Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by Qwickdraw, Apr 21, 2006.
Wake up people.
We have Demarcus Ware.
I do agree, but then again, if the brain trust thinks that Ware could be just as good on the strong side and bringing ML on to play the weak side, I could go with it. Parcells knows more about the players needed for the 3-4 than all the rest of us put together.
David Harrell - Pokes
You do have a point.
It appears to me many are falling in love with Lawson and trying desperately to invent reasons why he might be drafted by us, like moving Ware to the opposite side, digging up quotes from his high school coach that says he can play linebacker and so on.
I don't see it happening unless we really don't have any other options at linebacker. That means we don't see the value in Carpenter and Wimbley is gone. There is just too much that is being assumed and particularly the part about him being THE target.
I don't think any one player is someone we covet. There are probably three or four players that we really want. And I don't know if Lawson is among those three or not.
Yup, I'm with you.
We need someone for the Strong Side. That means playing the run VERY well. Lawson does not fit that bill. Ware is fine where he is....for now.
I think we are in the enviable postion where we don't have a glaring need that we feel we have to address with our first pick. A stud OLB would be nice, but probably not available when we pick. A stud OL would be nice, but probably not available when we pick.
If someone sees something they like I think we will trade down.
I am going to go with the following assumption.
That we like Wimbley and Carpenter over Lawson.
I project Wimbley will be gone before we pick (Cleveland at 12)
Carpenter should be there at 18....some argue he's not worth the 18.
There are too many teams behind us looking LB's. (NYG/NE/SF). I just don't see a trade down.
I hope we stand pat at 18 and just take Carpenter. He might never be a Pro Bowl player, but he sure looks like a solid Pro that will help this club...imo
Ware does play strong side linebacker.
Some of the time.
Because the way that our 3-4 works, and the way it will work is that the OLBs play a particular side, regardless of whether it is the strong side or not.
Ware is the LOLB.
Whoever we draft will be the ROLB.
Which ever side, right or left, that the TE lines up on will determine whether Ware or the other guy is the strong side LB for that play.
Granted, most of the time, the right side if the strong side, so the ROLB will be the strong side backer most of the time, but not all of the time.
Believe that all you want. Keep reassuring yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I just don't believe for a second that we have two starting outside linebackers that were defensive ends without a lick of linebacker experience within the past two years. One I could understand, but both? That would make us big time gamblers. I don't see us doing it, not this year.
While what you say is true, teams generally play with their tight end on the right side. The reason is that teams generally are right handed and run more to the right. This is why there is such a premium on LT on offense. They don't generally get the help from chip blocks, etc from TEs.
So while you are correct that at times he is the strong side, he's actually the weak side about 70% of the time. That means that whoever we put on the other side is going to be strong side about 70% of the time. So a guy like Lawson if put on the right side is going to have to hold his ground against a blocker (something that he doesn't tend to show) even when he's going on the pass rush so that he isn't vicitmized by the draw. Getting to the QB is only part of the equation. The route taken to get to there is just as important.
If a guy that tends to run around his blocker (like Lawson) were on the strong side were to do that in a game when there was a delayed hand-off from a one back set, there wouldn't be anybody to stop him for about 20 yards. The biggest part of playing LB isn't always in final stats. Just like the job of a DE isn't to make the tackle, it is to turn the play to the inside where the pursuit can make the play. The same can be said about OLB in the 3-4.
David Harrell - Pokes
I also think we will not take Lawson. I believe our first choice is Wimbley, second choice Carpenter. If neither is there at 18 we move back & take Howard or Ryans in the 2nd, or Gocong in the 3rd. JMO.
One thing to understand is that we don't HAVE to get a linebacker in the first round. The position is deep enough that would could easily drop down, take another player and look for Howard in the second round. It is risky assuming Howard lasts that long (I don't think Ryans escapes the first), but we did something similar when we passed up Steven Jackson for Julius Jones.
I trust what Coach Parcells sees in linebackers, just like I do running backs.
So if he thinks the difference isn't that great, we could see the linebacker in round two as you suggested.
We are spending a lot of time and energy talking about the first round LBers, when we might want to think about second round ones otherwise it will be much like 2004 when everyone panicked when we passed on Stephen Jackson and were mystified at what our ideas were.
There are several, like Howard, Gogong, Rocky McIntosh, Parys Harrelson, Jon Alston, Mark Anderson, Stanley McClover and so on.
I'm a TN Vols fan, and though it pains me to say it, I would take Mark Anderson over Parys (Hilton) Harrelson, though not by a great margin. I like Parys, but I think Anderson will be a better pro, and I still believe in Burnett.
Of course that is the problem we as fans have, setting ourselves up to be disappointed come draft day, when the club doesn't take the player we have fallen in love with, or think they should take, or have predicted they would take. NFL GM's and scouts can't afford that luxury of singling out one particular player especially when picking later in the first round.
I think Dallas is a bit of a wild card in this draft.
They have the luxary of taking the BPA whether it is a RB,WR,LB,DE, OT,OG etc....and that is what I think they will do .Makes it very hard to predict...
If a trade down is the best value than that is what they will do.
If a guy played DE in college, wouldn't he be able to play the run, take on tackles and the like? Or did NC State just let runners run wild when they ran to Lawson's side? Maybe I just don't get it. I though that was part of the reason undersized DEs in college are tweeners and often moved to OLB
Best post ever?
There have been a couple reports on this BBS that Belichick likes to draft college linebackers and make ILBs of them and draft college DEs and make OLBs of them. One can only assume that Parcells and Belichick have similar philosophies defensively, as they worked together for so long. So I'm not sure the two converted DEs is as serious an issue as are reports that Manny doesn't hold up well at the point of attack.
For those who do remember, recall when we swapped Ebeneezer Ekuban to the strong side of the line, and what John Runyan did to him? Do we really want to risk Pickle Bowl II?
Except he was a RDE in college which is opposite the side most teams generally run. That means how well he held up versus the run wasn't nearly as important for him as it was for Williams and McCargo.
If you look at stats, it simply doesn't tell the story. Lawson had 58 tackles during the season and Williams had about the same. NC State was among the NCAA leaders versus the run. I watched NC State play a lot of times this past year and Lawson was an after thought on that D-Line. McCargo was a fire plug that nobody could move and Williams was simply spectacular. Lawson made a lot of sacks, but teams couldn't afford to double him as the others on the line were so darn good.
Lawson wouldn't be the worst pick in the history of the Cowboys, but I don't believe he's a good fit for the position that we project him to.
David Harrell - Pokes
"We" could only means fans. I don't think Ireland or Parcells has spoken about this guy. More explicitly: a guy that can't hold up at the point of attack isn't fit to be a LOLB or ROLB in a 3-4. He's relegated to being a situational pass rusher. Just seems to me we can get situational pass rushers much later in this draft.