stitches
-
Posts
15,313 -
Joined
-
Days Won
109
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
This is a killer draft. Love it.
-
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.
-
17 minutes ago, krunk said:
This is fair analysis. I didn't post the link to say Mcdowell needed to be drafted higher than Thomas.
Or to establish Voch Lombardi as some type of expert to be taken over the opinions of others. Just wanted to get some opinions on the player because he's actually pretty good.
I usually like his videos, they give me different perspective. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't with the analysis, but it's fun to see what others see in different players and how they watch film. I'm relatively new to it, so I'm very far from being any sort of an expert. I'm still learning the game if I have to be honest, so whatever I say, take with a grain of salt. I try to do my best and give a fair assessment of what I see, but because I didn't grow up watching football and I've never played football, it's very possible I'm missing things or I'm not watching for the right things or I'm giving undue importance to things that are not worth it or vice-versa. That's why I love reading the full length analysis people here provide(the Budda Baker and Jamer Conner threads), or whatever analysis I can find on youtube.
Now on the topic you are interested in this thread - from what I've watched from McDowell, when his effort is good, he has great strength and violent hands on the inside, but doesn't seem to have very many advanced pass-rushing moves, although he creates pressure and penetration with his strength and hands. He has great strength against double teams and on run plays where he holds very well at point of attack and sheds blocks well to get to the carrier. In certain games his film looks incredibly impressive. He truly looks like a top 10 talent. Other times, he's ... meh and looked like he's not giving any effort. He also admited at the combine that he disregarded game plans, coaches instructions and was freelancing. He said it with pride. Like it was something to be praised about because every now and then it worked. Every time I've heard him talk I've thought to myself "My oh my... somebody needs to tell him to shut up until the draft".
-
We had a discussion about this video and McDowell vs Thomas in another thread here:
Without overrepeating myself, to summarize my opinion - I like Lombardi's video usually, but he started this one by admitting that he's doing the video as a response to an argument he's had online. I think this specific video is very selectively edited and was commented on in a biased way during the video(I gave the example of the comments about Thomas' motor at the goalline situation, where it was presented as some egregious lack of effort, when in reality it had nothing to do with effort and motor). I think the worst effort film of McDowell is much worse than the worst effort film of Thomas you can get.
With that said, when McDowell is locked in, he's a freaking manace and pursues to the end. I have no issue with people thinking McDowell has better natural football talent. He might. Especially if we are talking about him playing inside. I think on talent alone he's clearly a top 10-15 talent. Now, when the other considerations come in, it becomes much less clear where he should be taken. If we do take him at 15 I'd just think Ballard has determined the issues are overblown in the media and he thinks we can work with him and get him straight and coach him up. I also think that if the issues are as bad as they are reported to be, he might fall significantly, maybe even out of round 2. I guess, we will have to wait and see.
-
1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:
Unfortunately, because the draft has moved on and Samuel has been picked, we can't go back and change it.
Thanks for posting this.
No worries.
-
Colts met with UWA CB Dee Virgin after his pro-day:
-
Hey guys I'm sorry I wasn't here for the Eagles pick. Was away for Easter. If noone protests is it possible to change it to Curtis Samuel?
-
2 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:
Thats against one of the worst lines in the league
The Dallas one?
-
Gotta agree with @Defjamz26, feels like you are reaching a lot on multiple ocassions and especially early in the draft.
-
23 hours ago, krunk said:
I think they have plans to bring in one or two more Ohio State guys from this draft too.
1: R1P15CB GAREON CONLEYOHIO STATE2: R2P14LB RAEKWON MCMILLANOHIO STATE3: R3P16C PAT ELFLEINOHIO STATE4: R4P14WR NOAH BROWNOHIO STATE?
-
-
Well thought out and well motivated picks for the most part. Nicely done.
-
The Colts hosted USF OT Kofi Amichia for a visit in Indy.
http://coltswire.usatoday.com/2017/04/14/usf-kofi-amichia-visited-indianapolis-colts/
-
2 minutes ago, BProland85 said:
I like Conley if we traded down first. I'd rather have either Reddick or Foster though.
Conley won't be there much past 15. He might even go before us IMO.
-
6 minutes ago, BR-549 said:
Right and....
I hear ya.... but as they say, play to the whistle every play and he just didn't seem to put much effort into that play one way or another. That one didn't bother me so much but there were other similar examples in the film. Most likely not an issue at all, just something to keep an eye on.
Yeah the argument was on his Facebook page and he made too big of a deal over it. Much like what often happens on the forum lol.
Watching the video and not paying attention to what is being said, I saw a more motivated player in Malik. And like you say, maybe it is a result of raw talent and not motivation, Idk, Just going off of what I saw.
The problem with McDowell is inconsistency. When he's on, he pursues and his motor is great. The problem is that this is not every game. This is why you can find film of him giving effort and present him as this hound that pursues everything and never gives up. Sure, absolutely... when he's on, he's a freaking wrecking ball for offensive lines.
I guess if I had to say it more consicely - the worst film of Solomon Thomas' motor is MUCH BETTER than the worst film of Malik McDowell's motor.
Anyways... maybe we got very off-topic. If a moderator wants to separate those discussions so we wouldn't clutter this thread, that'd be ok. Sorry for creating more work for you guys.
-
12 minutes ago, BR-549 said:
I don't know about the selective video part, why would he care one way or the other? His job is to break down film and show skill sets or lack of.
I know what I see and regardless of selective film, if a top tier player shows any laziness at all I would at least have hesitation and Thomas does that. In contrast, I also watched the combine and I really liked Solomon that day.... he was pretty amazing actually. And being from Stanford you don't have to wonder about his ability to learn.
I had not heard about the locker room issue with Malik, and also have not seen his combine interview (i will dig it up and watch it though). If that is true it is unlikely he will be a Colt anyway so it is a moot point (meaning the better than Thomas opinion).
I like them both, I just happen to like Malik better. It will be fine with me if we draft either, and it will be up to the staff to figure out how to deal with the cancer issue if Malik is someone they decide they want.
Lombardi also compared Allen, Thomas and McDowell in a film session. I haven't watched it yet but I plan to.
It's because he got into argument online with somebody about McDowell vs Thomas. I have no problem with somebody thinking McDowell has more natural talent than Thomas. That might be right. The problem is that this video is as a response to this argument he had and it's specifically selected cuts. For example the video he showed of Thomas not pursuing the RB around the goal line - to me this was nonsense commentary. He didn't pursue because he was like... 10 yards away from him and the goalline was 2 yards away from the RB and there were 4 bodies between him and the RB he had to pursue him from behind. What exactly was he supposed to do there? Run to jump on the pile? That's not what motor is. You can tell his commentary in this specific video was extremely biased, because he had taken a position he needed to defend.
-
13 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:
Sorry for taking this off topic-ish for a sec, but I had a quick question and didn't think it deserved it's own thread.
As far as Jonathan Allen goes, we've been seeing him slide in mock's recently. If by some outside chance teams got spooked by his shoulders and we picked him at 15, what would be his most natural position on our 3-man front? Would he be best in Anderson's DE role? Or would he be better served in Langford's DT role? I see your example shows him in the DE position, but I always just see Allen listed as "DL". Thanks!
Both Allen/McDowell and Henry Anderson would be 5 technique on both sides of Hankins in our 3-4 base defense and they can be moved around to 3 tech in sub-packages IMO... hell some think McDowell can even play both DE and NT in sub-packages.
-
Just now, BR-549 said:
I like Malik.. for those who care to watch this kind of sums up why... I know it is Voch, but check it out it is worth watching.
I watched this one. He's being incredibly selective with his film to bump up McDowell and crap on Thomas. There is absolutely no question Thomas' motor and "give a #" factor is much higher than McDowell's. And I like Thomas better, but I do think McDowell is legit top 10-15 level talent. My worry with him is what some reporters have described as "cancerous for the lockerrom" attitude and him being hard to deal with on a daily basis and questions about coachability. Hell just watch his combine interview.
-
13 hours ago, Superman said:
Nothing substantiated, but take a look at this reddit thread for some draft rumors, including some notes on the Colts and Mixon: https://www.reddit.com/r/Colts/comments/64ul74/take_this_as_you_will_but_i_have_some_info_you/
I read this thread. A lot of it makes no sense. I have a suspicion the guy is a Brad Wells/Jim Osborne type of 'insider"
-
On paper B+. He got 2 of my favorite FAs(Hankins and Simon), but he kind of overpaid for one of them(Hankins). He gave out good contracts that don't tie us up long term, yet give us some mid-term upside(the 3 year contracts) if those players pan out. We are arguably better now than before FA at pretty much every single position(except for CB) and he did it without big splashes. He improved the depth and competition on the roster and he set us up to largely be able to draft without much consideration for need in the draft.
What to do at 15, round 2
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
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.