What if...

[Rack]

Dolphins have no LBs so they can't have any 1st LOL... Honestly, they don't have any 34 LBs in my opinion. They have an undersized guy who has heart but I think you know what I think about undersized LBs in a 34, or really, in any defensive scheme.

Can't argue with the Patriots but then again, who can draft like they can? In fact, the Patriots do make a practice of taking DTs high. They took Wilfork, Warran and Seymour all in the first round. There LBs, while not 1st round picks, are high picks. Katzenmoyer was a first round pick. Bruschi was a 3rd round pick. Johnson was a 2nd round pick. McGuinst was a 1st round pick although, he was a DE at USC. He was still a 1st round pick.

Pittsburgh, well, there current LBs are not high picks but they normally do take LBs high.

Kendrell Bell 2nd round. Joey Porter 3rd round. Steve Connely 3rd round. Jason Gildon 3rd round. Chad Brown 2nd round. Levon Kirkland 2nd round. Mike Vrabel in the 3rd. Huey Richards 1st round. That goes back a ways but you kind see what I'm getting at. On the other hand, the only DTs they've taken high are Casey Hampton 1st round, Kendrick Clancy in the 3rd and Joel Steed in the 3rd. I think that Hampton was out of the ordinary for what Pittsburgh normally does as opposed to the norm.


Chargers are pretty early into the 34 so I don't know if you can really go to school on what they've done just yet. Having said that, they took a LB first last year but they also drafted Castillo in the 1st last year and Olshansky in the 2nd the year before. Both are not playing DE but that's another story.

We took a LB 1st last year, we took Burnett in the 2nd and it looks as if we are tying to target another LB in the first this year. meanwhile, our DTs are UFAs or very low draft picks.

Niners are still at the clueless stage so what can you take from them. I look at the Old Falcons, the old Giants, the old Saints and look at those LBrs and where they were taken.

Do you think Lawson will be a good 3-4 LB? If so, then he's a Jason Taylor clone.

Taylor is fine as a 3-4 WOLB.


Either way I proved you wrong. You said more 3-4 teams have first round picks at LB then they have NG, and you were wrong. And going by %'s, it's not even close.

We took a LB 1st last year, we took Burnett in the 2nd and it looks as if we are tying to target another LB in the first this year. meanwhile, our DTs are UFAs or very low draft picks

You referred to the Pats starting DEs' (Seymour and Warren) as DTs, but when you refer to our DTs, you don't mention our DEs, one of which is a first rounder, and the other would of been a late first/early second if not for injuries.


Again, almost half the starting NGs in the NFL = First rounders. Less then 20% of the starting 3-4 LBs in the NFL were first round picks.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I never said Ngata was a can't miss player. I just said he's better then any LB in the draft not named Hawk.

I do not agree with this statement.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

3 LBer?

The Browns have Davis, Mcginest, Thompson, and Stewart(started for ALT 2 years ago).

Speegle and Mcmillan 2nd day pick last year.

Yeah, 3LBrs. I think you have Davis Taylor and Thompson. I think McGinest is there for the short haul only. I think McMillan has yet to prove he's anything. I think Stewart is what he is. a 6-3 236lbs LB who didn't make a lot of tackles last year, nor does he apply pressure. He's a LB who had his chance to be something in a 34 scheme but failed at it in Atlanta. Basically, I just don't think he's ever going to be a very good OLB in a 34.

 

[Paniolo22]

Hopefully the Fin's just take Greenway and leave us this tough decision.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Do you think Lawson will be a good 3-4 LB? If so, then he's a Jason Taylor clone.

Taylor is fine as a 3-4 WOLB.


Either way I proved you wrong. You said more 3-4 teams have first round picks at LB then they have NG, and you were wrong. And going by %'s, it's not even close.






You referred to the Pats starting DEs' (Seymour and Warren) as DTs, but when you refer to our DTs, you don't mention our DEs, one of which is a first rounder, and the other would of been a late first/early second if not for injuries.


Again, almost half the starting NGs in the NFL = First rounders. Less then 20% of the starting 3-4 LBs in the NFL were first round picks.

Wow, you edited the crap out of this one.

I don't love Lawson as much as some do. I talked about Lawson very early in the year but I always felt like he was a 3rd or 4th round OLB in a 34. Yeah, he has a chance to be good but he has to learn to be more physical IMO. I don't think he's a Taylor Clone. I think he's much closer to a Derrick Thomas. We will see if Taylor is fine as an OLB in a 34 or not. Before you say anybody is good or bad, you have to see it in action. To this point, Miami has not proven one way or the other. If it pleases you to say that you've proven me wrong, then so be it. The fact of the matter remains that only Pittsburgh and the Pats have had enough time for anybody to Gage personel in the 34. Over the years, Pittsburgh has taken many more LBs higher then they have DTs. It's a matter of record. The Pats, on the other hand, have taken several DTs early. They have also taken the majority of ther LBs early. Clearly, they put stock in drafting LBs high.

I mention Seymour as a DT because he was one early in his career and when he came out. Ours are not. They are cleary DEs. That's just how it is. Don't even know why you would argue this point. It's silly.

Washington, was a 1st round pick out of Louisville if I'm not mistaken by the 9rs. Back then, he was not a NT but a 2 technique DT along side Stubblefield.

The point here being that most of the 34s your using to prove your point are not complete yet. We will see how they draft to finish these teams. I can only look back at the 34 teams that I can recall and look at how they were built.

The Giants were built on LBs taken high in the draft. The most succesful 34 I can remember was that team.

 

[Rack]

If it pleases you to say that you've proven me wrong, then so be it.

I didn't say it to be a jerk. I was just messin' with you.


But technically I was right.


To me it's not about what position is more important. Both the NG and LBs are important to the 3-4.

For me, it's about taking the BPA at a position of need. For the Browns it'll be Ngata (if he's on the board). And it is a huge need for them. Washington is 37, and the other guys on their DL aren't great. Ngata can play some DE his first year, possibly as a backup to both DE and NG, then take over at NG his second year.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I didn't say it to be a jerk. I was just messin' with you.


But technically I was right.


To me it's not about what position is more important. Both the NG and LBs are important to the 3-4.

For me, it's about taking the BPA at a position of need. For the Browns it'll be Ngata (if he's on the board). And it is a huge need for them. Washington is 37, and the other guys on their DL aren't great. Ngata can play some DE his first year, possibly as a backup to both DE and NG, then take over at NG his second year.

Lots of people believe Ngata is the pick if he's there. I am not so sure, as you know. I guess we'll see. BTW, you have conveniently ingonred my point of evaluating 34 teams that are not yet complete. We can not make determinations on who is drafted where until all of these 34 teams are completed. Now, your looking at personel two years into most of these teams defensive switches. Story is not complete. However........

Giants 34

NT Jim Burt (don't even know if he was drafted)
NT Erik Howard was a 2nd Rd pick.
LB Harry Carson was a 4th Rd pick.
LB Lawrence Taylor was a 1st Rd pick.
LB Carl Banks was a 1st Rd pick.
LB Pepper Johnson was a 2nd Rd pick.
LB Gary Reasons was a 4th Rd pick.



Buffalo Bills 34

NT Jeff Wright was an 8th Rd draft pick.
NT Mike Lodish was a 10th Rd pick.
LB Daryl Talley was a 2nd Rd pick.
LB Cornelius Bennett was a 1st rd pick.
LB Marvcus Patton was an 8th rd pick.
LB Shane Conlin was a 1st rd pick.
LB Keith Gogaines was a 3rd rd pick.

These are the two most succesful 34 defenses I can recall. You can argue that Pittsburghs and or the Pats have been more succesful but I don't know that I would agree. Perhaps the Pats but from the past, these two are it IMO. Clearly investment was made at LB as opposed to NT. Not saying you can't do it the other way but if history is any indicator, it would seem that your most important players are taken relatively high and there LBs.

 

[Rack]

I don't know if showing the personell of defenses from over 10 years ago helps your argument very much.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't know if showing the personell of defenses from over 10 years ago helps your argument very much.

I would say that it probably helps more then looking at a club who is a year or two into the process of implementing a 34 and evaluating there talent levels. The only way you can really view a 34 is from the finished product in my mind. While the defenses are older, I think the criteria is valid. These two teams fielded the best 34 defenses I have ever seen, then or now. This is why I used the two of those clubs as criteria.

 

[Rack]

I would say that it probably helps more then looking at a club who is a year or two into the process of implementing a 34 and evaluating there talent levels. The only way you can really view a 34 is from the finished product in my mind. While the defenses are older, I think the criteria is valid. These two teams fielded the best 34 defenses I have ever seen, then or now. This is why I used the two of those clubs as criteria.

Sorry, but no. Trends from 10+ years ago are not the same as recent trends.


I don't understand why you're making a big deal out of this. I've proven you wrong. It's ok. You'll prove me wrong some other time.


And even then, as I said, it comes down to who is the better BPA that you actually need? Ngata is better then any LB in this draft, other then Hawk. And he fills a need for Cleveland. If he's available, he'll be their pick, most likely.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Sorry, but no. Trends from 10+ years ago are not the same as recent trends.


I don't understand why you're making a big deal out of this. I've proven you wrong. It's ok. You'll prove me wrong some other time.


And even then, as I said, it comes down to who is the better BPA that you actually need? Ngata is better then any LB in this draft, other then Hawk. And he fills a need for Cleveland. If he's available, he'll be their pick, most likely.

Of course you are Rack.

Players have gotten bigger but the scheme is not very different then it was 30 years ago. More zone blitz stuff but really, not that different.

 

[kartr]

This is really an interesting scenario IMO. Bunkley and Ngata are both there at the Bills pick, eight overall, which way do they go? Barring trades, they may not go DT here. They could go QB with whichever one is left, they could go OLB which they need badley, they could go with a guy like Huff to replace Troy Vincent who is about 100 years old now or they could go TE if SF doesn't take Davis, which is a real possability IMO. I don't think DT is a certainty at this spot.

Who's the next team that might take a DT? Could be Arizona with a 3 technique, which Bunkley would fit nicely but they have a lot of needs. I don't know that this is there biggest.

It's probably Cleveland. Who would Cleveland take, if they were going to take one of these players? I think that again, it would be Bunkley because I don't really think they need a NT so much as they need a DE. Bunkley could easily be that in a 34 IMO. However, they may like OLB better. If indeed this is what they value, we could see both NTs slide.

I think Baltimore would snatch Bunkley up in this situation but it could be Ngata.

I don't think Philly would take a DT. I don't think Miami would take one. I don't think the Vikes would take one. Denver might take one but there needs are at LB, Tackle, WR and RCB as well. I don't know that DT would be there first choice here. That would leave Ngata available at our pick 18 is the draft were to fall that way.

If he is there, would we take him? I think we would probably have to. There might be trade down options here with a team like Cincy who could probably use a big DT to replace Adams or maybe NYG one pick down. A big tackle like Ngata would really solidify there DL but then I look at there OLBs and secondary and I just think what we would want might not make it cost effective for them. The Jets could use a player like Ngate and they would have the picks to move around with IMO. Could be interesting if it fell this way.

Nfldraftcountdown has Ngata going to Cleveland for their 3-4 and I've heard that the Ravens are interested in Bunkley and remember the Eagles have not replaced Corey Simon adequately, so they might take a DT in the first.

 

[Rack]

Of course you are Rack.

Players have gotten bigger but the scheme is not very different then it was 30 years ago. More zone blitz stuff but really, not that different.

It's not just how much the defense has changed, it's how the offenses have changed and what defenses need to do to stop them.



Either way, like I said, I wouldn't draft a certain position thinking, "This is more important" regardless of the position (with the exception of FB, K, P, and maybe G and TE).

If you have a big need at OLB and at NG, and the BPA at a position of need is a NG, then you take the NG. Especially when it's one that fits your system so well.


There will be some tweeners they can get in round 2 or 3. There is no rule saying only a 1st round pick can be a starter.

If I'm the Browns a combination of Ngata in the first and Gocong in the 3rd is more appealing then Lawson in the first and ... well there isn't another worthy NG that will be available to them in the 2nd and 3rd. Watson might drop to the 2nd, but he won't drop that far.