2019 Draft Discussion

[Chieferific]

11 minutes ago, warfelg said:

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.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here but those % don't mean anything as it relates to Gary. He is a 3tech. We already have two 3techs. Where is he going to go in replace of Heyward/Tuitt in any of those schemes. And please don't say kick one of the inside. You don't move a player to a spot he's not as effective at (Heyward/Tuitt to DT) just to put another player at his spot (Gary to DE) that he, at best, may be just as good at.  

[Chieferific]

3 minutes ago, warfelg said:

And I somewhat disagree, but like I said, with a good combine he can prove that.

Well yes, that could change everything which I guess was the crux of your original post. 

[warfelg]

Just now, Chieferific said:

Well yes, that could change everything which I guess was the crux of your original post. 

Yes.  I'm not 100% sure what his bend is like.  I think he's more a base 4-3 end, but if he can prove he can really bend, he's jumping up my list.

[warfelg]

2 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

Not trying to beat a dead horse here but those % don't mean anything as it relates to Gary. He is a 3tech. We already have two 3techs. Where is he going to go in replace of Heyward/Tuitt in any of those schemes. And please don't say kick one of the inside. You don't move a player to a spot he's not as effective at (Heyward/Tuitt to DT) just to put another player at his spot (Gary to DE) that he may be only just as good at.  

I disagree he's a 3T.  He's a 5-8T.

FWIW, Heyward has gained a majority of his stats the last 2 years out of 'traditional' UT spots.

[Chieferific]

2 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I disagree he's a 3T.  He's a 5-8T.

FWIW, Heyward has gained a majority of his stats the last 2 years out of 'traditional' UT spots.

I'm assuming that is because of the prevalence of the Nickel. Are you suggesting that Heyward is a better UT then 3-4 DE? Do you really believe that. 

[warfelg]

1 minute ago, Chieferific said:

I'm assuming that is because of the prevalence of the Nickel. Are you suggesting that Heyward is a better UT then 3-4 DE? Do you really believe that. 

Not suggesting that at all.  Just saying, most of Heywards production (like Tuitt) comes from interior rushes.  You could use this as a two sided coin:  Do we play more 2-4 because Tuitt and Heyward are better interior rushers, or are Tuitt and Heyward better interior rushers because we play the 2-4 more.

[warfelg]

And just a bit of commentary on this weekend and stuff we are talking about:

This is where the combine is big.  We disagree on what Gary's best NFL position is.  This happens a lot in scouting rooms.  You look at the tape of Gary and he lines up at the 6/7T a lot, but does some 5 ad 8 T stuff.  But he produces a lot out of this position.  So you need to figure out what he's going to be best at.

So now you watch his drills.  How does he do in drills to bend?  What are his hips like in these hip movement drills?  Does he keep his feet clean or is he stumbling?  What's his 10 yard split like?  3 cone?

Lets say case 1: 10 yard is ok, 3 cone is good, hip movement drills show tightness, but his feet are clean.  He's a 3/5T

Case 2: His 10 yard is good, 3 cone is great, shows great fluidity in the hips and the feet are clean.  He's a 7T with the size to play the 5T.

[Chieferific]

3 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Not suggesting that at all.  Just saying, most of Heywards production (like Tuitt) comes from interior rushes.  You could use this as a two sided coin:  Do we play more 2-4 because Tuitt and Heyward are better interior rushers, or are Tuitt and Heyward better interior rushers because we play the 2-4 more.

The answer is simple. Who the heck else were they gonna put there? Both are very good players that are talented enough to slide in. They both are better outside. If Gary can prove he can stand up outside then it's a moot point.  

[Chieferific]

6 minutes ago, warfelg said:

And just a bit of commentary on this weekend and stuff we are talking about:

This is where the combine is big.  We disagree on what Gary's best NFL position is.  This happens a lot in scouting rooms.  You look at the tape of Gary and he lines up at the 6/7T a lot, but does some 5 ad 8 T stuff.  But he produces a lot out of this position.  So you need to figure out what he's going to be best at.

So now you watch his drills.  How does he do in drills to bend?  What are his hips like in these hip movement drills?  Does he keep his feet clean or is he stumbling?  What's his 10 yard split like?  3 cone?

Lets say case 1: 10 yard is ok, 3 cone is good, hip movement drills show tightness, but his feet are clean.  He's a 3/5T

Case 2: His 10 yard is good, 3 cone is great, shows great fluidity in the hips and the feet are clean.  He's a 7T with the size to play the 5T.

Agreed. Do you think Zadarious Smith is a good comp? The Ravens stand him up. 

[warfelg]

1 minute ago, Chieferific said:

Agreed. Do you think Zadarious Smith is a good comp?

I think he’s better. 

[Chieferific]

5 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I think he’s better. 

Ok, what about usage? Meaning do you envision him being used the way the Ravens use Smith. That seems to be what you mean.  I don't feel he is as fluid in space as Smith. 

[warfelg]

12 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

The answer is simple. Who the heck else were they gonna put there? Both are very good players that are talented enough to slide in. They both are better outside. If Gary can prove he can stand up outside then it's a moot point.  

You think both would be better off as 4-3 ends than inside the tackles in a 3-4 or 2-4? They don’t play inside because there’s no one else. 

[warfelg]

4 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

Ok, what about usage? Meaning do you envision him being used the way the Ravens use Smith. That seems to be what you mean.  I don't feel he is as fluid in space as Smith. 

Year 1 i see him as a pass rusher only. I kinda gave you a player I imagine him being used like earlier. Clowney. Move him all around. If he’s producing, moving him will do more than anything to help. 

[jebrick]

Ravens run a Hybrid defense with 3 down and one pass rusher.  If it is close to the Pats base hybrid, they have 2 interior players as 2-gap and 2 players as 1 gap.  I think Smith spells Stuggs who is the pass rusher in their scheme.

 

[warfelg]

I think you’re a little guilty of trying to pigeon hole him as one thing right now.