Feb Mock

[c12schleyer]

RoyleRedlegs Wrote:How is it not?
The entire pass rush is two guys. That is unsustainable.

And my closing arguments:

The sentence that followed was "at least not in the first".  We can add quality EDGE rushers in the later rounds.  Atkins is at his best when he has a stout DT/NT type playing alongside him.  I could make the argument that the position that needs to be upgraded most to boost the pass rush would be at the LB position, not the Dline at all.

Clark is Peko like, which is ok.  He does have an element to his game that Peko never had, and that is the ability to pass rush.  He isn't the pass rush force that Rankins is, but he has immense potential.  Hence, the part of the assessment you posted that states Clark has the potential to be more than a 2 down player.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 02:41 PM)c12schleyer Wrote: The sentence that followed was "at least not in the first".  We can add quality EDGE rushers in the later rounds.  Atkins is at his best when he has a stout DT/NT type playing alongside him.  I could make the argument that the position that needs to be upgraded most to boost the pass rush would be at the LB position, not the Dline at all.

Clark is Peko like, which is ok.  He does have an element to his game that Peko never had, and that is the ability to pass rush.  He isn't the pass rush force that Rankins is, but he has immense potential.  Hence, the part of the assessment you posted that states Clark has the potential to be more than a 2 down player.

What quality edge rushers come in the later rounds? 

Here's the NFL sack leaders for 2015. I highlighted the non-first rounders and included rounds for you.


So if you use the most lenient use of "later rounds" and include the 4th round, that gives you 3 of 23 guys as "late round picks."

Does that seem like you can get "quality edge rushers" in the later rounds to you?

Geno is at his best, whenever he is on the field. 
He's never played with a DT of that caliber before so how would we know?
He wrecks when Sims, Peko or Gilberry are in at DT. It doesn't matter. He's an elite player. 

[RoyleRedlegs]

For reference, Denver's NT played fewer than 50% of their snaps.
Ours played exactly 50%.

What round is a player who will ideally play 50% or fewer of the snaps worth a pick in?

Are we a true run stopping NT away from the Super Bowl? No.

If you have a chance at a guy who can play 1 tech and also provide interior pass rush, you take him. They are rare.
Carolina did it with Star Lotulelei. They don't have to sub their NT for a DE to get interior pressure.

[c12schleyer]

(02-16-2016, 02:50 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: What quality edge rushers come in the later rounds? 

Here's the NFL sack leaders for 2015. I highlighted the non-first rounders and included rounds for you.


So if you use the most lenient use of "later rounds" and include the 4th round, that gives you 3 of 23 guys as "late round picks."

Does that seem like you can get "quality edge rushers" in the later rounds to you?

Geno is at his best, whenever he is on the field. 
He's never played with a DT of that caliber before so how would we know?
He wrecks when Sims, Peko or Gilberry are in at DT. It doesn't matter. He's an elite player. 

I can use numbers to show anything.  If you want to go back over the last 10 drafts and look at players drafted in the first that were supposedly pass rush specialists and tanked, I bet that list would be longer.  

I was using the words "later rounds" for any round following the first.  

And of the 22 you reference, only 4 are DT.  That lowers the odds that Rankins will live up to expectations.  

We don't need someone to lead the league in sacks, we need a compliment player in the mid-late rounds that can get us 4-6 sacks a year.



This really is a moot point though... Rankins will get picked by a team like Detroit earlier in the 1st.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 02:59 PM)c12schleyer Wrote: I can use numbers to show anything.  If you want to go back over the last 10 drafts and look at players drafted in the first that were supposedly pass rush specialists and tanked, I bet that list would be longer.  

I was using the words "later rounds" for any round following the first.  

And of the 22 you reference, only 4 are DT.  That lowers the odds that Rankins will live up to expectations.  

We don't need someone to lead the league in sacks, we need a compliment player in the mid-late rounds that can get us 4-6 sacks a year.



This really is a moot point though... Rankins will get picked by a team like Detroit earlier in the 1st.

Wow. 
You just went right by the point and missed it entirely.
That's impressive. Just absolutely impressive. 
I'm done. This is pointless. 

[fredtoast]

(02-16-2016, 02:29 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: If you want a pure run stopping DT who will play at most, 50% of the snaps, you take them later in the draft. 

(02-16-2016, 02:56 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: For reference, Denver's NT played fewer than 50% of their snaps.

Why did you bring up Denvers NT to prove your point?


Wasn't he a first round pick?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 03:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why did you bring up Denvers NT to prove your point?


Wasn't he a first round pick?

Yes. By an older group of coaches.

Wade played him less than 50% of the snaps. 

That's not where Denver would re-draft him, guarantee it. 

The entire defense changed under Wade. Not that hard to figure out.

[RoyleRedlegs]

Let me put it this way fred, if Denver could go back to 2013 with Wade and take someone they would use for more than 48% of their defensive snaps do you think they would?

[fredtoast]

(02-16-2016, 03:21 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Yes. By an older group of coaches.

Wade played him less than 50% of the snaps. 

That's not where Denver would re-draft him, guarantee it. 

The entire defense changed under Wade. Not that hard to figure out.

I am not that impressed by arguments based on supposition.  You have no idea how much Wade would have valued Williams.

But I am not going to get in a big argument over this.  All I am saying is that of all the NTs out there to prove your point you probably should have chosen one that was not a first round pick since it is the opposite of what you were trying to argue.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 03:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not that impressed by arguments based on supposition.  You have no idea how much Wade would have valued Williams.

But I am not going to get in a big argument over this.  All I am saying is that of all the NTs out there to prove your point you probably should have chosen one that was not a first round pick since it is the opposite of what you were trying to argue.

Yes I do.
Wade has been a coach for a long time.
His last 2 coaching stops (dating back to 2012) he used a NT over 50% of the time once. He used Earl Mitchell 52% of the snaps. 

He doesn't value a big run stopping DT like you seem to think he does based on what another set of coaches did. 

You are applying another staff's set of values to a man who has shown to disagree with that...and done so with incredible amounts of success.

Before that while in Dallas, he used Jay Ratliff as his NT. Ratliff was "undersized" and used to penetrate and cause disruption. Gee that sounds familiar.
He did it in Houston. He did it in Denver.

[c12schleyer]

(02-16-2016, 03:33 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Yes I do.
Wade has been a coach for a long time.
His last 2 coaching stops (dating back to 2012) he used a NT over 50% of the time once. He used Earl Mitchell 52% of the snaps. 

He doesn't value a big run stopping DT like you seem to think he does based on what another set of coaches did. 

You are applying another staff's set of values to a man who has shown to disagree with that...and done so with incredible amounts of success.

Before that while in Dallas, he used Jay Ratliff as his NT. Ratliff was "undersized" and used to penetrate and cause disruption. Gee that sounds familiar.
He did it in Houston. He did it in Denver.

That argument can be slanted against you slightly... 

Wade coaches a 3-4... and Wade isn't our D Coordinator

If he was I would be more concerned with his preferences.  But he isn't.

Based on the fact that we keep bringing back guys like Peko and Sims gives me the impression that our coach likes to have a run stuffing DT to pair with Geno

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 03:38 PM)c12schleyer Wrote: That argument can be slanted against you slightly... 

Wade coaches a 3-4... and Wade isn't our D Coordinator

If he was I would be more concerned with his preferences.  But he isn't.

Based on the fact that we keep bringing back guys like Peko and Sims gives me the impression that our coach likes to have a run stuffing DT to pair with Geno

And how has that been working out?

Wade doesn't coach a true 3-4.
On roughly 60% of his plays he had Ware - Wolfe - Jackson - Miller as his "DL"

Wade is incredibly creative and innovative. He understands that the league has changed. You have to get more athletic up front and be able to create pressure from all parts of the DL. 

If we beat Pittsburgh, we get housed at NE because we can't get to the QB without sending more than 4 in playoffs. And we don't have the LBs to cover Gronk. 
We have to get better athletically up front.

[c12schleyer]

(02-16-2016, 03:41 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: And how has that been working out?

Wade doesn't coach a true 3-4.
On roughly 60% of his plays he had Ware - Wolfe - Jackson - Miller as his "DL"

Wade is incredibly creative and innovative. He understands that the league has changed. You have to get more athletic up front and be able to create pressure from all parts of the DL. 

If we beat Pittsburgh, we get housed at NE because we can't get to the QB without sending more than 4 in playoffs. And we don't have the LBs to cover Gronk. 
We have to get better athletically up front.

So you think Rankins is the guy?  Question... would you trade up to get him?  Is he that big of an improvement in your opinion?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 03:48 PM)c12schleyer Wrote: So you think Rankins is the guy?  Question... would you trade up to get him?  Is he that big of an improvement in your opinion?

Depends on FA. I would move up for a DT in theory though. 

Rankins, Billings (albeit he's more raw still), Nkemdiche, Buckner....

I wouldn't go top 5. But if we can keep Jones and Iloka, I would absolutely move up for a playmaker on defense. And that extends beyond DT to DE/LB as well. 

[fredtoast]

(02-16-2016, 03:41 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: And how has that been working out?

They won the Super Bowl.

And if everything is about being athletic then why did Williams play 50% of the snaps?

Would you use a first round pick on a pass rush specialist that only played 50% of the snaps?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 04:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They won the Super Bowl.

And if everything is about being athletic then why did Williams play 50% of the snaps?

Would you use a first round pick on a pass rush specialist that only played 50% of the snaps?

We did?!?! When???? I was referring to our futile efforts of bringing back the Peko and Sims of the world who offer little to no pass rush

You say it like 50% is awesome and a badge of honor.

It's not.

As far as drafting a pure pass rush specialist, they probably aren't first round picks if that is all they are projected to do.
Nickel is your base now. You best pass rushers are going to see 60% or better of your snaps.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 04:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They won the Super Bowl.

And if everything is about being athletic then why did Williams play 50% of the snaps?

Would you use a first round pick on a pass rush specialist that only played 50% of the snaps?

And Sylvester Williams isn't bad. He's just not worth a 1st round pick in that defense to Wade Phillips, as history has shown. 

[fredtoast]

(02-16-2016, 05:16 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: And Sylvester Williams isn't bad. He's just not worth a 1st round pick in that defense to Wade Phillips, as history has shown. 

History has not shown that at all.

[fredtoast]

(02-16-2016, 05:03 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Nickel is your base now. You best pass rushers are going to see 60% or better of your snaps.

So it is ridiculous to use a first round pick on a player that plays 50% of the snaps, but perfectly reasonable to use one on a guy that plays 60%?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-16-2016, 05:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So it is ridiculous to use a first round pick on a player that plays 50% of the snaps, but perfectly reasonable to use one on a guy that plays 60%?

At minimum. Yes. 
Best guess for me is, 10% is roughly 106 snaps based on our defense last year.
Reggie Nelson played 1056 snaps at 97%.

10% of that would be 105.6

This includes playoffs, so 1056/17 gives you roughly 62 snaps a game. 

That over one and a half games worth of snaps difference fred.

So you tell me, is that a big enough difference over the course of a season or not