The future of Brandon Spikes and Dont'a Hightower - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

Sicilian · 02-21-2013, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyto3690

The point clearly went right over your head.

There is only so much you can physically expect from someone given their adult body. Hightower is not suddenly going to morph into a Randy Moss or even Mike Vrabel, let alone a Patrick Willis.

No, it didn't. You claimed that clearly Spikes and Hightower are what they are, LIABILITIES in coverage. I am saying let's see what Hightower can do with a few seasons of experience under his belt before we say what he'll never be able to do. You seem to think that a rookie is what he is after year one and we should plan on that forever. I vehemently disagree.

And like I said, no one is asking for him to become Patrick Willis. He just needs to be adequate, which I believe he CAN (not will, CAN) do, even at his size. I don't see why that's so hard to believe.

mikiemo83 · 02-21-2013, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jax

Brady will restructure, Wilfork likely will too. Mayo could be extended again and redistribute that cap hit. Mankins is a tough hit but none of this should prevent keeping Spikes.

the cap is not going to spike as many thought it would in the 2015 season so restructuring to backload deals is not a great option right now. Teams that have the past couple seasons are going to be in cap hell in two years....Jets level cap hell

JackBauer · 02-21-2013, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urgent

To improve the pass defense, they need to replace Spikes.

No. To improve the pass defense they need a legitimate safety next to McCourty and a CB1.

tonyto3690 · 02-21-2013, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sciz

I could see both sticking around for a while. With McCourty, the Pats have a legitimate cover-1 FS, which opens up the SS to do things like helping on TEs, or just covering them himself.

And for all the complaints about the LBs, the CB group was responsible for twice as many passing yards as the LB group this past season, and there being more CBs than LBs in subpackages isn't nearly enough to explain that difference.

Seriously?

Corners cover guys who go 30+ yards downfield.
LBs cover guys who go 10-15 yards downfield.

Not to mention what you've already stated. Patriots are more likely to be in subpackage than base. That means it's already a minimum 3:2 ratio, with occasional 4:1 ratio.

A case can be made that CB coverage was a bigger issue, but that is a terrible argument for it.

tonyto3690 · 02-21-2013, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sicilian

No, it didn't. You claimed that clearly Spikes and Hightower are what they are, LIABILITIES in coverage. I am saying let's see what Hightower can do with a few seasons of experience under his belt before we say what he'll never be able to do. You seem to think that a rookie is what he is after year one and we should plan on that forever. I vehemently disagree.

And like I said, no one is asking for him to become Patrick Willis. He just needs to be adequate, which I believe he CAN (not will, CAN) do, even at his size. I don't see why that's so hard to believe.

You still aren't getting it.

Hightower is essentially a tweener DE. He is never going to be even mediocre in coverage. He will always be a matchup issue we have to account for and protect. Maybe not as much as Spikes who is a massive liability in coverage, but Hightower will always get beaten by any RB with decent speed. This is not going to change.

Again, loved Hightower as a prospect for a 34 ILB. But for our team, our scheme, I really did not understand the pick at all unless they think he can play as a down rusher or 34 OLB. I mean, even if we didn't have Spikes, Hightower is a poor fit in the 43. He's too big and hulking and in the 43 the biggest difference is the LBs need to play in coverage well. Instead we have two guys who are poor in coverage.

JackBauer · 02-21-2013, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyto3690

You still aren't getting it.

Hightower is essentially a tweener DE. He is never going to be even mediocre in coverage. He will always be a matchup issue we have to account for and protect. Maybe not as much as Spikes who is a massive liability in coverage, but Hightower will always get beaten by any RB with decent speed. This is not going to change.

Again, loved Hightower as a prospect for a 34 ILB. But for our team, our scheme, I really did not understand the pick at all unless they think he can play as a down rusher or 34 OLB. I mean, even if we didn't have Spikes, Hightower is a poor fit in the 43. He's too big and hulking and in the 43 the biggest difference is the LBs need to play in coverage well. Instead we have two guys who are poor in coverage.

How do his measurables compare to Adalius Thomas'?

I think the case you're trying to make is a dubious one, at best.

DocHoliday · 02-21-2013, 10:37 AM

I just refuse to believe BB picked two hulking run stopping LBs without thinking of how they fit in the scheme. Either DH is replacing BS, or BB is going to unleash a crazy new defensive look.

SeymourTrophies · 02-21-2013, 10:39 AM

It's no secret BB loves his big front 7, and it's no secret BB is still buried in the defensive philosophies that he had in the early 2000s and well before then. The difference is the nature of the league, which is a faster, lighter-packed league than it once was. If you want to argue for a change in philosophy, that's a different argument, and an exhausting argument at that.

I don't think anyone knows what they expected out of Hightower in his rookie year. He was drafted to play a position that doesn't show up on the stat sheet, and if your knock on him is that he can't cover the league's slot WR's and TE's, there's a very short list of people who do that well, particularly when the QB has all day. He still did his job well enough for people to want him to move inside. He is what he is: a solid all around player with that football pedigree BB loves. If you wanted them to draft Mercilus or a specialist of any kind, then you're arguing for a change in philosophy.

I'm not sure I'd write off Spikes as far as his future in New England goes. He's been a solid player for us, and he has the game intelligence and pedigree BB loves. No doubt, he's not a great man to man coverage LB, but he plays his zone, and he does get his mits up and bat down balls with the occasional pick. The fact that his speed has always been his biggest problem should keep his price respectable. In a perfect world, Hightower becomes the ILB and you get a good coverage LB and a beast on the edge, but in a perfect world, you also don't bomb in the draft for four years.

Sicilian · 02-21-2013, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyto3690

You still aren't getting it.

Hightower is essentially a tweener DE. He is never going to be even mediocre in coverage. He will always be a matchup issue we have to account for and protect. Maybe not as much as Spikes who is a massive liability in coverage, but Hightower will always get beaten by any RB with decent speed. This is not going to change.

Again, loved Hightower as a prospect for a 34 ILB. But for our team, our scheme, I really did not understand the pick at all unless they think he can play as a down rusher or 34 OLB. I mean, even if we didn't have Spikes, Hightower is a poor fit in the 43. He's too big and hulking and in the 43 the biggest difference is the LBs need to play in coverage well. Instead we have two guys who are poor in coverage.

Once again, I'm getting it just fine. You want to say Hightower will never be even decent in coverage, I think that's a stupid thing to say after one year. You want to typecast a player's potential based on size alone. I think that's narrow-minded. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree and see what happens with Dont'a down the road.

Nunchucks · 02-21-2013, 01:48 PM

I am not one to put a lot of stock into 40 time, but Dont'a Hightower ran a 4.62 40, that is pretty fast.

He also played MLB in college, not OLB...so, yeah..tweener DE who actually played MLB, not OLB or DE.....the whole characterization is silly.