Ramius Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 If the point is to use a high pick on someone who can get to the QB as a pass rusher, why doesn it matter if that guy is a DE or 3-4 OLB? If the guy is getting you a bunch of sacks per season, who cares that he's a LB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Look - I'm just looking at the evidence on hand, which is pretty overwhelming. And I don't know a damn thing about Robert Quinn, so you've got me there. That said, he's probably not going to be a top five pick. I also don't necessarily buy into the idea that bad teams are run by complete idiots who avoid drafting pass rushing 3-4 ends because of innate stupidity, which seems to be the basic presupposition in your argument. The bottom line: 2 LBs, neither of them pass rushers, have been drafted in the top five in the past ten years. There's no getting around that. I think my argument is the opposite - that good teams run the 3-4 and don't have many top 5 picks. When they do it has to intersect with a need at OLB and a player that is rare to find. Why do left tackles go high more commonly? Every team needs a left tackle, regardless of scheme. Qb? Likewise. Regardless of offensive scheme, you need a qb. Especially if your in the top 5. Rarely do top 5 teams have that guy. 34 olb? Nope, maybe 10 teams or so consistently ran the scheme last decade, that leaves a lot of teams drafting 43 defensive ends. Yes, kc didn't draft a 34 olb, because they had a guy, a previous first round pick that plays the position at a probowl level. Drafting maybin or orakpo would have been dumb. Neither a top 5 talent, or a need. Of those handful of teams that consistently run the 34, how many top 5 picks were taken? Not many. How many pure, elite 34 OLBs do you see come out? Not many. How many of them had a need for 34 OLB when they picked in the top 5? Even fewer. Is my argument starting to make sense? It's not that 34 teams are dumb, it's rare for a 34 team to pick top 5, have that need, and have a candidate available. There are years where qb or LT isn't taken top 5, maybe even this year, and those are two positions that every team in the top 5 could target, and would if there was someone. Ps. Robert Quinn is the UNC DE/LB that was a consensus top five, possibly number one pick going into this season, until suspension. Even with suspension, he is getting mocked as high as 3. After the combine, I expect his value to rise. He stood still while everyone got bowl game bumps. Just wait til he gets to show his stuff. I suppose if we draft him, he's a thorn in the side of your argument, but if the bengals take him, he's yet another example of you being right. I guess that kind of makes one of my points as to why there are less of them taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I kind of saw us going a D lineman or an OT, but don't think there will be an OT worthy of a 3 pick. D line is shaping up as the way to go with our 3, although a trade down is looking better all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Last ten years: Aaron Curry AJ Hawk Last 25 years: Aaron Curry AJ Hawk Lavar Arrington Marvin Jones Kevin Hardy Trev Alberts Quentin Coryatt Mike Croel Keith McCants Audray Bruce (#1) Mike Junkin Junior Seau Cornelius Bennett Derrick Thomas (although he essentially played DE) Anthony Bell Brian Bosworth was also a supplemental #1 pick by Seattle, but probably doesn't qualify as top five given Seattle's draft position that year. The lessons: 1) In the last decade, teams across the board have avoided spending top-five picks on LBs. The two who have didn't get much return on investment -- neither Curry nor Hawk have been game changers. 2) In a quarter century, the only top-five LBs chosen who have proven to be worth the picks are Bennett, Seau, and Thomas (who was very arguably a DE anyway). They were all picked ages ago. Marvin Jones and Arrington were nice players, but both were out of the league pretty quickly because of injuries. 3)I really don't see the Bills taking Von Miller with the #3 pick. Clay Matthews was taken in the first ?? 2 picks after us taking Mabin YAAA !! Orapko was also a first rounder !!! And the kid in Houston too i thought was a first rounder ?? The one busted for roids !!! Oh well 2 out of 3 ain't bad !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share Posted February 15, 2011 I think my argument is the opposite - that good teams run the 3-4 and don't have many top 5 picks. When they do it has to intersect with a need at OLB and a player that is rare to find. Why do left tackles go high more commonly? Every team needs a left tackle, regardless of scheme. Qb? Likewise. Regardless of offensive scheme, you need a qb. Especially if your in the top 5. Rarely do top 5 teams have that guy. 34 olb? Nope, maybe 10 teams or so consistently ran the scheme last decade, that leaves a lot of teams drafting 43 defensive ends. Yes, kc didn't draft a 34 olb, because they had a guy, a previous first round pick that plays the position at a probowl level. Drafting maybin or orakpo would have been dumb. Neither a top 5 talent, or a need. Of those handful of teams that consistently run the 34, how many top 5 picks were taken? Not many. How many pure, elite 34 OLBs do you see come out? Not many. How many of them had a need for 34 OLB when they picked in the top 5? Even fewer. Is my argument starting to make sense? It's not that 34 teams are dumb, it's rare for a 34 team to pick top 5, have that need, and have a candidate available. There are years where qb or LT isn't taken top 5, maybe even this year, and those are two positions that every team in the top 5 could target, and would if there was someone. Ps. Robert Quinn is the UNC DE/LB that was a consensus top five, possibly number one pick going into this season, until suspension. Even with suspension, he is getting mocked as high as 3. After the combine, I expect his value to rise. He stood still while everyone got bowl game bumps. Just wait til he gets to show his stuff. I suppose if we draft him, he's a thorn in the side of your argument, but if the bengals take him, he's yet another example of you being right. I guess that kind of makes one of my points as to why there are less of them taken. Your argument is tautological (good teams run a 3-4 and therefore draft late, which is why good rush LBs go late), but since I don't care anymore, you win. That said, of the 25 top five picks in the last five years, 9 (36 percent) were made by 3-4 teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Your argument is tautological (good teams run a 3-4 and therefore draft late, which is why good rush LBs go late), but since I don't care anymore, you win. That said, of the 25 top five picks in the last five years, 9 (36 percent) were made by 3-4 teams. i guess -- that goes with my idea that 2 out of 3 picks in the top 5 dont have the position on their boards at all. of those 9, you start taking out the picks like KC that already had the position filled. That is 2 of the 9 removed. Washington had orakpo. so we are down to 6 teams that might be able to take the position top 5 at all in the last 5 years. In 2009 -- Jets took sanchez after a huge trade up to 5 - wouldnt have had a top 5 pick unless they traded up for their QB. In 2008 -- Miami took Jake Long at 1, with no stand out OLB on the board. I think the only one graded as a first rounder was gholston. oppotunity did not meet availability. In 2007 -- were cleveland and arizona running 34 at this point? i know theyve switched back and forth. Either way, picked Left tackles. In 2006-- Jets took a LT in the top 5. Its less overwhelming then just saying "look its never happened and we shouldnt consider it" when you actually get into the picks. all these teams have spent first round picks, many in the first 10 or so slots. it seems the position is valued, but rare both in openings, as well as players that fit the mold. agree to disagree i suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share Posted February 15, 2011 i guess -- that goes with my idea that 2 out of 3 picks in the top 5 dont have the position on their boards at all. of those 9, you start taking out the picks like KC that already had the position filled. That is 2 of the 9 removed. Washington had orakpo. so we are down to 6 teams that might be able to take the position top 5 at all in the last 5 years. In 2009 -- Jets took sanchez after a huge trade up to 5 - wouldnt have had a top 5 pick unless they traded up for their QB. In 2008 -- Miami took Jake Long at 1, with no stand out OLB on the board. I think the only one graded as a first rounder was gholston. oppotunity did not meet availability. In 2007 -- were cleveland and arizona running 34 at this point? i know theyve switched back and forth. Either way, picked Left tackles. In 2006-- Jets took a LT in the top 5. Its less overwhelming then just saying "look its never happened and we shouldnt consider it" when you actually get into the picks. all these teams have spent first round picks, many in the first 10 or so slots. it seems the position is valued, but rare both in openings, as well as players that fit the mold. agree to disagree i suppose. Is Tamba Hali *really* a LB? He played DE in college, came out listed as a DE, and for all intents and purposes, spends the vast bulk of his Sundays rushing the passer with one hand on the ground. Once you get past semantics, he looks like a defensive end to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 (edited) Is Tamba Hali *really* a LB? He played DE in college, came out listed as a DE, and for all intents and purposes, spends the vast bulk of his Sundays rushing the passer with one hand on the ground. Once you get past semantics, he looks like a defensive end to me. but that is precisely what the 3-4 rushbacker would be for us. its the epitome of what im arguing i would be ok with us taking top 5. he is a pro bowl LB when he is franchised, it will be the top 5 LB salaries used, not the top 5 DE salaries. you are arguing that a 34 rushbacker is in reality just a 4th lineman and that i am somehow using a loophole to show up your argument - but if that is the case, and Tamba is really a defensive end.... arent they then running a 43? a 34 olb that gets after the qb has a lot of pass rush duties, but also has coverage responsibility which makes it hard to fill. you need the speed to run in coverage, and the strength to push around a tackle when you are a successful 34 olb. how you qualify that guys like ware, hali, wake, merriman, matthews, suggs, orakpo, are not linebackers is beyond me, and i really think we will have to just agree to disagree. its like saying a safety that is good at man coverage is really just a corner. yea, they have things in common, but...... Edited February 15, 2011 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share Posted February 15, 2011 (edited) but that is precisely what the 3-4 rushbacker would be for us. its the epitome of what im arguing i would be ok with us taking top 5. he is a pro bowl LB when he is franchised, it will be the top 5 LB salaries used, not the top 5 DE salaries. you are arguing that a 34 rushbacker is in reality just a 4th lineman and that i am somehow using a loophole to show up your argument - but if that is the case, and Tamba is really a defensive end.... arent they then running a 43? a 34 olb that gets after the qb has a lot of pass rush duties, but also has coverage responsibility which makes it hard to fill. you need the speed to run in coverage, and the strength to push around a tackle when you are a successful 34 olb. how you qualify that guys like ware, hali, wake, merriman, matthews, suggs, orakpo, are not linebackers is beyond me, and i really think we will have to just agree to disagree. its like saying a safety that is good at man coverage is really just a corner. yea, they have things in common, but...... Well, for one thing, Hali doesn't actually line up in back of the front line. So technically, he's not actually a "linebacker" if we're going to take the meaning of term seriously. Also, he's not a guy who's ever dropping into coverage except on gimmick/trick plays. Someone like Joey Porter did actually often play back. Hali is more of a defensive end then some of the guys playing that position. The same with Suggs. Despite the fact that they're called LBs, they don't really have any traditional LB duties as far as I can tell. Both of those guys were DEs in college too. Edited February 15, 2011 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Well, for one thing, Hali doesn't actually line up in back of the front line. So technically, he's not actually a "linebacker" if we're going to take the meaning of term seriously. Also, he's not a guy who's ever dropping into coverage except on gimmick/trick plays. Someone like Joey Porter did actually often play back. Hali is more of a defensive end then some of the guys playing that position. The same with Suggs. Despite the fact that they're called LBs, they don't really have any traditional LB duties as far as I can tell. Both of those guys were DEs in college too. I guess the flip side of what is turning into a terrible debate - if tamba Hali is a DE, do you consider the chiefs a 43 scheme? If not, and you say they are 34, who are their 4 linebackers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 16, 2011 Author Share Posted February 16, 2011 I guess the flip side of what is turning into a terrible debate - if tamba Hali is a DE, do you consider the chiefs a 43 scheme? If not, and you say they are 34, who are their 4 linebackers? I don't know the answer to that. I do know that a player like Hali isn't the same sort of guy you saw in the old traditional 3-4s (Bennett and Talley). Both of those guys played a ton of pass coverage. Hali doesn't really play much of any. Not sure why this is a terrible debate, btw. I've seen a lot worse ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 I don't know the answer to that. I do know that a player like Hali isn't the same sort of guy you saw in the old traditional 3-4s (Bennett and Talley). Both of those guys played a ton of pass coverage. Hali doesn't really play much of any. Not sure why this is a terrible debate, btw. I've seen a lot worse ... Hali is learning the position. As he spends more time, expect more versatility. When you read about his year, you will see that his improving coverage skills are commonly mentioned. He has only been an OLB for 18 months. I don't expect him to master totally foreign concepts overnight. He knows the trenches, he's learning space. All that said, coming full circle - if Robert Quinn isn't functionally retarded or 350 lbs at the combine I think there's a good chance he is your next top 5 LB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts