That would be a foolish move. Albert has never played RT. Matthews has 2 full seasons of recent experience at RT.
You make a good point, but I am not sure we need any drafted WRs. It would kind of be a luxury. If we return the exact same top 4 WRs, but with a much improved OL, this is a playoff team. The by far #1 reason we didn't have 2-3 more wins last year was the OL. JMO.
Can someone explain the infatuation with Ryan Shazier? I don't see a top 100 LB. maybe the idea is to have him play Kam Chancellor role? but he is not a big hitter. I don't get it.
I agree with you. If you're a stop-start runner like this then you had damn well better be explosive. I see guys like Carlos Hyde try and do that stop-start stuff and it's like...no, just...no. This is something I always key on with players. You have to figure out what they're trying to be, then figure out if they have the recipe to make that work. This is what Lache Seastrunk is trying to be, no doubt about that. He's one of those guys that wants to stop on a dime, make guys miss, play with them, etc. It's not like the NFL has none of those guys. Some of the best guys out there like Marshall Faulk and now LeSean McCoy are that type. Does he have the goods to do it like they did? Absolutely.
Mason ahead but only by a slim margin. Mason is more used to working in traffic but Seastrunk is more explosive and actually breaks more tackles, does more after contact. They're both physically gifted and I could imagine either player becoming a top five fantasy back (which just means super productive, a game-changer).
Reality is no, I can't explain Shazier to you or anyone that have already made up their minds on him. There's very little mind-changing happening when it comes to these things and more often just spinning our wheels and trying to debate one another on the points. I'm a believer in Ryan Shazier, where initially I was not. Eventually I came to that myself, not because anyone convinced me of it. As I watched more film I came to realize that what I had been mistaking for lack of instincts or not making as many plays on the ball carrier in the running game as I'd hoped, what I was really seeing was a good defensive player surrounded by poor defensive players in a questionable defensive scheme. Yet he still found a way to make an inordinate number of plays. His production is second to none or one (possibly Kyle Van Noy). There was never any question that athletic ability and explosiveness dripped off him on tape. He makes plays other players can't. Put it all together with an A+ character and the league being devastatingly short on real linebackers that can match up with the underneath passing game...and there you have it.
which guy? Zack Martin? Marcus Martin? Yeah, draft day has the potential for some big bucks. There's a bunch of 425K guys who will be skyrocketing this weekend. I'm 65th at the moment with $14,573,222. Did 2.52M the past month.
yeah but they're potentially accent pieces rather than feature backs. Plus, how much pass blocking did Mason get to do in Auburn's offense? ... and didn't Seastrunk drop more passes than he caught?
I think mason has size that makes you feel confident that he can be your 20 carry guy, I don't get that sense with Seastrunk.. It looks like there is a ten lb difference.. Would you take Giavonni Bernard over Seastrunk?
Scouts comments on him. RYAN SHAZIER, Ohio State (6-1, 230, 4.38, 1) – Third-year junior and a two-year starter on the weak side. "He is the fastest guy I have scouted at linebacker other than Brian Urlacher," one longtime scout said. "We had him at 4.38 at 235 or 237. Mosley is a hell of a football player but I'll take 4.38 and see if I can work with it. He's a blur. He's faster than Derrick Brooks. He's a bigger, faster Lavonte David. He's a freak when it comes to speed." Posted the best vertical jump (42 inches) of anyone at the combine and led LBs in the broad jump (10-10). Scored 20 on the 50-question Wonderlic intelligence test and bench-pressed 225 pounds 25 times. "His problem is he's a real linear guy," another scout said. "He bulked up for his pro day but he probably played under 220 this year. He's doesn't have a lot of (expletive) to him so when he hits you sometimes his legs go dead." Finished with 315 tackles (44½ for loss), 14 sacks and 10 big plays. Compared by one scout to former Bear WLB Wilber Marshall. "Not very strong," a fourth scout said. "Gets bounced around some. He's got unique speed. Pursuit angles are a little inconsistent. Supposed to be a pretty good kid. Good hands, but not physical. Good feel in the pass game." From Pompano Beach, Fla. Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...kers-b99261940z1-257880521.html#ixzz30sAao682 Follow us: @JournalSentinel on Twitter
Mason can absolutely be a 20 carry guy, imo. Carried a serious load at Auburn, has that compact build that looks rock-solid against contact. This is part of the reason he's my favorite back. Would love him at 50, but I doubt it'll happen. Seastrunk's fall is weird. Two-three months ago he was a lock second round pick, even some first round talk in the media. I'll be really surprised if he makes it to the third day. I agree with phinsational that he's a complementary guy right now because he's so perimeter and east-west. For those reasons I wouldn't have taken him over Gio Bernard, who is better between the tackles, better vision/decisions in traffic, better receiver. That said...I'd hate to go against Seastrunk if he 's on a team like Philly, Seattle, or the Jets. He has the potential to be a real nightmare as a part-time player.
I don't really see why they'd be "accent pieces" more so than other guys in the NFL. Look around us. Only two players in the league got 300+ carries. From 2008 to 2010, an average of more than six backs carried that kind of load. Now? Only two. And one of those two only barely scraped it at 301 carries. The other had 314 carries. Oh and that leading ball carrier with 314 carries? That would be LeSean McCoy, who had pretty much the EXACT same dimensions as Lache Seastrunk coming out of Pittsburgh. Not far off from Tre Mason either. Everyone's an "accent piece" nowadays. Just a matter of whether you're the team's leading accent piece or the secondary one and there's no reason guys with the DYNAMIC talent of Tre Mason and Lache Seastrunk aren't lead pieces. And don't get me started on the blocking thing. In addition to being entirely overrated on the football field, it's a TECHNICAL skill being evaluated in players that aren't even taught how to do it. How much time do you think ART BRILES spent teaching Lache Seastrunk to block? Maybe 30 minutes the whole year? Blocking is something you learn to do once you're in the league. As for catches or drops I really can't say because I don't know the answer to that question. I know that ESPN's play by plays didn't record a single pass attempt toward Lache Seastrunk in 2013 so that claim must pertain purely to 2012. I don't know whether that's true or not about more drops than catches in 2012 but I do know that was his first year playing college football. He did have 9 catches for 107 yards and 1 TD so I doubt anyone could try and claim he was incapable of catching the football. I can say he didn't look terribly bad catching the ball... HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAPoRHY_koA&feature=player_detailpage#t=26 Or expecially.. HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAPoRHY_koA&feature=player_detailpage#t=50 The implication talking about his drops is that he simply can't catch the football and if that's the case then it's just too bad. But there's enough on the 2012 tape to make you think it's workable and the real issue is just Briles doesn't utilize backs catching the football out of the backfield because that's not the design of his offense. If he can catch the football period then forget about it. Probably 80% of what a back can do in the passing game is determined by his quickness and ability to run in the open field with the ball in his hands and there is literally nobody in the draft at tailback better at that than Lache Seastrunk.
I'd say they're about the same. Also, nobody in the NFL is a 20 carry per game guy anymore. It's an antiquated evaluation tool to judge based on that.
WADR, I could say the same thing about using 1st & 2nd round picks on a right tackle- that it's a luxury when we could get good enough production from a 2nd rounder. I just find it unacceptable the notion that Miami's offensive line can't be an effective unit unless it features 3 Pro Bowlers, which is what you're basically saying by suggesting anything less than Matthews or Martin added to Pouncey & Albert leaves us in the same boat as we were last year. As it sits we're already an upgraded unit with the additions of Albert, Smith, and Fox. As far as WR goes, I heavily disagree with you. If we return the exact same top 4 receivers, we'd still have 3 receivers who are better fits for Sherman's offense and even Henning's which placed a greater emphasis on horizontal stretch stuff and rarely utilized players in space. Personally, I'm not fond of sticking round pegs in square holes by forcing Sherman & Henning's personnel to try and fit Lazor's offensive scheme & philosophy that was the most vertically oriented and YAC oriented in the NFL last year by a wide margin, and I'm guessing that's why Hickey has scoured the first few rounds looking at WR. Hartline starting at WR in Lazor's offense will do more to hold back production than not addressing RT will IMO. He's a complete non factor in the screen game as he's terrible with the ball in his hands [just 2 catches for 4 yards behind the LOS the past 2 years], and he's heavily inadequate in the vertical game as he can't win jump balls and has difficulty separating from coverage downfield. Look at what Riley Cooper did last year. Even with Jake Matthews at right tackle, Hartline won't be making the game-changing plays Cooper did. Hartline mustered just 84 yards and 1 TD on screens and throws beyond 20 yards; meanwhile Cooper totaled 309 yards and 3 TDs and did so despite seeing 50 less targets than Hartline on the season. Therefore I think it's a priority to give Lazor the appropriate receivers, tight ends, and backs who best fit his needs and who open up his playbook to the fullest. I think that trumps the idea of taking one of the best tackles in the draft when a good tackle like James can get the job done just fine.
also had the aid of one of college's best fullbacks blocking for him. How will he hold up on a team without a lead back?
Hey I'm not saying they're undraftable and won't contribute or anything. I'm just listing why they won't go as high as they could if the blocking and hands were already established. Obviously a Tre Mason with established blocking ability will go higher than a Trey Mason without, and obviously a Lacke Seastrunk with proven, reliable hands will go higher than a Lache Seastrunk without..... and obviously a 220 pound Seastrunk & Mason will go higher than a 205 pound Seastrunk & Mason. I think NFL teams will also have concerns about Seastrunk's durability due to a thinner frame that has lots of muscle packed on it to be at 201 pounds, unlike LeSean McCoy who weighs roughly the same but has a slightly thicker and more durable frame.
I've seen a fair number of arguments that imply a guy had it better in college than he will in the pros. I've never seen a fullback be the centerpiece of that argument.
Only way that makes sense is Matthews starting at RT, filling in for Albert when he is hurt, and taking over the LT spot when Albert is gone in two years. On a different note, the pet peeves I have for RB's is dancing in the backfield and shoe string tackles. Pick your damn feet up.
Difference is my handsome young Will Hunting, is that we have a solid WR corps right now. We have Jack and Squat at RT right now.
Holy Feck, it looks like Shazier is in play at 19. Feck! They are going to draft a Shazier family. smh Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...the-case-for-shazier-canes.html#storylink=cpy[/
Yup, more and more it looks like my style of evaluating players is antiquated, he looks like a fourth round pick to me, package player, " 20 carry back".. metaphor for I'd want him to have the majority of touches and could handle it, and give the team the best chance at production.
I obviously can't predict how well in the NFL without his fullback, but I have some interesting stats on runs in which he had at least one full back. Mason had at least one fullback on 67.4% of his total carries. On carries in which he had a fullback, he averaged 5.42 YPC versus 6.27 YPC without one. With a fullback he was first contacted on average 2.55 yards from the LOS and without a fullback he was first contacted on average 2.99 yards from the LOS. With a fullback 44% of his carries were 3 yards or less. Without a fullback, 37% of his carries were 3 yards or less. There are a lot of variables in play of course. Different play calls with the fullback in (however there doesn't appear to be a significant difference in down/distance/field location with or without a FB), defensive fronts, etc. However, on the face of it - there doesn't seem to be a significant difference in his play with or without the FB.
This is a nice little group of lead FBs this year. Too bad we don't seem to use one enough anymore to have a specialist in that role. I'd be happy with Prosch, Copeland or Hewitt. Gator or Jordan too. Who couldn't like a player named Gator?
If the buzz is legitimate it's not because Hickey has suddenly in the final hour become enamored with the linebacker; it would be because the interest has been there all along, only it's just now being discovered. Perhaps the rumor is true b/c the talk about moving Misi to ILB in order to settle the linebacking unit would make for a nice smokescreen to throw teams off the trail. Now, we're obviously not looking at all these high round receivers as a smoke screen, as doing so would simply be too time consuming and detrimental to our overall goal of finding the best players, so there's the possibility that a "Shazier buzz" is nothing more than a smoke screen to deter Philly or KC from jumping ahead of us for Beckham or Cooks. I'd Shazier is a real possibility though.
Good stuff, Greg. Thanks. Yeah, I wasn't suggesting that Mason was better with a fullback or anything but merely questioning if that's what some of his success was due to, and you addressed it with flying colors. I think it's a legitimate concern, and somewhere I'm guessing a scout has appreciated you taking the time to statistically shed better light on it to make his job that much easier. lol
Yeah it is a little disappointing. I really liked Copeland. Too bad we can't draft him and then just figure out a way to get him involved.
Have to keep in mind that what you as a draft evaluator would have at your disposal is a vertically stacked list with 19 players on it. Actually more but only the top 19 of them count for now. If you're "high" on Ryan Shazier, where exactly is he on that list? Surely not #1. He's somewhere on it and there are other players on it ranked higher. So why would Ryan Shazier's name start coming out? Probably because as teams start to hear where other guys are graded with the other teams and who is interested in who, it starts to become a little more apparent which of those top 19 players is going to actually be available when you pick. Maybe that wasn't obvious a week ago, or two weeks ago, or a month ago. And running all through the background of all that are the constant trade scenarios wherein you'd be targeting other players altogether. These are the reasons you should never be able to find a consistent narrative with respect to who a team is going to take in the draft. Unless they're picking VERY high at which point it simply boils down to how well they can keep a secret.
makes sense. But also we have to consider the fact Shazier is sitting somewhat in the sweep spot of where we're drafting, so Hickey could very well feel Shazier represents value AND fills a need by providing the type of coveted impact linebacker he had in Tampa [Lavonte David]. Let's be honest, even with a stacked board of 19, if Shazier is higher on the board and happens to make it to 19, there's a good chance Hickey takes him. If Shazier is lower on the board, there's still a decent chance Hickey drafts him by the simple fact that most of the players higher on the board will get drafted ahead of Shazier, leaving Shazier as one of the few options. could there be any tea leaves to this?
We are talking about Shazier at 19, we are facked. It's time to blow up this regime and go back to good old power football of the NY Giants. Another thing is, this speed thing rears its head again, it means Ireland did nothing more nor less than what Philbin asked for and Philbin is the real problem and should be fired today.
Copeland is like Jovorskie Lane if Lane could block, offer better athleticism, and hold onto the ball. It's been a few years since we've had the pleasure of watching Lousaka Polite crack some linebackers. I wouldn't mind rekindling that feeling TBH. But then again, if Egnew picks up where he left off last year, Copeland could be viewed as a luxury perhaps.
I don't think it's that implausible that the team is interested in a fullback. They're a team that might go without a true fullback, but they're probably not a team to go without a lead blocker, unless it's Chip Kelly's offense adopted whole-cloth.
Yes indeed there are. I brought it up in the Club minutes after Dominik posted it. Adam Beasley and I have discussed it in private too. He agrees with me that Dominik is secondhand telegraphing Hickey's board because of his role trying to earn his keep with the media, and this is likely not to continue beyond this year. Either Hickey will shut him off, or Hickey will hire him (latter seeming to be more likely than the former).
I don't think Shazier makes it to 19 anymore. My real concern is Detroit they need a OLB something fierce and if they found a trading partner if Aaron Donald fell to 10 like Chicago or Dallas then you can bet Detroit is going Shazier. Even at 10 Shazier could be the pick. I'm hoping Gilbert falls to 19 so we can use him as trade bait with someone like the 49ers and at 30 take Moses or Su'a-Filo
At the round table coach interview earlier this year (there's video of it on the official site) Philbin was asked how important the fullback position was, and he said something to the effect of "11th most important position on offense". So if he meant that (or if I, in fact, heard it right) then that may indicate our plans in regard to the position in the draft or maybe not.
I can't even tell anymore, to be honest, he says these things but then there are talks about us pursuing Vonta Leach last year. Maybe he's willing to make exceptions for proven fullbacks but opposed to drafting them right out of college.
If Shazier is the pick, though, how would he be utilized in this defense? Would the staff trust him to start at MLB right away? Would he just outright take Wheeler's spot at WLB? Or would he be a situational player? With this staff's reluctance to start rookies I just don't know how much of an impact a raw Shazier would have in his first year... I don't think we can afford to have another Jordan type pick where the first round rookie doesn't make as much of an impact as he should.
The Vonta Leach thing could be speculation, could have been all Ireland, could have been Philbin capitulating just to get help blocking since Ireland didn't get him an LT proper...I dunno. I do know this "11th most important" thing actually came out of Philbin's mouth and the Leach stuff I don't.
