Trade a Bust for a Bust?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(02-25-2017, 10:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I agree with some of what you say here. Injuries have to be taken into account though and some great players are
made of glass like Bob Sanders and maybe even Tyler Eifert. Dennard might be one of them, i would just like to see
what he has before i call him a bust. He has fluid hips and great ball skills.

I still have high hopes for the man and am just hoping he is not made of fine china.

Heck, Frostee Rucker took many years and seemed like glass as well, he did okay here after awhile and in Zona.

Sure, injuries can be taken into account. A bad luck injury (Gio's torn ACL on a play that didn't look like anything, Dalton's broken thumb) is one thing, but if you keep getting banged up or hurt, it's another. Staying healthy is a skill, too. The reason why Sanders/Eifert/etc aren't technically busts is because of how dominate they are/were when healthy. Dennard doesn't have that.

I doubt his ball skills. He's played 585 defensive snaps. Last year ~1100 snaps was a whole season. So in a little over half a season of play, he has 84 tackles, 1 sack, 5 Pdef, 1 INT, 0 FF... that would pace out to be roughly a 160 tackle, 2 sack, 10 Pdef, 2 INT, 0 FF full season. Maybe good numbers for a linebacker, but terrible for a CB.

It's one thing if you don't have a lot of Pdef and INT because people aren't challenging your coverage (Revis in '10 had 32 tackles, 10 Pdef, 0 INT because nobody wanted a ball anywhere near him), but CBs getting that many tackles is a bad sign, doubly so when there's so little play on the ball. It means there's a lot of completions in his coverage and he then makes the tackle after it's completed. For example, DeAngelo Hall a couple years back when he had three straight years of 90+ tackles at CB because even though he made plays on balls, he gave up a bajillion yards/completions.

I honestly think Dennard's future in the NFL is at safety and he could have success there.