Mark Barron solid starter vs Luke Kuechly, Pro Bowler

[nathanlt]

I don't understand why Mark Barron is such a favorite on this board. Yes, we need a safety. We need new blood. But if a replica of Sean Lee is available to you, pick him and make LB a strength, as it should be in the 3-4.

What is it about Mark Barron that sets him apart as such a clear cut choice? Harrison Smith had more tackles, more passes broken up, and more forced fumbles, although Barron had more interceptions. Harrison Smith could be picked in the 2nd round, and would provide a boost to tackling production.

So with Smith still available in the mid to high second, why trade in your first pick for a safety that's not far better than the next guy? Because your need dictates it? That's how you get a busted draft pick.

If at all possible, always go with a safe pick in the first round, it will pay you back for the next decade.

 

[Primetime42]

Barron is a pretty safe pick as far as SS's go.

Smith might not be there at 45. Other top DE and LB prospects will definitely be.

 

[DFWJC]

Mark Barron could someday make multiple Pro Bowls.

Check back in 3 years.

I say that not taking anything away from Kuechly.

 

[cowboysooner]

Kuechly is a better player, but there is a reason certain positions keep falling to you in the draft.

Inside OL, linebackers and running backs will almost always be there.

 

[Avery]

Kuechly is KC bound unless Poe is on the board (then prompt the warroom debate).

 

[InmanRoshi]

I don't know why you would assume Kuechley is an automatic Pro Bowler. He didn't make a lot of cataclysmic plays in college that get people noticed for Pro Bowls. Last year he had no forced fumbles (does it bother anyone that a guy who supposedly made 190 tackles last year can't force a fumble 1 time?). No sacks. He got accredited for these crazy tackle totals (oftentimes tackle stats are highly dubious, IMHO), nearly half of which were assisted tackles (aka "Oh he jumped on the at the end of an 8 yard run, we'll give him an assisted tackle for that"). His best trait is he's good in coverage for a linebacker, which I fully recognize is a valuable skill, but I don't think it's the kind of skill that's going to get him the kind of name recognition that's necessary for Pro Bowls. Also, LBs taken highly in the draft bust at a pretty amazing rate.

I dunno, maybe it's because I'm not really a fan of these run around and chase finesse LBs who rack up these huge tackle numbers jumping on piles after the offense has already made positive yardage, but I'm not that awestruck by him. I'm more of a fan of LBs who who play downhill, can make plays behind the line of scrimmage and are physical and can stack and shed. I'm more of a Seau kinda guy.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I don't know why you would assume Kuechley is an automatic Pro Bowler. He didn't make a lot of cataclysmic plays in college that get people noticed for Pro Bowls. Last year he had no forced fumbles (does it bother anyone that a guy who supposedly made 190 tackles last year can't force a fumble 1 time?). No sacks. He got accredited for these crazy tackle totals (oftentimes tackle stats are highly dubious, IMHO), nearly half of which were assisted tackles (aka "Oh he jumped on the at the end of an 8 yard run, we'll give him an assisted tackle for that"). His best trait is he's good in coverage for a linebacker, which I fully recognize is a valuable skill, but I don't think it's the kind of skill that's going to get him the kind of name recognition that's necessary for Pro Bowls. Also, LBs taken highly in the draft bust at a pretty amazing rate.

I dunno, maybe it's because I'm not really a fan of these run around and chase finesse LBs who rack up these huge tackle numbers jumping on piles after the offense has already made positive yardage, but I'm not that awestruck by him. I'm more of a fan of LBs who who play downhill, can make plays behind the line of scrimmage and are physical and can stack and shed. I'm more of a Seau kinda guy.

My one concern with him is if he can hold up in a 3-4. The games I've seen of him make him look like a much better fit in a 4-3.

 

[texbumthelife]

My one concern with him is if he can hold up in a 3-4. The games I've seen of him make him look like a much better fit in a 4-3.

He is definitely a 4-3 guy who needs some big dogs in front to eat up blocks. He is perfect Tampa-2 material. He would get mauled in the 3-4.

I get the comparisons to Lee, because they're both white and athletic (yes being white has something to do with it whether anyone wants to admit it), but really, they play nothing alike. Lee is far more explosive and aggressive and willing to throw his body around.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think it's this board. Very few liked Barron up until a couple of weeks ago. Virtually every scouting report you read says he's rock solid top to bottom. there are a good 5 or 6 teams that are looking at him and trying to figure out how to get him. It's not this board, it's outside of this board that has lead to this point. I think everybody here just finally stopped trying to argue it and started accepting that fact that people who do this for a living love this guy.

That's what I think it is.

 

[Teague31]

Bruce Carter

 

[nathanlt]

I don't know why you would assume Kuechley is an automatic Pro Bowler. He didn't make a lot of cataclysmic plays in college that get people noticed for Pro Bowls. Last year he had no forced fumbles (does it bother anyone that a guy who supposedly made 190 tackles last year can't force a fumble 1 time?). No sacks. He got accredited for these crazy tackle totals (oftentimes tackle stats are highly dubious, IMHO), nearly half of which were assisted tackles (aka "Oh he jumped on the at the end of an 8 yard run, we'll give him an assisted tackle for that"). His best trait is he's good in coverage for a linebacker, which I fully recognize is a valuable skill, but I don't think it's the kind of skill that's going to get him the kind of name recognition that's necessary for Pro Bowls. Also, LBs taken highly in the draft bust at a pretty amazing rate.

I dunno, maybe it's because I'm not really a fan of these run around and chase finesse LBs who rack up these huge tackle numbers jumping on piles after the offense has already made positive yardage, but I'm not that awestruck by him. I'm more of a fan of LBs who who play downhill, can make plays behind the line of scrimmage and are physical and can stack and shed. I'm more of a Seau kinda guy.

Ok, I truly appreciate your comments, I think Kuechly is more likely to go the Pro Bowl than Barron is, but I enjoyed the perspective on finesse versus downhill, although I will point out the sports science piece that shows Kuechly hitting 15% harder than Dwight Freeney. Pretty good for a finesse guy.

 

[Afigueroa22]

Bruce Carter

'Nuff said.

 

[speedkilz88]

Bruce Carter

Shiny new toy syndrome.

 

[nathanlt]

My one concern with him is if he can hold up in a 3-4. The games I've seen of him make him look like a much better fit in a 4-3.

I had not heard about that regarding Kuechly. Thus the question. I can see why Dallas wouldn't take him now, because he doesn't fit the scheme.

On the other hand though, Rob Ryan's defense is 4-3 sometimes and 3-4 in other situations, with Ratliff dropping into coverage, so scheme might not be as much of a factor as it is with other teams.

 

[AbeBeta]

Bruce Carter

You need 3 solid inside LBs

 

[DBOY3141]

You need 3 solid inside LBs

Lee, Connor, Carter

 

[DFWJC]

Shiny new toy syndrome.

Wouldn't Kuechly be the same thing at this stage?

 

[Wulfman]

I had not heard about that regarding Kuechly. Thus the question. I can see why Dallas wouldn't take him now, because he doesn't fit the scheme.

On the other hand though, Rob Ryan's defense is 4-3 sometimes and 3-4 in other situations, with Ratliff dropping into coverage, so scheme might not be as much of a factor as it is with other teams.

I just wanted to point out that this is a very common misconception. Just because there is a 4-man front does NOT mean they are running a 4-3 defense.

I know there are stat sites out there that go through play-by-play and say the Cowboys used a 3-4 this percentage of the time and a 4-3 this percentage of the time, etc. But they are counting EVERY 4-man front as a 4-3 unless it's some extreme dime package, and that's simply not accurate. The Cowboys actually ran more 4-6 defense last year than they did 4-3. I'll even go so far as to say that if you watch the film and really look at the personnel groups when the Cowboys have a 4-man front, you'd be hard-pressed to find any plays where they ran a 4-3 with 4 down linemen and 3 LBs.

There will undoubtedly be those who debate this, but in watching game film, it's simply true. The Cowboys will run the 4-6 and the 4-2-5, or some variation of them, nearly half of the time. But a guy who is a solid MLB in a 4-3 scheme would not necessarily do well in those alignments.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I had not heard about that regarding Kuechly. Thus the question. I can see why Dallas wouldn't take him now, because he doesn't fit the scheme.

On the other hand though, Rob Ryan's defense is 4-3 sometimes and 3-4 in other situations, with Ratliff dropping into coverage, so scheme might not be as much of a factor as it is with other teams.

I've watched him some and he can't shed blocks as well as Sean Lee in my opinion. He is an excellent tackler and he flows to the football better than most I've seen, but his dynamic plays seem predicated on his being kept clean. I personally worry that Kuechly ends up with a ton of tackles five to seven yards down-field because he is having a more difficult time disengaging from blockers.

I'm sure Kuechly would disagree with me though.

 

[NeonNinja]

Wouldn't Kuechly be the same thing at this stage?

Winner!