Chieferific Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, warfelg said: Rahsaan Gary going to be on our radar after this weekend. I've seen him going top 10 mostly. But he's a hand in the dirt guy, yes? 280+ standing up seems unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 5 minutes ago, Chieferific said: I've seen him going top 10 mostly. But he's a hand in the dirt guy, yes? 280+ standing up seems unlikely. Read between the lines on what Colbert said and you come away with this: We need to go back to an emphasis on production in college over combine numbers. Honestly, I don't care if he's 280+. If his hips check out and he's got the bend, he's on my short list. We need to stop looking at certain size guys. Especially if that 2-4 is going to become more prolific. Having one of your EDGE guys being that much bigger is only going to help. Who cares if it telegraphs who's coming. We had that with James Harrison and Joey Porter (Between the two of them, their career coverage rate was 15%) for years as pure pass rushers. Sometimes it helps with the confusion not to have the 'which one is coming' but the sudden 'he's not coming'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chieferific Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, warfelg said: Read between the lines on what Colbert said and you come away with this: We need to go back to an emphasis on production in college over combine numbers. Honestly, I don't care if he's 280+. If his hips check out and he's got the bend, he's on my short list. We need to stop looking at certain size guys. Especially if that 2-4 is going to become more prolific. Having one of your EDGE guys being that much bigger is only going to help. Who cares if it telegraphs who's coming. We had that with James Harrison and Joey Porter (Between the two of them, their career coverage rate was 15%) for years as pure pass rushers. Sometimes it helps with the confusion not to have the 'which one is coming' but the sudden 'he's not coming'. A 2-4 as a Base is losing football imo. Teams will push them back and run all over them. There's a reason the 3 point stance exists...Leverage. I know you're a coach so I know you know that. He's a 3-Tech who may have the ability to slide inside in a Hybrid. With Tuitt and Heyward on the roster his early 1st Rd price is too expensive. *And I agree the "who's coming" scheme is over rated. Watt is the coming guy. Draft a coverage OLB (Walker/Pratt) in the 3rd or Edwards later. CB/ILB in the first 2 Rds. Defense coming together. Edited March 1, 2019 by Chieferific Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 He does not have the feet or the bend to play outside in the NFL. He has phone booth quickness which is not an outside trait. He is pure 3-tech and will be a pretty good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Um, didn't say 2-4 was the base, just we're using it more and more. And that's the reason you get a edge guy that's bigger. I disagree he's going to be a guy that moves inside. He doesn't have the inside finesse moves. He converts speed to power very well. Has a great outside jab, inside swim. Good bend. He starts low and gets lower. He's done it standing up some at UM. Just because you are in a 2 point doesn't mean you can't get great leverage, but you need better hip mobility and ankle bend to get low in a two point stance. If you have the ability in the lower body to be explosive and bent you can play on the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chieferific Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, warfelg said: Um, didn't say 2-4 was the base, just we're using it more and more. And that's the reason you get a edge guy that's bigger. I disagree he's going to be a guy that moves inside. He doesn't have the inside finesse moves. He converts speed to power very well. Has a great outside jab, inside swim. Good bend. He starts low and gets lower. He's done it standing up some at UM. Just because you are in a 2 point doesn't mean you can't get great leverage, but you need better hip mobility and ankle bend to get low in a two point stance. If you have the ability in the lower body to be explosive and bent you can play on the edge. Ok, you didn't specifically say it was the Base but you mentioned it as an important factor to draft him. If the 2-4 isn't being run where does he play? Standing up on the Outside in a 3-4 or Nickel? I just don't see it. I don't see him inside either but as mentioned, perhaps in a Hybrid (NASCAR) type front. If you could get the same leverage in a 2 point as you could a 3 point, the 3 point wouldn't exist. You know that. Don't read these comments as criticisms of Gary. He a nice player. But I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel. We have our 3Techs. Just draft another OLB that can cover and occasionally rush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Put him the OLB spot. 2-4 is a nickel formation FWIW, because it puts 5 DB's out there. You can get the same leverage in the 2 point as the 3 point from the edge. What works there is how well do you stay low after you start. If you come up out of the 3 point fast it doesn't do anything for you. If you can stay lower out of the 2 point then it works. But here's my big thing. Some of y'all are talking about an edge guy from day 1 of the draft like he's got to play 100% of the snaps in day 1. I don't need that. If year 1, they unleash him as a pass rusher, and rotate him with Dupree for coverage or edge setting, there's nothing wrong with that. Develop the other parts of his game while he's using his best assets from day 1. The need to find these certain players if getting old. Keep complaining about the same issues while looking for the same thing out of the draft. What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. What's wrong with reinventing the wheel some with our defense somewhat? It struggled in some spots for us. Isn't that a sign that we need to reinvent some things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFF Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 If AB is traded...and James or a comparable vet is not signed....would you guys be against drafting TE Hockenson at 20 if he’s somehow there? Just asking as a general question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcash4 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Defensive Charting breakdown from 2018: - 3-4: 30%, 2-4: 29%, Dime: 37%, 4-3: 10% Moral of the story - draft talent players, figure out how to use them. We need to stop fitting players to letters on a roster. Personally, I believe defenses will be largely positionless as they evolve with modern offenses. I don’t care if we take a 4-3 DE, a Mack, a nickel corner, a hero saftey....just give me a talent football player. They will fit into a defense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, AlanFanecaFan said: If AB is traded...and James or a comparable vet is not signed....would you guys be against drafting TE Hockenson at 20 if he’s somehow there? Just asking as a general question... Yes-ish. I know he's likely to be better than Vance McDonald, but having those two doesn't really help spread the field sideline to sideline at the snap. Let's say we get a high 2 for Brown, and you think you can either move into the late first or move up in the 1st without giving up 20, then getting Hockenson at 20 is worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Dcash4 said: Defensive Charting breakdown from 2018: - 3-4: 30%, 2-4: 29%, Dime: 37%, 4-3: 10% Moral of the story - draft talent players, figure out how to use them. We need to stop fitting players to letters on a roster. Personally, I believe defenses will be largely positionless as they evolve with modern offenses. I don’t care if we take a 4-3 DE, a Mack, a nickel corner, a hero saftey....just give me a talent football player. They will fit into a defense. This, this, so much this. This is why I like the Idea of Gary. He's an outstanding player, and we were in sup packages, 76% of the time, which means you can find a way to use him somewhere. And again, read into what Colbert said yesterday, and this is what he's getting to. He literally said "we need to have a defense that gets us the ball back, so we got to emphasize production". That's what that means. Stop looking at the 'prototype' or 'base 3-4' fits. We flipped around too much to looking at the combine, and using the tape to backup the combine; as opposed to looking at the tape and using the combine to back it up. The two perfect examples of that: Bell and Conner. Their Combine results weren't great. But whack the tape from college on both of them and you just see production. And what the combine did for you was show that yes they are pass catchers, they have side to side movement. The perfect example of what you are talking about here is Jadeveon Clowney. Houston played a 3-4, but they didn't worry about it. He's an ultra productive player. So they just took him. I got a friend that does charting for the Texans, and since being drafted, Clowney has played: 3-4 OLB, 3-4 DE, 2-4 OLB, 2-4 DE, 4-3 OLB, 4-3 DE, 4-3 DT, 3-4 NT That's their charting with Clowney since coming in the league. He's used all over. So I again go with, who cares with a guy like Gary. He's ultra productive, reduces our dependency on blitzes, and can move. Edited March 1, 2019 by warfelg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, warfelg said: And again, read into what Colbert said yesterday, and this is what he's getting to. He literally said "we need to have a defense that gets us the ball back, so we got to emphasize production". That's what that means. Stop looking at the 'prototype' or 'base 3-4' fits. We flipped around too much to looking at the combine, and using the tape to backup the combine; as opposed to looking at the tape and using the combine to back it up. The two perfect examples of that: Bell and Conner. Their Combine results weren't great. But whack the tape from college on both of them and you just see production. And what the combine did for you was show that yes they are pass catchers, they have side to side movement. which means Baker over Murphy ( for one example). Actual production vs projection. They want high floor guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chieferific Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 8 minutes ago, warfelg said: Put him the OLB spot. 2-4 is a nickel formation FWIW, because it puts 5 DB's out there. You can get the same leverage in the 2 point as the 3 point from the edge. What works there is how well do you stay low after you start. If you come up out of the 3 point fast it doesn't do anything for you. If you can stay lower out of the 2 point then it works. But here's my big thing. Some of y'all are talking about an edge guy from day 1 of the draft like he's got to play 100% of the snaps in day 1. I don't need that. If year 1, they unleash him as a pass rusher, and rotate him with Dupree for coverage or edge setting, there's nothing wrong with that. Develop the other parts of his game while he's using his best assets from day 1. The need to find these certain players if getting old. Keep complaining about the same issues while looking for the same thing out of the draft. What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. What's wrong with reinventing the wheel some with our defense somewhat? It struggled in some spots for us. Isn't that a sign that we need to reinvent some things? The 2pt Vs 3pt was referring to the 2-4 scheme and specifically those over the ball. Yes of course "OLBs" are better off standing up. I get what you are saying. I just don't think he can be effective standing up. Plain and simple. There are better options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, Chieferific said: The 2pt Vs 3pt was referring to the 2-4 scheme and specifically those over the ball. Yes of course "OLBs" are better off standing up. I get what you are saying. I just don't think he can be effective standing up. Plain and simple. There are better options. And I somewhat disagree, but like I said, with a good combine he can prove that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, jebrick said: which means Baker over Murphy ( for one example). Actual production vs projection. They want high floor guys. It can mean more than just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts