Bradley Chubb 3-Cones at 7.37

[Boiler_Colt]

1 minute ago, boo2202 said:

I know right. I'm fine with Chubb in the 1st but the next two rounds need to be dedicated to solidifying the oline and finding a young playmaker at rb or WR. We invested a lot last year with hooker, Wilson, Basham, Hankins, sheard, Simon, woods, etc. some of those guys better earn their keep. 

 I'd be shocked if O-Line and WR arent addressed in Free Agency.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 I'd be shocked if O-Line and WR arent addressed in Free Agency.

Very true but would still love it if a OL is drafted 

[IndyScribe]

4 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 I'd be shocked if O-Line and WR arent addressed in Free Agency.

I wouldn't be shocked about WR. The WR class is pretty weak, and Ballard can find lots of good ones in the draft.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

11 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

Yea lets just do this and put Andrew out there with

rb-mack

wr-Hilton & rodgers

te- doyle

ol- AC Clark kelly haeg good

 

that sounds like a great idea

 

Yeah lol. For some reason this Forum doesn't think the 30th rank offense don't need no players added caus Luck should be back.

[boo2202]

1 minute ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 I'd be shocked if O-Line and WR arent addressed in Free Agency.

Addressed in FA? Slim Pickens there. Who are we hoping for Paul Richardson, Jeremy hill, Zack Fulton? Ballard needs to pull one rabbit out of the hat. Rather it's Norwell or Robinson. I do believe he sees the roster as we all do tho. The Landry rumor probally had some legs to it because there's really no answer for receiver outside of Robinson not getting tagged. Who wants to pay Watkins 8mil a year on a prove it deal? Not me. Pryor please.... let's just keep moncrief and hope the turf monster doesn't damage his fragile body. Everybody says FA will fill some holes but I don't see many good WR-rb-ol available. Now defensively there are lb's a plenty a few good corners that would help. Just my two cents.

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, boo2202 said:

Addressed in FA? Slim Pickens there. Who are we hoping for Paul Richardson, Jeremy hill, Zack Fulton? Ballard needs to pull one rabbit out of the hat. Rather it's Norwell or Robinson. I do believe he sees the roster as we all do tho. The Landry rumor probally had some legs to it because there's really no answer for receiver outside of Robinson not getting tagged. Who wants to pay Watkins 8mil a year on a prove it deal? Not me. Pryor please.... let's just keep moncrief and hope the turf monster doesn't damage his fragile body. Everybody says FA will fill some holes but I don't see many good WR-rb-ol available. Now defensively there are lb's a plenty a few good corners that would help. Just my two cents.

I like the WR Draft class more than the FA group

[Alex22]

7 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Agreed. He tests better than everyone thought in the 40 but everyone is hung up on the 3 cone. 

 

40 Means not much for a DE, But 3 cone is all about dat pass rush mentality yo 

[GoColts8818]

I think we as fans way over value combine numbers both good and bad.  I could really care about someone’s 40 time for example because they are doing it not in a game setting without football gear on.  I am much more interested in what’s been put on film.  That goes for anyone not just Chubb.  

[TdungyW/12]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

Trying to find a rhyme for Chubb that says this^

 

tub for Chubb 

Snub for Chubb

flub for Chubb 

Scrub for Chubb 

Schlub for chubb

washtub for chubb 

 

[chrisfarley]

8 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

If we trade down to #6 woth Jets and 2 additional 2nd rd. picks. Would you get him at #6?

nelson, not him

[masnerj]

Guys, I think the issue here is how we classify Bradley Chubb. I am hearing phrases like "rock-solid pash-rusher" or "complete 4-3 DE with no overall weaknesses" and then I am hearing things like "elite pass-rusher" and "top overall defensive player in the draft." The problem is whether or not we consider Bradley Chubb to be an ELITE, All-Pro potential PASS-RUSHER. Nobody will deny that in all likelihood, Bradley Chubb's floor is that of an above-average 4-3 DE who gets around 6-7 sacks a year and is a good run-defender as well and never comes off the field. HOWEVER, that is not what the #3 pick overall is for (atleast in today's NFL).

 

Just go back to Ballard's words about what the #3 pick should ideally be. He used words and phrases like "transformational talent", "game-changer," etc. At this point, throwing needs out of the window to an extent (which any self-respecting NFL draft strategy should have," there is no question that those phrases belong to Saquon Barkley more so than they do to Bradley Chubb. And looking back at history, those phrases belonged easily to Clowney and Garrett. 

 

Unfortunately, Chubb probably isn't at the same level as Bosa, Garrett, Clowney, etc in terms of pass-rush talent. Sure he might be a better run-defender coming out or have an overall better solid body of work but that isn't what a top 5 pick is about. You need a game-breaker type player if you want to pick at #3 (unless your team is desperate for a QB in which case you probably reach for a Josh Allen or settle with Rosen type player). 

 

As much as I love Bradley Chubb and his extremely high floor, I don't think his ceiling is high enough to warrant the use of the #3 pick. If we somehow trade back to like 6-8 and grab him than I will go crazy because we would have picked up extra premium picks AND gotten him at a pick that he is suited for. I hate to agree with @BlueShoe because I personally would rather have a defensive player than an offensive player but I have been convinced over the last few weeks that Barkley fits exactly with that game-breaker type talent way more so than Chubb or anybody else in the draft. And to be honest, that might be why Ballard wasn't jumping out of his seat when describing SB in an interview (or was it his press conference?). He used "good player" lol. 

 

If Barkley is there at 3, you grab him no questions asked (unless a team gives up the farm to trade up for him). If Barkley is gone, I don't think you can grab Chubb at #3 and be "happy." At a pick like #3 you gotta be able to grab a player and start jumping up and down in the war-room and be excited for a game-changing talent. If Barkley is gone, that means you probably will have several teams looking to trade up for the 2nd QB pick in which case you move down and comfortably select out of Chubb, Nelson, etc in a BPA mode AND enjoy additional 1st/2nd round talent this year or next also in a BPA mode. 

[Superman]

4 hours ago, chad72 said:

Plus, Demarcus Lawrence had a 7.46

 

http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?i=20977

 

I'm not worried at all.

 

Demarcus Lawrence hasn't really been a great pass rusher. He was excellent in 2017, but average at best before that. He was hurt, and suspended, and all that, but he wasn't on my radar as a great pass rusher before this season, just a disappointing second round pick.

 

Still, he did blow up last year, which serves as evidence that a bad 3 cone doesn't mean you can't be a good pass rusher.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, masnerj said:

Unfortunately, Chubb probably isn't at the same level as Bosa, Garrett, Clowney, etc in terms of pass-rush talent.

 

...

 

I don't think his ceiling is high enough to warrant the use of the #3 pick.

 

Since you want to talk about how we're classifying Chubb, I'm zeroing in on this part, which I disagree with. 

 

Chubb has been just as productive as all three of the guys you named above. His film is just as good. 

 

His workout was not as good as Garrett's (one of the most freakish athletes in Combine history), but Chubb is a more refined player, more of a technician, with better technique and a more impressive motor. He was more productive than Garrett in their last seasons.

 

His workout was better than Bosa's, with the exception of the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle. He's faster (21 MPH compared to Bosa's 17) and more explosive, at basically the same size. He was twice as productive as Bosa in their last seasons, they are similarly skilled in hand usage and pass rush moves, and play with the same tenacity.

 

Clowney's combine was basically the same as Chubb's, with the exception of a faster 40 and 3 cone, but Clowney's 3 cone was nothing to write home about, either. Explosion numbers were basically the same (Chubb hit a higher top speed). And again, Chubb is more of a technician, and in their last seasons, Chubb easily outworked Clowney, both in effort and production.

 

This talk about Chubb not being an elite pass rush prospect with All Pro potential... I'm not sure where it comes from (I think I know, but that's a different conversation). He has the potential to notch double digit sacks for several seasons, a ton of QB pressures, and he'll be good against the run. That's what the tape has always said. The combine showed that he is a great athlete, despite the bad 3 cone.

 

Drafting Chubb at #3 makes all the sense in the world. There are only two players that can be considered better than him in this draft -- Barkley, who is a freakish athlete who will likely have an immediate impact wherever he goes, and Nelson, who is probably the safest player in the class and will have a 10+ year career, barring injury. And that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with Chubb as a prospect; it's not like there's a massive separation between him and the other two, especially once you adjust for positional value (Barkley won't last at RB, and guards a) are always available in free agency, and b) don't play a premium position). 

 

A trade back to 5 or 6 and drafting Chubb would be great. But I have zero problem with drafting him at #3 straight up, and that's because I believe he can be a heavy duty pass rusher. He plays with speed, power, good technique, and passion. He can play in space. He has good change of direction (in both directions, off of either foot), a variety of pass rush moves, goes speed-to-power, closes well, finishes well, and produces every week despite facing double teams. He has great size and length.

 

He has one red flag: a bad 3 cone. So you go back to the tape. Does he look stiff? Does he struggle to change direction? Does he play upright and have trouble turning the corner or flattening to the QB/ball carrier? Is the bad 3 cone an outlier, or was the rest of his workout an anomaly? 

 

For me, he's the real deal. So when I say he's "a rock solid prospect," that's not me being withholding or selling him short. 

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Since you want to talk about how we're classifying Chubb, I'm zeroing in on this part, which I disagree with. 

 

Chubb has been just as productive as all three of the guys you named above. His film is just as good. 

 

His workout was not as good as Garrett's (one of the most freakish athletes in Combine history), but Chubb is a more refined player, more of a technician, with better technique and a more impressive motor. He was more productive than Garrett in their last seasons.

 

His workout was better than Bosa's, with the exception of the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle. He's faster (21 MPH compared to Bosa's 17) and more explosive, at basically the same size. He was twice as productive as Bosa in their last seasons, they are similarly skilled in hand usage and pass rush moves, and play with the same tenacity.

 

Clowney's combine was basically the same as Chubb's, with the exception of a faster 40 and 3 cone, but Clowney's 3 cone was nothing to write home about, either. Explosion numbers were basically the same (Chubb hit a higher top speed). And again, Chubb is more of a technician, and in their last seasons, Chubb easily outworked Clowney, both in effort and production.

 

This talk about Chubb not being an elite pass rush prospect with All Pro potential... I'm not sure where it comes from (I think I know, but that's a different conversation). He has the potential to notch double digit sacks for several seasons, a ton of QB pressures, and he'll be good against the run. That's what the tape has always said. The combine showed that he is a great athlete, despite the bad 3 cone.

 

Drafting Chubb at #3 makes all the sense in the world. There are only two players that can be considered better than him in this draft -- Barkley, who is a freakish athlete who will likely have an immediate impact wherever he goes, and Nelson, who is probably the safest player in the class and will have a 10+ year career, barring injury. And that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with Chubb as a prospect; it's not like there's a massive separation between him and the other two, especially once you adjust for positional value (Barkley won't last at RB, and guards a) are always available in free agency, and b) don't play a premium position). 

 

A trade back to 5 or 6 and drafting Chubb would be great. But I have zero problem with drafting him at #3 straight up, and that's because I believe he can be a heavy duty pass rusher. He plays with speed, power, good technique, and passion. He can play in space. He has good change of direction (in both directions, off of either foot), a variety of pass rush moves, goes speed-to-power, closes well, finishes well, and produces every week despite facing double teams. He has great size and length.

 

He has one red flag: a bad 3 cone. So you go back to the tape. Does he look stiff? Does he struggle to change direction? Does he play upright and have trouble turning the corner or flattening to the QB/ball carrier? Is the bad 3 cone an outlier, or was the rest of his workout an anomaly? 

 

For me, he's the real deal. So when I say he's "a rock solid prospect," that's not me being withholding or selling him short. 

Well summarized as usual man. I find it interesting that the only time you here the 3 cone mentioned is by those fancy analytics websites like PFF, who put an emphasis on data trends. I never hear Mayock, Jeremiah, Brooks, McShay, etc... raving about how good a guy’s 3 cone is. It’s about tape. I don’t think any of the tests or drills have much stock individually.

[krunk]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Since you want to talk about how we're classifying Chubb, I'm zeroing in on this part, which I disagree with. 

 

Chubb has been just as productive as all three of the guys you named above. His film is just as good. 

 

His workout was not as good as Garrett's (one of the most freakish athletes in Combine history), but Chubb is a more refined player, more of a technician, with better technique and a more impressive motor. He was more productive than Garrett in their last seasons.

 

His workout was better than Bosa's, with the exception of the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle. He's faster (21 MPH compared to Bosa's 17) and more explosive, at basically the same size. He was twice as productive as Bosa in their last seasons, they are similarly skilled in hand usage and pass rush moves, and play with the same tenacity.

 

Clowney's combine was basically the same as Chubb's, with the exception of a faster 40 and 3 cone, but Clowney's 3 cone was nothing to write home about, either. Explosion numbers were basically the same (Chubb hit a higher top speed). And again, Chubb is more of a technician, and in their last seasons, Chubb easily outworked Clowney, both in effort and production.

 

This talk about Chubb not being an elite pass rush prospect with All Pro potential... I'm not sure where it comes from (I think I know, but that's a different conversation). He has the potential to notch double digit sacks for several seasons, a ton of QB pressures, and he'll be good against the run. That's what the tape has always said. The combine showed that he is a great athlete, despite the bad 3 cone.

 

Drafting Chubb at #3 makes all the sense in the world. There are only two players that can be considered better than him in this draft -- Barkley, who is a freakish athlete who will likely have an immediate impact wherever he goes, and Nelson, who is probably the safest player in the class and will have a 10+ year career, barring injury. And that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with Chubb as a prospect; it's not like there's a massive separation between him and the other two, especially once you adjust for positional value (Barkley won't last at RB, and guards a) are always available in free agency, and b) don't play a premium position). 

 

A trade back to 5 or 6 and drafting Chubb would be great. But I have zero problem with drafting him at #3 straight up, and that's because I believe he can be a heavy duty pass rusher. He plays with speed, power, good technique, and passion. He can play in space. He has good change of direction (in both directions, off of either foot), a variety of pass rush moves, goes speed-to-power, closes well, finishes well, and produces every week despite facing double teams. He has great size and length.

 

He has one red flag: a bad 3 cone. So you go back to the tape. Does he look stiff? Does he struggle to change direction? Does he play upright and have trouble turning the corner or flattening to the QB/ball carrier? Is the bad 3 cone an outlier, or was the rest of his workout an anomaly? 

 

For me, he's the real deal. So when I say he's "a rock solid prospect," that's not me being withholding or selling him short. 

You straight snapped on these haters Supe! Thats what I'm talking bout big homie. On point and I luv it! I knew you were going to come with some knowledge.

[pgt_rob]

2 hours ago, krunk said:

You straight snapped on these haters Supe! Thats what I'm talking bout big homie. On point and I luv it! I knew you were going to come with some knowledge.

 

Big Homie.  Not a shot at your comment. That part just made me laugh.

[aaron11]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Disappointing.....

 

It's almost as if he heard about BOTT's comment about tanking the rest of the events to scare off the Giants and Browns...

 

Way to take one for the team, BC!    

 

funny but i could see the giants being better than the colts next year.  if they get barkley they probably will be 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

45 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

funny but i could see the giants being better than the colts next year.  if they get barkley they probably will be 

WHEN they get Barkley, they will be BETTER THAN A LOT OF TEAMS! 

And I'm guessing whoever drafts Chubb.

[Surge89]

17 hours ago, stitches said:

Dammit, I was so excited. After all the other tests even an average 3cone would have kept me extremely hyped until the draft. Now I feel so meh... 

 

Same... I was full on board with Chubb but this drill is so important and it explains a couple if the things that show up on tape... relatively this doesn't hurt him much in the draft maybe 2 or 3 spots but he was already borderline pickings for us to begin with I don't think this helps that. 

 

I wanna see Minkah.  The combine should really show if he is able to get those hips low so he can peddle and flip and show natural comfort in lower sets.  If anything he's the one who can gain the most here. 

[DaColts85]

Why are so many saying Chubb will drop now because of a drill.  Tape shows production and potential.  He will go to his pro day and all times will be improved.  Also, he is a pass rusher.  I can almost guarantee he is drafted within the top 3.  And most likely by us at #3.

[hoosierhawk]

Bleacher report has an article up that says Chubb separated himself from the pack better than anyone at the combine including Barkley and Griffin. Says he is far better than anyone else at his position than Barkley or anyone else at their respective positions.

Super job Superman on you analysis above.

 

[stitches]

22 minutes ago, Surge89 said:

 

Same... I was full on board with Chubb but this drill is so important and it explains a couple if the things that show up on tape... relatively this doesn't hurt him much in the draft maybe 2 or 3 spots but he was already borderline pickings for us to begin with I don't think this helps that. 

 

I wanna see Minkah.  The combine should really show if he is able to get those hips low so he can peddle and flip and show natural comfort in lower sets.  If anything he's the one who can gain the most here. 

I'm back to hyped today  One bad test shouldn't invalidate a great overall workout and resume. It's not ideal but overall Chubb tested as a better athlete than I expected. Like... MUCH BETTER. I'm already ready to celebrate when we pick him  

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Oh boy... another BlueShoe thread... where we get 10 pages of BlueShoe being argumentative with anyone and everyone that has a different opinion...

 

 

Lovely... 

[richard pallo]

10 hours ago, boo2202 said:

Addressed in FA? Slim Pickens there. Who are we hoping for Paul Richardson, Jeremy hill, Zack Fulton? Ballard needs to pull one rabbit out of the hat. Rather it's Norwell or Robinson. I do believe he sees the roster as we all do tho. The Landry rumor probally had some legs to it because there's really no answer for receiver outside of Robinson not getting tagged. Who wants to pay Watkins 8mil a year on a prove it deal? Not me. Pryor please.... let's just keep moncrief and hope the turf monster doesn't damage his fragile body. Everybody says FA will fill some holes but I don't see many good WR-rb-ol available. Now defensively there are lb's a plenty a few good corners that would help. Just my two cents.

Hopefully it's both Norwell and Robinson but it looks like Robinson is going to get tagged. I think the Landry rumor has legs and I'm not going to be surprised if he winds up a Colt. He won't us much at all.  Just look at who are 3rd. and 4th. rd. picks were last year. A 3rd or 4th. from this year for a young all pro.  No problem.  I give it better than 50:50. Ballard will give him a three or four year deal and lower the cap hit. I would love to pay Watkins 8m a year on a three or four yr. deal.  Playing indoors with a franchise QB like Luck would propel his career.  Ty, Landry and Watkins would be crazy.  

[krunk]

The 3 cone drill has zero to do with the haterism. He could go back on his pro day and run a much better time and the same individuals would be here doing the same bashing. its consistently coming from the same people.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, aaron11 said:

funny but i could see the giants being better than the colts next year.  if they get barkley they probably will be 

So?

 

I only care about the Colts.   I don't care how other teams are....

 

[Surge89]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I'm back to hyped today  One bad test shouldn't invalidate a great overall workout and resume. It's not ideal but overall Chubb tested as a better athlete than I expected. Like... MUCH BETTER. I'm already ready to celebrate when we pick him  

 

I'll be hyped again when he does his pro day and puts a better number up 

 

I still want to see Minkah lol

[Coffeedrinker]

18 hours ago, BOTT said:

No, I remember. The pass rusher and the small corner he way overpaid.  Maybe there were others and I just don't recall.  But ignoring free agency as he did most of his time here I thought was a mistake.

 

Ballard signed Hankins who is around 330....that's a big difference right there lol

You're right, his first couple of years he brought in via FA, Corneilius Bennett (Biscuit), Bratzke, Shaun King, Tito Wooten, Fred Lane, Barber (a LB, I don't remember his first name) Jeff Burris, Tyrone Poole, Chad Cota.  He also brought in a few WRs even after he drafted Reggie Wayne.

 

The thing about Polian is not that he didn't bring in FAs, he just rarely went after the big name free agents the exceptions being Corey Simon and Booger McFarland.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Surge89 said:

 

I'll be hyped again when he does his pro day and puts a better number up 

 

I still want to see Minkah lol

Minkah measured with shorter arms than I expected. The big question for him is whether he can play outside or not.  Him running in the 4.4s or better would go a long way in convincing teams he can hang on the outside at an elite level. 

[PrincetonTiger]

8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

So?

 

I only care about the Colts.   I don't care how other teams are....

 

Chiefs are the only other team I care about

[shasta519]

11 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I like the WR Draft class more than the FA group

 

I want one of each. I think the WR class will look a bit better in a couple weeks when some players are released.

[shasta519]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

Minkah measured with shorter arms than I expected. The big question for him is whether he can play outside or not.  Him running in the 4.4s or better would go a long way in convincing teams he can hang on the outside at an elite level. 

 

He said he ran a

4.39 40 this spring for scouts. It wasn't official...but I don't why he would lie about it when other scouts were there that would know he was lyring. He also wasn't training for it like I am sure he has been. I am very interested to see what he runs and he jumps.

[Surge89]

8 minutes ago, stitches said:

Minkah measured with shorter arms than I expected. The big question for him is whether he can play outside or not.  Him running in the 4.4s or better would go a long way in convincing teams he can hang on the outside at an elite level. 

 

For me I'm not too worried about his speed.  I just need to see that he's going to be graceful enough to dip and turn play after play after play.  Also do his feet set in stride consistently at the break. I saw the length... that's saddening and it makes his 10 yard even more important.  That short area needs to be elite. 

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

He said he ran a sub 4.39 40 this spring for scouts. It wasn't official...but I don't why he would lie about it when other scouts were there that would know he was lyring. He also wasn't training for it like I am sure he has been. I am very interested to see what he runs and he jumps.

Yeah... that's about what I'm expecting - 4.40 +/- 0.05 ... but still good to confirm it... 

[Ben Fisher]

7.37 cone time isn't ideal. However, it should be stated that the 40 time, vert. and broad jump measurables were all great for his position. He's comparable to Myles Garrett IMO, although I think he plays better against the run. His game tape speaks for itself, and he registered double-digit sacks the last twos seasons against primarily double teams. ACC teams knew he was the best player on NC State's defense, and they still struggled to stop him. He's the best player at arguably our biggest position of need. It would be foolish to pass on a guy with that level of consistent production and the desire to be the best.

[USAFHoosier]

I just don't see what the 3 cone drill has to do with lineman. WR, RB, CB, and safeties I can definitely see where it would come into play.  But if a DE has to throw his head and body in the opposite direction and accelerate he didn't hold the edge and is getting smoked.  Maybe someone could enlighten me.

[NewEra]

20 hours ago, Shive said:

As a pure pass rusher, sure, but as a 3 down DE, not a chance.

Same could have been said about Freeney/Mathis 

[NewColtsFan]

7 minutes ago, USAFHoosier said:

I just don't see what the 3 cone drill has to do with lineman. WR, RB, CB, and safeties I can definitely see where it would come into play.  But if a DE has to throw his head and body in the opposite direction and accelerate he didn't hold the edge and is getting smoked.  Maybe someone could enlighten me.

 

Change of direction.   Ability to bend.  DL don't often have a clear straight shot at the QB.   You have to take awkward angles and be able to stop and start...

 

The 3-cone and shuttle drills are highly valued by teams.   That said,  for a guy like Chubb,  for many teams the tape wins out.    And Chubb has great tape.

 

[Superman]

8 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Well summarized as usual man. I find it interesting that the only time you here the 3 cone mentioned is by those fancy analytics websites like PFF, who put an emphasis on data trends. I never hear Mayock, Jeremiah, Brooks, McShay, etc... raving about how good a guy’s 3 cone is. It’s about tape. I don’t think any of the tests or drills have much stock individually.

 

There's an indisputable correlation between 3 cone results and successful pass rushers. In no way am I dismissing the 3 cone, or even excusing Chubb's poor time.

 

But, as we all know, correlation does not equal causation, and there are a number of examples of edge rushers with poor 3 cones who are still good pass rushers. Usually, those guys are good athletes and play with good effort and technique. 

[stitches]

I'm actually so hyped about Chubb that I will be changing my profile pic from Roquan(who I still love, but isn't a player for our range) to Chubb sometime today... unless Minkah blows me away in his testing and on-field drills.