Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why drafting DE and OT in round 1 worries me


Recommended Posts

Including Garrett and Thomas

The college game has evolved from an NFL breeding ground to a high octane, pass happy, quick hitting game.  Receiving records in the college game are getting re-written every year. Teams are scoring record amount of points.  QBs are lining less and less under center and more into the Pistol and Shotgun.

Look at the OTs and DE that bust when they reach the NFL.  The names on both sides of the ball are staggering.  #1 picks being average at best.  Hell we have two former first round talents OTs drafted by other teams on our roster.  Both had injury issues but some of it is talent. We just let a former 2nd round DE go because he was for the most part ineffective.   Yeah he played great in the Super Bowl but so did Timmy Smith.

Someone pointed out that Barnett broke Reggie White's sack record at Tennessee.  He wouldn't have done it in Reggie's era. Or I would love to see what Reggie would have done in this era of college football.

What my point is, is that there is less emphasis on being technically sound at OT because most offenses are quick hitting offenses.  You don't have to hold your blocks so long and therefore look better than you actually are.  DEs benefit from a weaker OT position and there numbers are inflated.  So while OTs and DEs MAY be as good as advertised they also have a very good chance of being a bust or just an average player.

This is why drafting DE and OT in round 1 worries me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think any OTs in this draft are worth it at 8. I do think Thomas is worth it though. He has all the tools to be great. The best part is his motor. Usually a high motor means he can be coached,that's a good thing. He is my favorite player in this draft but I do not think he will be our pick. Honestly, we could be draft Thomas, Fournette, Adams, Howard or Ross and I'd be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Including Garrett and Thomas

The college game has evolved from an NFL breeding ground to a high octane, pass happy, quick hitting game.  Receiving records in the college game are getting re-written every year. Teams are scoring record amount of points.  QBs are lining less and less under center and more into the Pistol and Shotgun.

Look at the OTs and DE that bust when they reach the NFL.  The names on both sides of the ball are staggering.  #1 picks being average at best.  Hell we have two former first round talents OTs drafted by other teams on our roster.  Both had injury issues but some of it is talent. We just let a former 2nd round DE go because he was for the most part ineffective.   Yeah he played great in the Super Bowl but so did Timmy Smith.

Someone pointed out that Barnett broke Reggie White's sack record at Tennessee.  He wouldn't have done it in Reggie's era. Or I would love to see what Reggie would have done in this era of college football.

What my point is, is that there is less emphasis on being technically sound at OT because most offenses are quick hitting offenses.  You don't have to hold your blocks so long and therefore look better than you actually are.  DEs benefit from a weaker OT position and there numbers are inflated.  So while OTs and DEs MAY be as good as advertised they also have a very good chance of being a bust or just an average player.

This is why drafting DE and OT in round 1 worries me.

Interesting thought.

Regression analysis has shown that the best predictor of NFL success as an edge rusher is burst generated in the first three steps and agility to plant and bend around the edge.  The correlation is much stronger between that specific type of athleticism and success than it is between college production and end results.

Interesting to think whether this is more of a leading or trailing indicator.  Has the game evolved (and technoque devolved) in a way that permits lesser athletes to succeed in college? Or have recent draft failures driven investment into analytics that is highlighting factors that have always existed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, uscgamecocks said:

Interesting thought.

Regression analysis has shown that the best predictor of NFL success as an edge rusher is burst generated in the first three steps and agility to plant and bend around the edge.  The correlation is much stronger between that specific type of athleticism and success than it is between college production and end results.

Interesting to think whether this is more of a leading or trailing indicator.  Has the game evolved (and technoque devolved) in a way that permits lesser athletes to succeed in college? Or have recent draft failures driven investment into analytics that is highlighting factors that have always existed?

And ironically Barnett had one of the fastest 3 cone times even though sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nails said:

And ironically Barnett had one of the fastest 3 cone times even though sick.

Admittedly, I'm not as high on Barnett as some.  But his agility was never the concern, that shows up in spades in his college film.  Barnett's got incredible bend - he just did not show explosive burst.  Athletically, his combine results are actually very comparable to Kony Ealy.  Ealy actually beat his 3-cone (6.83 for Ealy vs. 6.96 for Barnett, but the 3c is the only drill where Ealy was above the 50th percentile).  To his credit, Barnett has much better technique/hand usage and gives consistent, outstanding effort (which is quite unlike Ealy on both counts).

As you noted, the big caveat is that Barnett was obviously sick during the combine and that impacted his performance. Will be interesting to see what kind of numbers he puts up at his pro day.  A drastic improvement could see him rocket up (mock) draft boards.  His vertical jump is the drill to watch.

https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/derek-barnett

https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/kony-ealy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, uscgamecocks said:

Interesting thought.

Regression analysis has shown that the best predictor of NFL success as an edge rusher is burst generated in the first three steps and agility to plant and bend around the edge.  The correlation is much stronger between that specific type of athleticism and success than it is between college production and end results.

Interesting to think whether this is more of a leading or trailing indicator.  Has the game evolved (and technoque devolved) in a way that permits lesser athletes to succeed in college? Or have recent draft failures driven investment into analytics that is highlighting factors that have always existed?

I think technique is not being taught so much.  College players tend to thrive off of natural talent over learn talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that in addition to understanding current  trends or patterns you have to determine how well the players skills will translate to the NFL.  If there are no players with the physical attributes and mental attitude to justify a first rounder at OT or DE you go elsewhere.  Doesn't matter who busted in the past, you are trying to avoid it in the present. If the guy is there then you go for it.  You never know if you are right until years later. Hopefully the experience of Ealy will inform us what not to pick going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Give me Mitchell Evans over T Sanders in this run heavy offense any day of the week. 
    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
×
×
  • Create New...