What to do at 15, round 2

[James Ducheteau]

Your on the clock and the board looks like this...what do you do?

 

6 EDGE  SOLOMON THOMAS - STANFORD

8 EDGE  DEREK BARNETT - TENNESSEE

13 WR  MIKE WILLIAMS - CLEMSON

15 EDGE  HAASON REDDICK - TEMPLE

16 CB  GAREON CONLEY - OHIO STATE

18 RB  CHRISTIAN MCCAFFREY - STANFORD

19 OT  CAM ROBINSON - ALABAMA

21 CB  MARLON HUMPHREY - ALABAMA

22 OT  FORREST LAMP - WESTERN KENTUCKY

23 EDGE  TAKKARIST MCKINLEY - UCLA

25 DL  MALIK MCDOWELL - MICHIGAN STATE

26 QB  PATRICK MAHOMES II - TEXAS TECH

27 RB  DALVIN COOK - FLORIDA STATE

28 S  JABRILL PEPPERS - MICHIGAN

29 OT  RYAN RAMCZYK - WISCONSIN

30 EDGE  TIM WILLIAMS - ALABAMA

31 LB  JARRAD DAVIS - FLORIDA

32 QB  DESHONE KIZER - NOTRE DAME

33 LB  ZACH CUNNINGHAM - VANDERBILT

34 OT  GARETT BOLLES - UTAH

35 EDGE  T.J. WATT - WISCONSIN

[James Ducheteau]

Myself, I think I'm going to be looking to trade back to 20th or so and grab some mo picks but I'm betting some are running to turn in the Solomon Thomas card.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, James Ducheteau said:

Your on the clock and the board looks like this...what do you do?

 

6 EDGE  SOLOMON THOMAS - STANFORD

8 EDGE  DEREK BARNETT - TENNESSEE

13 WR  MIKE WILLIAMS - CLEMSON

15 EDGE  HAASON REDDICK - TEMPLE

16 CB  GAREON CONLEY - OHIO STATE

18 RB  CHRISTIAN MCCAFFREY - STANFORD

19 OT  CAM ROBINSON - ALABAMA

21 CB  MARLON HUMPHREY - ALABAMA

22 OT  FORREST LAMP - WESTERN KENTUCKY

23 EDGE  TAKKARIST MCKINLEY - UCLA

25 DL  MALIK MCDOWELL - MICHIGAN STATE

26 QB  PATRICK MAHOMES II - TEXAS TECH

27 RB  DALVIN COOK - FLORIDA STATE

28 S  JABRILL PEPPERS - MICHIGAN

29 OT  RYAN RAMCZYK - WISCONSIN

30 EDGE  TIM WILLIAMS - ALABAMA

31 LB  JARRAD DAVIS - FLORIDA

32 QB  DESHONE KIZER - NOTRE DAME

33 LB  ZACH CUNNINGHAM - VANDERBILT

34 OT  GARETT BOLLES - UTAH

35 EDGE  T.J. WATT - WISCONSIN

Solomon Thomas without a Question. My 2nd ranked player overall.

[masnerj]

First of all, this is highly unlikely considering Soloman Thomas is not going to be available at 15. 

 

Second of all (and I might get some flak for this), I say we go ahead and draft Conley, pencil him at CB 2 and look forward to the next round satisfied that we filled a huge need with an amazing player with Pro-Bowl potential. 

 

Why you might ask because it is technically not BPA? Thomas isn't a great fit for our 3-4 and our D-line is already kinda set at this point. I like Barnett a lot but I don't think he is the 8th best player in the draft so I prefer Conley over him. I like Riddick but he has a bunch of risk associated with him and I would only draft him or Davis if we traded back a bunch. 

[James Ducheteau]

 Thomas is amazing,but in this scenario he is the value and you should be able to get some picks for him, and as long as your not going back more than 5 spots, your going to get 2 or 3 really good players for the price of one.

[stitches]

My order in this scenario would be:

1. Solomon Thomas

2. Gareon Conley

3. Trade back

4. Haason Reddick

5. Malik McDowell... if he's cleared by Ballard.

[Superman]

Who went 1-14, so that Solomon Thomas is still available? I'm having trouble with this. If anyone dropped, it would be Jonathan Allen, and that would mean there are serious questions about his medical.

 

Accepting your premise, the only two players that I'd be excited about at #15 wold be Thomas and Barnett, and I probably wouldn't trade back because I have them a tier higher than the rest on your list (I have Thomas in my top 5, Barnett in my top 10).

[Superman]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

My order in this scenario would be:

1. Solomon Thomas

2. Gareon Conley

3. Trade back

4. Haason Reddick

5. Malik McDowell... if he's cleared by Ballard.

 

Not surprised by Reddick, I know you're a huge fan, but you have Conley ahead of Barnett? You'd trade back before taking Barnett at #15?

[UKColt13]

Thomas, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Jarrad Davis, McCaffrey in that order.

[Colts1324]

5 minutes ago, UKColt13 said:

Thomas, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Jarrad Davis, McCaffrey in that order.

I just don't see Jarrad Davis as a top 20 pick. Good player but I would not like him at No. 15. 

[stitches]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Not surprised by Reddick, I know you're a huge fan, but you have Conley ahead of Barnett? You'd trade back before taking Barnett at #15?

I was just writing a question to you about Barnett, when the notification popped up that you quoted me.

 

I am not the biggest Barnett fan. I like him. I just don't love him. Just, there are some questions about his athleticism that were not answered at his pro-day. They said he was sick at the combine so I gave him a bit of a pass on a non-stellar combine. And he went to his pro-day and did worse than he did at the combine. I know the 40 is not the be all of athleticism, but 4.9 40 is just way too slow for my tastes for a passrusher. I think athleticism is one of the key predictors for pass-rush success in the league and he kind of failed that test. I'd be very wary taking him top 15. His bend is very very good, but if he can't get to the outside ot the tackle quick enough it won't do him any good in the league.

 

About Conley - yes, I'm EXTREMELY high on him. I think he's the second best (healthy) CB prospect in this class and I'd have absolutely no problem taking him at 15. He checks all the boxes - athleticism, fluidity, understanding of the game and instincts, ball-skills. OK, maybe not ALL the boxes - he needs to work a bit on physicality at the LOS and at run support, but I love pretty much everything else about him.

 

So about Barnett and Conley - how do you see them? How do you think Barnett will win in the league? What would be his bread and butter? What about Conley? What makes you hesitate about him?

[Colts1324]

30 minutes ago, James Ducheteau said:

Myself, I think I'm going to be looking to trade back to 20th or so and grab some mo picks but I'm betting some are running to turn in the Solomon Thomas card.

I don't see why we would trade back honestly. I doubt we get another chance to pick 15th overall or better in the next several years. We have 3 4th round picks already. Do we have enough space on our roster to add 8 players from the draft? If we did trade down, I would trade to 19th or 20th. And then trade back up. Use our 3rd and 2 4th round picks. Possibly with Seattle or the Steelers at the end of the 1st. Could potentially get two true difference makers ready to play in year 1. 

[OffensivelyPC]

Thomas is probably the higher graded prospect by most websites and perhaps by most here.  That said, I am not as high on him.  He's a top 10 pick, for sure.  I think I'd still go Derek Barnett in this case, but they are graded close enough. 

 

Here's some data from PFF if you're interested:

 

Derek Barnett -

 

Pass Rush Snaps	Run Snaps	Sacks	QB Hits	Hurries	BP	Tackles	Assists	MT	Stops
Three Year Stats	1126	1115	34	43	110	2	124	32	18	117
2016	390	411	13	24	41	2	34	6	6	38
2015	396	351	10	10	42	0	44	13	6	38
2014	340	353	11	9	27	0	46	13	6	41

 

Solomon Thomas

Pass Rush Snaps	Run Snaps	Sacks	QB Hits	Hurries	BP	Tackles	Assists	MT	Stops
Three Year Stats	780	582	14	18	37	0	72	15	13	72
2016	417	304	10	12	22	0	45	8	9	46
2015	363	278	4	6	15	0	27	7	4	26

 

 

EDIT - you'll have to forgive the formatting...the columns denoting which stat is which should be shifted over one spot.  Nto sure what happened, but trying to fix

[OffensivelyPC]

OK, it's not letting me fix it.  Whatevs...hope it makes sense lol.

[Smonroe]

The only way Thomas would be there is if something horrible came out about him or every GM ahead of us had brain cramps. 

 

Unless that's the case, the choice is obvious.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

I was just writing a question to you about Barnett, when the notification popped up that you quoted me.

 

I am not the biggest Barnett fan. I like him. I just don't love him. Just, there are some questions about his athleticism that were not answered at his pro-day. They said he was sick at the combine so I gave him a bit of a pass on a non-stellar combine. And he went to his pro-day and did worse than he did at the combine. I know the 40 is not the be all of athleticism, but 4.9 40 is just way too slow for my tastes for a passrusher. I think athleticism is one of the key predictors for pass-rush success in the league and he kind of failed that test. I'd be very wary taking him top 15. His bend is very very good, but if he can't get to the outside ot the tackle quick enough it won't do him any good in the league.

 

About Conley - yes, I'm EXTREMELY high on him. I think he's the second best (healthy) CB prospect in this class and I'd have absolutely no problem taking him at 15. He checks all the boxes - athleticism, fluidity, understanding of the game and instincts, ball-skills. OK, maybe not ALL the boxes - he needs to work a bit on physicality at the LOS and at run support, but I love pretty much everything else about him.

 

I'm actually fine with Conley's physicality. I question his instincts and ball skills, especially tracking the ball over his head and staying engaged with the receiver. Those are the only reasons I still have him in the 30s. 

 

I agree that athleticism is a key indicator for pass rushers. But timed 40 is just one metric, and I'm not sure it's that important. Ten yard split is more important, 3 cone, even vertical and broad jump. Those show explosiveness, burst, agility, flexibility. Barnett's 10 yard is .07 slower than Garrett's, his 3 cone is .01 slower than Thomas'. If anything, his 40 calls into question his closing speed, but his production (sacks and TFLs) offset those questions. My concern about his athletic ability from his testing is with his jumps, not his times.

 

He's not extremely explosive, there's no question about that. But I think he has enough bend and burst, and maybe more important, he's skilled enough as an edge player that his floor is very high. I'm putting him in the same category as Bosa as a prospect. I think he's can't miss as a good pro / career starter, but I don't expect him to be a 12+ sack/year guy. Bosa has already outdone my expectations, but we'll see how his career progresses. To get a starter level guy who can give you 8+ sacks a year, play every down, and who will be reliable and consistent as a pro, I'm good with that at #15. I value his profile more than a higher ceiling guy about whom I have serious question marks.

[stitches]

7 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

OK, it's not letting me fix it.  Whatevs...hope it makes sense lol.

Doesn't the lack of high end athleticism bother you with Barnett? When we are talking about transition to the league if they have similar production and grading in college, I'd always take the superior athlete.

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm actually fine with Conley's physicality. I question his instincts and ball skills, especially tracking the ball over his head and staying engaged with the receiver. Those are the only reasons I still have him in the 30s. 

 

I agree that athleticism is a key indicator for pass rushers. But timed 40 is just one metric, and I'm not sure it's that important. Ten yard split is more important, 3 cone, even vertical and broad jump. Those show explosiveness, burst, agility, flexibility. Barnett's 10 yard is .07 slower than Garrett's, his 3 cone is .01 slower than Thomas'. If anything, his 40 calls into question his closing speed, but his production (sacks and TFLs) offset those questions. My concern about his athletic ability from his testing is with his jumps, not his times.

 

He's not extremely explosive, there's no question about that. But I think he has enough bend and burst, and maybe more important, he's skilled enough as an edge player that his floor is very high. I'm putting him in the same category as Bosa as a prospect. I think he's can't miss as a good pro / career starter, but I don't expect him to be a 12+ sack/year guy. Bosa has already outdone my expectations, but we'll see how his career progresses. To get a starter level guy who can give you 8+ sacks a year, play every down, and who will be reliable and consistent as a pro, I'm good with that at #15. I value his profile more than a higher ceiling guy about whom I have serious question marks.

Yeah, it wasn't just the 40, his jumps indeed are not great either. I don't know... maybe I'm downgrading him way too much because of his testing. What are your questionmarks for Thomas? Or Harris?

 

I kind of ... I think I would be more willing to take Harris than Barnett at 15. Maybe I'm crazy. I don't know.

[OffensivelyPC]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

Doesn't the lack of high end athleticism bother you with Barnett? When we are talking about transition to the league if they have similar production and grading in college, I'd always take the superior athlete.

I will take some time and go back and watch them both.  But despite what the combine times say, I didn't think Barnett looked less athletic; I thought he looked considerably quicker.  I'ts not night and day, but I felt Thomas game was based more on power than anything else, Barnett on the other hand, was able to win with his quickness.  It's been a while since so I can do a comparison write-up if I have time to (maybe as we get closer to the draft).  But at the end of the day, I thought Barnett's game speed/athletic ability was better than Thomas'.

[chad72]

7 minutes ago, stitches said:

Doesn't the lack of high end athleticism bother you with Barnett? When we are talking about transition to the league if they have similar production and grading in college, I'd always take the superior athlete.

 

It is the age old question. When Polian used to draft later in round 1, he valued production consistency on the field over potential ceiling, I felt.

 

Can you guys tell me this? How was Freeney's college production and hype prior to him being picked by the Colts at No.11? Was Freeney very much like Barnett, more a fit for a 4-3 DE? Was there ever talk about Freeney being a 3-4 OLB?

 

2002 is a long time ago, hence I thought I'd ask you guys if any of you remembered.

[OffensivelyPC]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

It is the age old question. When Polian used to draft later in round 1, he valued production consistency on the field.

 

Can you guys tell me this? How was Freeney's college production and hype prior to him being picked by the Colts at No.11? Was Freeney very much like Barnett, more a fit for a 4-3 DE?

The latter might be true - but that's true for most guys coming out of college.  Tennessee did drop Barnett back into coverage with some regularity.  So his fit in our scheme is not out of the question or even as significant of a question as some other guys.

[rock8591]

No way Soloman Thomas drops to us, unless he pulls an Aaron Hernandez.

[Defjamz26]

I'm taking Conley or Reddick in that scenario.

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

The latter might be true - but that's true for most guys coming out of college.  Tennessee did drop Barnett back into coverage with some regularity.  So his fit in our scheme is not out of the question or even as significant of a question as some other guys.

 

Well, Bjoern Werner came from a 4-3 too with a lot of college production. It does make me nervous with Barnet though it is not an apples to apples comparison, I know.  

 

Here is a good write up, I thought, about Barnett:

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2017/2/12/14554500/derek-barnett-scouting-report-production-vs-potential

 

 

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It is the age old question. When Polian used to draft later in round 1, he valued production consistency on the field over potential ceiling, I felt.

 

Can you guys tell me this? How was Freeney's college production and hype prior to him being picked by the Colts at No.11? Was Freeney very much like Barnett, more a fit for a 4-3 DE? Was there ever talk about Freeney being a 3-4 OLB?

 

2002 is a long time ago, hence I thought I'd ask you guys if any of you remembered.

http://cuse.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1511

 

He was a monster in college production-wise. 34.5 sacks, 30.5 of them in the last 2 years. 14 forced fumbles.

 

The difference is... he had elite athleticism too:

http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?i=5925

 

4.48 40 yard dash at 266. That's better than Von Miller at 20 pounds lighter. I don't think Barnett is in the same tier as a prospect.

[Superman]

31 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Thomas is probably the higher graded prospect by most websites and perhaps by most here.  That said, I am not as high on him.  He's a top 10 pick, for sure.  I think I'd still go Derek Barnett in this case, but they are graded close enough. 

 

Here's some data from PFF if you're interested:

Derek Barnett -

 

Pass Rush Snaps	Run Snaps	Sacks	QB Hits	Hurries	BP	Tackles	Assists	MT	Stops
Three Year Stats	1126	1115	34	43	110	2	124	32	18	117
2016	390	411	13	24	41	2	34	6	6	38
2015	396	351	10	10	42	0	44	13	6	38
2014	340	353	11	9	27	0	46	13	6	41

 

Solomon Thomas

Pass Rush Snaps	Run Snaps	Sacks	QB Hits	Hurries	BP	Tackles	Assists	MT	Stops
Three Year Stats	780	582	14	18	37	0	72	15	13	72
2016	417	304	10	12	22	0	45	8	9	46
2015	363	278	4	6	15	0	27	7	4	26

 

EDIT - you'll have to forgive the formatting...the columns denoting which stat is which should be shifted over one spot.  Nto sure what happened, but trying to fix

 

Based on this, Barnett's pass rush percentage (raw, not weighted toward sacks) is 16.6%. Thomas' is 7.6%. I didn't realize Thomas' was that low, but that's not surprising given the different positions he played in Stanford's front. He was less an edge, more of a DE/DT who lined up at 3/5/7. Barnett was almost always outside. 

 

And that highlights my only concern about Thomas, at least with the Colts. I think Thomas is a special prospect, and that when you have a chance at a guy like that, you take him and adjust to him to make sure he is effective in your front. Like Aaron Donald -- not a prototypical fit for our front, but that's a problem with our front, so you take him and deal with it, IMO. But I'm not confident in our coaching staff to make that happen with a guy like Thomas. 

[chad72]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

http://cuse.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1511

 

He was a monster in college production-wise. 34.5 sacks, 30.5 of them in the last 2 years. 14 forced fumbles.

 

The difference is... he had elite athleticism too:

http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?i=5925

 

4.48 40 yard dash at 266. That's better than Von Miller at 20 pounds lighter. I don't think Barnett is in the same tier as a prospect.

 

Thank you!!! I agree, Freeney was in a different tier. Plus, Freeney did develop more moves as his career went on too.

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Well, Bjoern Werner came from a 4-3 too with a lot of college production. It does make me nervous with Barnet though it is not an apples to apples comparison, I know.  

 

Here is a good write up, I thought, about Barnett:

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2017/2/12/14554500/derek-barnett-scouting-report-production-vs-potential

 

 

 

Bjoern had no bend or burst, and his testing confirmed it. 

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Bjoern had no bend or burst, and his testing confirmed it. 

yeah, the problem with Bjoern was not the system he had to play in. It was that he just wasn't that good of a player.

[Superman]

17 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, it wasn't just the 40, his jumps indeed are not great either. I don't know... maybe I'm downgrading him way too much because of his testing. What are your questionmarks for Thomas? Or Harris?

 

I kind of ... I think I would be more willing to take Harris than Barnett at 15. Maybe I'm crazy. I don't know.

 

I just posted my thoughts on Thomas. He's not a prototypical edge, but his testing numbers don't raise any questions about his athleticism. The question is scheme fit, and I don't trust our coaching staff to give a good answer.

 

Harris doesn't have the refinement, consistency, play discipline, of Barnett, IMO. He had a dreadful 3 cone, and he doesn't have Barnett's production (same conference, Missouri actually played an easier schedule than the Vols in 2016). I have Harris and Charlton in the same range, but I think Charlton has a tougher transition to 3-4 edge, at least when it comes to playing in space. And I like both of them, don't get me wrong. But I don't see what there is about Harris that would put him above Barnett, especially if your questions about Barnett are his testing. 

[UKColt13]

58 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

I just don't see Jarrad Davis as a top 20 pick. Good player but I would not like him at No. 15. 

 

I agree. I'd take him in a trade down.

 

This is for round 2 though.

[OffensivelyPC]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Based on this, Barnett's pass rush percentage (raw, not weighted toward sacks) is 16.6%. Thomas' is 7.6%. I didn't realize Thomas' was that low, but that's not surprising given the different positions he played in Stanford's front. He was less an edge, more of a DE/DT who lined up at 3/5/7. Barnett was almost always outside. 

 

And that highlights my only concern about Thomas, at least with the Colts. I think Thomas is a special prospect, and that when you have a chance at a guy like that, you take him and adjust to him to make sure he is effective in your front. Like Aaron Donald -- not a prototypical fit for our front, but that's a problem with our front, so you take him and deal with it, IMO. But I'm not confident in our coaching staff to make that happen with a guy like Thomas. 

Yeah, Thomas' pass rush element isn't surprising.  I still question whether he could handle full time outside duties.  Both guys are deserving with the 15 pick no doubt.  Who we should take is up in the air and I'd be fine with either honestly.  I think with Thomas and Hankins, we might be able test the waters as a 2-gapping defense.  

 

I wish Barnett were more explosive and if he were, he'd be a no brainer in this draft scenario.  But while I thought he looked quicker than Thomas, he didn't blow me away.  That being the case, I would probably agree with anyone if they said Thomas was the safer pick, provided he's used right.  As you indicate, I wonder if we would.  I've said before and I still stand by it, Thomas I think would best be utilized as a 3/5 tech on the weak side.  He's a better edge setter than rusher, but he's got plus interior rush ability.  He needs to be better at taking double teams on, but he's got room to grown into his frame.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I just posted my thoughts on Thomas. He's not a prototypical edge, but his testing numbers don't raise any questions about his athleticism. The question is scheme fit, and I don't trust our coaching staff to give a good answer.

 

Harris doesn't have the refinement, consistency, play discipline, of Barnett, IMO. He had a dreadful 3 cone, and he doesn't have Barnett's production (same conference, Missouri actually played an easier schedule than the Vols in 2016). I have Harris and Charlton in the same range, but I think Charlton has a tougher transition to 3-4 edge, at least when it comes to playing in space. And I like both of them, don't get me wrong. But I don't see what there is about Harris that would put him above Barnett, especially if your questions about Barnett are his testing. 

Oh yeah... the coaching is indeed very much a questionmark with any prospect that would need to make a transition. That's one of the reasons I'm a bit hesitant with Reddick - I have no idea if our coaching staff will be able to coach him up to his new position and then use him creatively. I think he can be a huge mismatch in so many situations. A good coaching staff can make Reddick a superstar, IMO. Imagine him flying around the field on first and second down and then rushing or blitzing on obvious passing downs. I guess...the point is - if your question with a prospect is the ability of your coaching staff to coach him up, then you have a coaching staff problem, not a prospect problem. I'd still take the best prospect and if the coaches don't do their job - get ones that will do it. Too bad, Ballard couldn't come with his own staff and has to work with what he inherited... at least for this year.

 

About Harris - his testing improved A TON at his pro-day. If those numbers are anywhere close to real, he's a better athlete than Barnett IMO. There's like... 7 inches difference in their vertical jumps. I also liked what I saw from Harris in his positional drills.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

Oh yeah... the coaching is indeed very much a questionmark with any prospect that would need to make a transition. That's one of the reasons I'm a bit hesitant with Reddick - I have no idea if our coaching staff will be able to coach him up to his new position and then use him creatively. I think he can be a huge mismatch in so many situations. A good coaching staff can make Reddick a superstar, IMO. Imagine him flying around the field on first and second down and then rushing or blitzing on obvious passing downs. I guess...the point is - if your question with a prospect is the ability of your coaching staff to coach him up, then you have a coaching staff problem, not a prospect problem. I'd still take the best prospect and if the coaches don't do their job - get ones that will do it. Too bad, Ballard couldn't come with his own staff and has to work with what he inherited... at least for this year.

 

About Harris - his testing improved A TON at his pro-day. If those numbers are anywhere close to real, he's a better athlete than Barnett IMO. There's like... 7 inches difference in their vertical jumps. I also liked what I saw from Harris in his positional drills.

 

I forgot about Harris pro day. Improved his 3 cone significantly. I still don't necessarily think he's a better athlete than Barnett, his 40 time is still basically the same (4.82 for Harris, 4.88 for Barnett), and Barnett's broad jump is one inch better. I'd say Harris' pro day brought him back into sync with Barnett, didn't move him ahead.

 

To the bolded, I think there are certain schemes for which you look for specific players/traits/skills. A zone-based defense will look for different traits from corners and safeties than a man-based defense; I don't necessarily think it's a shortcoming of the coaching staff that they can't take a great zone prospect and turn him into a man cover corner. Good drafting says you don't draft the zone guy if you run a man defense. Same for OL, man scheme vs zone scheme.

 

On the other hand, there are certain things that every team needs: an ability to beat blocks, disrupt the backfield, affect the QB -- those are universal needs. Take a player like Thomas who can do all of that, and he plays with leverage and discipline, and he's physically strong and athletic... the problem is he's a hybrid/tweener prospect. No matter what front you run, you're going to have to make him fit your front. He's not quite a 4-3 pass rushing end, but he's also not quite a 3 tech. He's not big enough to be a full time 5 tech in a 3-4, but he has limited experience as a 3-4 rush backer, and his game isn't based on speed. No question he can play 3-4 Sam, but you don't draft a 3-4 Sam at the top of the first round. So how do you get the impact you expect from a top 15 player out of a tweener prospect?

 

I think he's a playmaker, but he needs to be deployed correctly. The Pats did a great job with Jamie Collins (they typically do a great job with all of their defensive front players; they're working with Kyle Van Noy now). The Cardinals did a great job with Tyrann Mathieu and Deone Bucannon. The Falcons are doing a great job with Keanu Neal and Deion Jones. There are many other examples of teams taking these hybrid prospects, especially on defense, and finding a role for them. To the Colts credit, they're doing a good job using Clayton Geathers. I just don't trust them to make Solomon Thomas work. It's trickier with a DL than it is with a LB/S hybrid, IMO.

[stitches]

@Superman What about Reddick's DE-to-ILB/moveable piece transition? Do you think it will be seamless and do you trust our coaching staff to guide him through it? I'm very dubious about our coaches ability to use players in a creative way that accentuates their strengths.

[BProland85]

As much as I'd be tempted to draft Solomon Thomas if he fell there to Indy, I think they could get a good return from a team wanting to trade up for him. I'd rather have an extra 2nd round pick and still get a guy like Forrest Lamp or Haason Reddick while also adding additional picks.

 

As good as I think Thomas could be, I'm not sure if he fits the 3-4 defense as a DE/DT unless he added 20-25 pounds. He's not JJ Watt size. He fits 4-3 teams as a DE much better.

[OffensivelyPC]

6 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

As much as I'd be tempted to draft Solomon Thomas if he fell there to Indy, I think they could get a good return from a team wanting to trade up for him. I'd rather have an extra 2nd round pick and still get a guy like Forrest Lamp or Haason Reddick while also adding additional picks.

 

As good as I think Thomas could be, I'm not sure if he fits the 3-4 defense as a DE/DT unless he added 20-25 pounds. He's not JJ Watt size. He fits 4-3 teams as a DE much better.

I wouldn't trade back if he or Barnett is there at 15.  They're good enough you're not likely to get the same output by dropping back 10 picks or so to pick up an additional 2nd.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

I wouldn't trade back if he or Barnett is there at 15.  They're good enough you're not likely to get the same output by dropping back 10 picks or so to pick up an additional 2nd.

 

Exactly. I'm all about adding draft picks, and in general, I believe the more picks you have in the top 100, the more likely you are to find a Pro Bowler. But I also think there's a clear difference between a top 10 player -- which I believe Thomas and Barnett are -- and a top 25 player. I'd rather have one top 10 player and 3 other picks between 45-100, than to have five picks all between 25-100. 

[Superman]

38 minutes ago, stitches said:

@Superman What about Reddick's DE-to-ILB/moveable piece transition? Do you think it will be seamless and do you trust our coaching staff to guide him through it? I'm very dubious about our coaches ability to use players in a creative way that accentuates their strengths.

 

Likewise, I question our staff's ability to get the most out of him. But I think he has an easier transition to hybrid LB than Thomas will have to the NFL. 

[OffensivelyPC]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Exactly. I'm all about adding draft picks, and in general, I believe the more picks you have in the top 100, the more likely you are to find a Pro Bowler. But I also think there's a clear difference between a top 10 player -- which I believe Thomas and Barnett are -- and a top 25 player. I'd rather have one top 10 player and 3 other picks between 45-100, than to have five picks all between 25-100. 

I get where guys like BP are coming from, but I don't think people account enough for hte difference in playmakers.  It's an overly simplistic analysis, but trading down as BP suggest, lets say you hit on both of them, you get probably a good starter with pro bowl upside, but otherwise nothing special, and an average to good starter with the extra pick.  But if you hit on a guy at 15 (particulary who is projected as a top 5 pick), you're getting an elite player at that position.  People can argue over the difference till the sun rises, but you need difference makers on defense.  You just do - and we have none (well last year we didn't, maybe Hankins fits the bill, but he's gotta prove it first).  

 

If you believe a guy is special, you take him regardless, because you don't know where you'll be drafting next year and you don't know if you'll have that same opportunity.  I always find it a little funny when we spend so many years drafting in the 20s, and we finally get 2 years in a row where we are in a position to maybe trade up a few spots and get a player graded high enough that we'd never have a chance at 3 years ago dating back to pretty much 2000...and everyone wants to trade back.