the guy was in front of him he very rarely lost the rep, the -- was a quick swim from Sheppard that beat him clean for a pressure and incompletetion.
-He struggled some with the blitzes and stunts. I dinged him for another couple pressures when he did not recognize the twist and was unable to recover.
-Daniels has an incredible base. There were a number of plays where he lost the rep early, but was able to drop his hips and shut down the bull rush after a recovery.

Overall: I really liked what I saw and the issues were not physical, but recognition which will come with time and experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WindyCity said:

I went back and watched James Daniels against the Jets. The scoring breakdown is as follows,

++: dominant rep
+: good rep
x: push, or nothing to do
-: bad rep
--: brutal rep that effected the play

Run

++:5
+:14
X: 5
-: 7

-There were a number of plays where Daniels flat out destroyed people in the run game. His lower body power is really impressive and he digs DLmen out and moves them.
-The long Cohen run he pancakes Henry Anderson and Cohen cuts right behind him.
-Howard TD he blocks down like a snow plow and Howard goes off his *** into the endzone.
-He had a couple of vicious pull blocks and a couple where he missed guys running underneath him
-His bad reps were mostly technique breakdowns where he lost his feet and did not generate any drive.
-He also needs to slow down at the 2nd level as he got there out of control and missed the speedy Jets LB.

Overall impression: He may be the Bears most physical run blocker right now after 1 start.

Pass

+: 20
X: 6
-: 6
--: 1

-I was impressed with the consistency I saw in his pass blocking. He did a really nice job of setting his base and landing his punch and his long arms are evident on tape.
-When the guy was in front of him he very rarely lost the rep, the -- was a quick swim from Sheppard that beat him clean for a pressure and incompletetion.
-He struggled some with the blitzes and stunts. I dinged him for another couple pressures when he did not recognize the twist and was unable to recover.
-Daniels has an incredible base. There were a number of plays where he lost the rep early, but was able to drop his hips and shut down the bull rush after a recovery.

Overall: I really liked what I saw and the issues were not physical, but recognition which will come with time and experience.

Guy just turned 21 last month.  You don't get man strength usually until mid 20s.  He could be a beast in a few years. 

Still don't know why they didn't stick him at center from day 1 and let him grow along with the young team.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Guy just turned 21 last month.  You don't get man strength usually until mid 20s.  He could be a beast in a few years. 

Still don't know why they didn't stick him at center from day 1 and let him grow along with the young team.  

 

 

 

Mitch and Cody are best friends.  The decision not to move Cody was bc of the desire to keep Mitch happy.  As long as there arent snap issues I'm fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daniels can play. The physical tools pop off the tape.

He had no business falling to 29.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WindyCity said:

James Daniels can play. The physical tools pop off the tape.

He had no business falling to 29.

A big deal was made about his size.  Before the combine everybody thought he was sub 290.  The combine he showed up at 305 every bit as athletic as he played.  Afterwards he said he could get to 310 in a weekend if he wanted to.  Hearing hes pretty close to 320 now, still looks ridiculous with the athleticism.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, WindyCity said:

James Daniels can play. The physical tools pop off the tape.

He had no business falling to 29.

It was a good draft for g/c's.   39 is still pretty high for a guard/center. 

Q. Nelson

Ragnow

Price

Hernandez

Smith

Were the guys drafted ahead of him. They were all highly thought of too.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WindyCity said:

James Daniels can play. The physical tools pop off the tape.

He had no business falling to 29.

He fell to 39.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2018 at 2:18 PM, beardown3231 said:

He fell to 39.

Typo. 

Still shouldn't have fallen, though. He's a first round guy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×