Thanks Boom. But speaking of it: What do you make of Dorsey's injury. That is about the only thing that would worry me a little bit about drafting him at #1 overall. I understand he recovered quite well, but still, it seems like a legitimate concern. At the moment, I'm really digging Chris Long. True, he is not quite on the same talent level Dorsey is, but he's going to be a very productive player for a very long time, he's going to be a leader on defense and he comes with virtually no question marks attached. Not quite the sexy pick when you could get Dorsey, but he seems to have a better risk vs. reward ratio. Or am I off the track here?
The sad thing is that NE is going to get one of these guys with their SF pick, which could end up being top 3.
CK and I were talking about this last night. Long is a brilliant player. Brilliant and coming off a great season. They're 1 and 1a in my book. Dorsey has toughed it out through a nasty injury but it's not as bad as first thought. He gets serious kudos for that and at the Combine, we both suspect he's going to do some serious damage in the drills. That short area burst is absolutely phenomenal. Dorsey excels because he can play end, he can play DT and like Long, he's relentless. Utterly relentless. And the little things of his game are special. Quite apart from the burst, he understands leverage as well as anyone I've seen in a while; he sets guards up and then makes plays when they think they have him; he understands angles brilliantly; he uses his hands so well and his 3 step burst is frightening. So do you take a Kevin Williams type, an All Pro DT or an Aaron Kampman type end? But Al Groh says the only player better than Long that he's been around is Lawrence Taylor. Like I said….1 and 1a.
Dorsey then long in my rankings. Trade down #1 if not Dorsey is clear cut to me, but love long as well even if keep JT. Nice rotation of JT Roth and Long but like Rd Wright and Dorsey combo better.
Long is real good. If you go by the theory that some GM's adhere to (Pass-rushers & cover corners are coveted above all else), then Long may very well be the best pick.
Honestly this team needs a pass rush. I'd go with Long if he continues ripping it up and then try to get a big man with that 32nd pick (ie: if Okam slips) and then go CB/TE with the Chargers pick and the 3rd rounder. Long is pretty good at run stopping also so he will make that impact and let Roth go back to part time duty. Depending on who is signed in FA.
: These 2 posts sum up my view completely. I think some are mistaking myself and others wanting Long as saying that Dorsey isn't going to be a good player. Not the case. I just completely agree with the mindset that Eighty Twenty posted. There are certain positions where "special players" are much more important than DT IMO. Am I saying there are any big bodies as good as Dorsey... no but what I am saying is that you can find big bodies later in the draft that can get the job done while on the flip side there is a much bigger drop off from an elite pass rushing end to a mid road guy. Chris Long gives us much better value and impact for the pick.... JMHO. Boom may rip me for saying that but it's not like I haven't felt his wrath before!
The problem is that you're categorizing Dorsey as just "a big body." That's not the case. Dorsey is more than just someone who stuffs the run: he routinely attacks the QB. This is a defensive tackle--a friggin' defensive tackle--who has beaten triple-teams and gotten to the quarterback. Taking Dorsey over Long does not harm our ability to rush the passer. Dorsey isn't a pure pass rusher the way Long is, but that doesn't mean he'll be completely unable to apply pressure. Hell, if he gets triple-teamed in the NFL, that frees up the other members of the defensive line, and possibly a linebacker, to get at the QB.
Ya, like Desides said there is actually a justification of that mode of thinking in the Quentin Moses thread. Which basically suggests that rarely is it worth drafting anything other than an offensive skill player high in the draft because no one else scores touchdowns. Dorsey isnt a big body. He's 300 pounds, but he's not a space eater. If he pans out, he's Warren Sapp 2.0. It all ties into the Parcells "Planet Theory" thing. I disagree with the big bodies thing, too. Getting a big 2-gap DL is not an easy task. Generally speaking, it's a position with the kind of learning curve that players need to mature in. The elite space eating big men in the league generally speaking werent elite until they were in the league for 4+ years. The few that were are generally more expensive, 1st/2nd round guys like Vince Wilfork, Kris Jenkins, Shaun Rodgers(Who isnt 2-gap anymore, but still). Sure, you can occasionally find a Ted Washington or Keith Traylor for cheap floating around, but there's generally only out there per offseason. However, with the amount of teams needing a NT out there, that number is dropping and it's becoming rarer and rarer. Last season there wasnt any of those players out there. This season, it looks like the closest thing is Albert Haynesworth, who doesnt exactly fit the mold and is less than ideal.
Keep in mind Unified Theory, this is simply theoretical, a way to pass the time between games, I've said repeatedly that I'm not in love with McFadden, but I also don't like the idea of taking a DT who has been injured even though he hasn't missed any games do to his injuries, for me that should be looked at very closely indeed rather then say "Of course". My argument isn't that DT's taken high are busts, it is that DT that are taken #1 overall haven't consistently panned out.
Let's look at it closely then- [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqiLlOybz9s[/ame] Dorsey was injured on what was very clearly a cheap block meant to injure him. That's not an issue of his conditioning, or him being injury prone, or lacking some technique or skill that would have prevented him from being injured. Him having chronic injuries would be one thing, which he doesnt have. Him being injured on a legal play that he should have expected and protected himself against wasnt the case either. The injury clearly isnt something threatening his career, because he's playing at a high enough level to be virtually universally rated in the top 3 of every mock draft I've seen despite playing injured for a significant portion of the year. The injury is essentially a non-issue unless you've got information suggesting it's going to result in a chronic condition. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the injury is a positive here. He took a really bad shot to the knee that easily could have ended his season. Look at his knee, when the guard hits it, it's moving in a direction a knee is not built to move. That's virtually always a torn ligament in the knee that ends the season. Instead, he's just got a sprained knee. That suggests he's got some serious durability, IMO. Guess what? About a week later, vs. Alabama another linemen rolled his knee, and he briefly went out, but ended up with 7 tackles, 2 for a loss, and a sack. That's not to mention he is out there playing hard and performing at a very high level while injured and obviously in pain. He was wearing a huge knee brace at one point, and has been obviously limping at times through the season. No position consistently pans out. If you've got some statistics that DT does it at a lower rate than other positions, I'd love to see it.
Whether he was hurt on a "legal" play or not means completely...-0-.. all that matters when looking at him as the #1 pick is his ability to comeback from the injury, and whether his skills have diminished. And the fact that he is rated "universally" as a top 3 pick perhaps should say something about how picks are rated. That is going far. He hasn't really played at a high level, and when he was completely healthy in 2006, he was never considered as a top 3 pick, he has played through injury this year and now he is a top 3 pick? Based on what? And i've listed every #1 overall player taken in the draft since the common draft started, the majority turn out to be Dan Wilkinson's. by 10% to 90%, they have a 90% washout rate. The only notables are Bubba Smith and well....maybe Russel Maryland.
By the way... going by your contention that the injury is a great reason not to draft him. then you wouldnt draft Adrian Peterson....
...and while we have been screwing around with offense for the last few years our defense has gotten old and has no playmakers.
Which pretty clearly a question that has been answered by his play while injured. How are they rated, in your estimation? By actual professionals, with honest to goodness qualifications who are compensated for sharing their opinions on athletes. You have absolutely no standing to contradict their assertions even had you a factual and well reasoned argument, which you do not. You offer only a theoretical opinion on how drafts should be run that is fundamentally contrary to every school of thought on how any draft outside video game franchises and fantasy football leagues should be run. Mel Kiper Jr. might have ridiculous hair, but he has been paid millions of dollars to give his opinion on the draft. You have not been compensated in any way for your opinion, and I'll go so far as to say unless you count me making fun of you as compensation, you wont get any ever. If you are going to argue a position radically different from standard practice, you need to give some sort of proof, some sort of example or experiment. Him not playing at a higher level is overwhelmingly contrary to both public and expert opinion. Proof, examples, or empirical evidence. He was not considered a top 3 pick last season, but he also declared his intentions to return to school long before even mock drafts arrived at a consensus projection. He was, however, considered a top 10 pick even that early in the process If you are intending to portray the act of drafting a defensive tackle high, and prove once again despite overwhelming popular and expert opinion that it's a bad idea, you've got to have something back it up. What's the success rate of DT at #1, vs. QB at #1? Or WR? Or really, whatever you'd like? Let's not even get into the fact that it's not going to be an even reasonably scientific sample size, but give it a shot. For humors sake.
Not "high" as in top 5, #1 overall since 1967. Here we go again: By far Qb's go #1 more then any other position with 15 out of 40. Rb's are #2 with 7 DT's are #3 with 7 De's are #4 with 6 Wr's have 2 Ol's have 2 Lb's have 2 De's have produced 5 HOF players Ol's have produced 2, O Pace is a HOfer. Rb's have produced 3 Hofer's, As a side note Rickey Bell died of a rare illness. Qb's have produced three with the position really falling off after P. Manning was drafted. DT's? Walt Patulski, Kenneth Simms, Russel Maryland, Steve Emtman, Dan Wilkinson, and Tony Casilas..Casillas went to two pro bowls in 13 years, Maryland made one, other then that...de nada...
That is what I thought as well, even if a DT, that is not a stellar list, DE's are historically better picks, with 4 going to multiple Pro Bowls and becoming Hofer's. Brown it is safe to say is a washout, and M. Williams is still learning so to speak. Rb's are surprisingly a mixed bag, OJ and Sims are Hofer's George Rogers had "good" career that was cut short by drug use, and Bo we all know what happened to him, and Carter was a washout due to serious knee troubles. Lb is the worst position to draft #1, with Cousineau playing on those good 80's Browns teams and A. Bruce doing -0- pretty much. Qb's have suddenly turned into a mediocre bet, with Couch and Carr being noticeable underperformers and Vick's career in trouble, and Eli being a bit "erratic".
Again, statistically speaking, just doing the #1 overall is insufficient for a reasonable sample size. Go tell me what the top 5, or top 10 looks like. Six players isnt going to tell you anything. That's not to mention you still arent presenting anything at all about that whole your opinion being wildly contrary to basically reality.
That would be moot, we are looking at the #1 pick, not picks 1-8. Virtually any other position then DT or LB, is a better pick. I've said my piece.
Its pointless 31...no disrespect intened but your talking about Pro bowls only... that is not a good comparison if you are doing a positional analysis...there is 1 starting RB per Team 1 starting Qb per team...their are 2 or 3 starting Dts per team 3 or 4 starting Lbs per team etc etc...the data is scewed and a REALLY bad way to compare.
I will say that historically speaking, the Texans Drafting of Mario Williams over Reggie Bush makes a sort of "sense" now, DE have a longer and much better track record of working out then Rb's do. Undercutting my own argument of taking Mcfadden? Why not? For me this is more an excersize in "what if", Rb's aren't that great either, but I will say that DT's are virtually invisible with Bubba Smith being the only one who truly stood out, the rest were just not that good Zeke. Now if Dorsey is as good as advertised, maybe we can play him at DE, R White played there for a few years and when he lost a step he moved inside and really dominated AFTER learning to play at DE. Been fun folks.
Problem is the history of the NFL draft the #1 overall pick is too small a sample for any real subjective nature. To get enough of a pool you really need to consider the top 5 picks of every draft cause lets face it depending on team needs, it changes things. #1 doesn't always mean the consensus #1 talent went off the board first (ala Bush/Williams at that time).
The difference is negligble. You cant sit there and say that a player taken #1 is leaps and bounds better than a player taken later on, or that one was consensus better than the other like that. Going by that kind of conventional wisdom seems kind of silly when you are throwing out virtually everything else.
Nobody is wroth the #1 overall. Well..expect for mcFadden. And im not giving up on Ronnie yet. I say we trade.
Bubba Smith played Left Defensive End when he played for the Colts. When they played against the Jets in the Super Bowl, the Jets moved the quick but undersized Dave Herman from guard to tackle to pass protect against Smith. Joe Namath said beforehand that by facing Herman, Smith was going to have a machine gun in his chest all day. I seen it, I remember it. If you doubt it, just google Bubba Smith Dave Herman and you can read several articles recounting their matchup in SB III. The Colts front 4 then was from left to right, Bubba Smith, Billy Ray Smith Sr., Fred Miller and Ordell Braase. When they returned in SB V, the first three were still there, with only Braase replaced, by Roy Hilton. Bubba also played DE at MSU with the late great George Webster playing OLB behind him. It was considered as formidable as any defense in college football history. In fact many consider the Spartans of the mid 60s as the best college defense ever.
I will consider myself "schooled" thanks for clearing that up Clean ...while you are here whats your opinion of Dorsey ?
I like Chris Long just as well. If we go defense with our first pick, right now I would rate them as even. I was a big fan of Howie, and the thought of having his kid, is very appealing. While the the real draft gurus here don't currently agree, at this point in time I am in the draft D Mac camp, because IMO he is the BPA and with the yearly durability problems of Ronnie Brown, while he is very talented he has shown he can't be counted on, so far, to stay healthy. Ricky, even with this recent torn pec, has been generally more durable, but we can't really count on him to stay clean so he can play. I would think a creative OC could devise many ways to utilize a Ronnie Brown and a D Mac on the field together. We need more highly skilled weapons at the offensive skill positions as much as anything, IMO. As the draft approaches, I reserve the right to change my mind several times if need be.
