Expectations for Michael Buchanan

[Mack Herron]

That many be true at many positions, but if you look historically, pass-rushing DE/OLB is a job where "measurables guys" rule -- whether or not they put up impressive stats in college. I'll take another Chandler Jones any day.

I'm sure we'll see the same production from Buchanan as we did from Chandler Jones, about whom nobody was saying things like this:

if he does not improve his competitiveness and aggressiveness he will never become a consistently productive NFL player.

.
National Football Post Scouting Department | National Football Post

He's a great binkie at a position of need, but the odds are long for him seeing the field, nevermind a QB.

 

[primetime]

I have no expectations. He's a 7th round pick. I'll be pleasantly surprised if he makes the team, but I don't expect him to.

 

[supafly]

Personally I think that Buchanan has a good shot at making the team despite being picked in the last round, but that also has something to do with the need for more youth, depth, and talent on the line itself.

I don't think it's too reasonable to have much expectation for him other than he certainly has a shot at making the roster if he shows anything at all. It's not like we're currently stacked at the position right now.

 

[patchick]

I'm sure we'll see the same production from Buchanan as we did from Chandler Jones, about whom nobody was saying things like this:

.
National Football Post Scouting Department | National Football Post.

Of course, the player we drafted in round 7 is nowhere near as good a prospect as the player we drafted in round 1! I assumed that went without saying.

I was just offering Jones as one of the many pass-rushing counterexamples to the claim that a player with poor measurables who produces on the field in college is a more likely contributor than the reverse. In fact, "workout warriors" have generally fared better at all points in the draft, from Clay Matthews and Jason Pierre-Paul to Cameron Wake.

 

[patsfan-1982]

my Expectations for Michael Buchanan are 0 I hope the kid makes the team and dose great but am not looking for much out of him

 

[BB4PRez]

A lot of late round picks have issues, but many people tend to be overly impressed by measureables. Dennard was a guy who could play but had off field issues. Buchanan has numbers that did not translate to the field. There are exceptions, but a healthy guy who doesn't have the numbers but produces on the field is a more likely contributor. I say Beauharnais makes the roster and Buchanan goes to PS.

I hear what you are saying about production and we will not know until they put the pads on. But to me Beauharnais is the classic D1 college overachiever and has practice squad writtin all over him. I think he can be a contributor with some time to learn the pro game. Buchanon had decent numbers as a junior and has the athletism to compete at the pro level. He screwed up before his senior year and based on some of the attitude comments out there on him there is a very good chance he washes out. But if he shows up in preseason, I think it is harder to get a guy like that through to the practice squad than it would be with Beauharnais.

 

[Mack Herron]

Of course, the player we drafted in round 7 is nowhere near as good a prospect as the player we drafted in round 1! I assumed that went without saying.

I was just offering Jones as one of the many pass-rushing counterexamples to the claim that a player with poor measurables who produces on the field in college is a more likely contributor than the reverse. In fact, "workout warriors" have generally fared better at all points in the draft, from Clay Matthews and Jason Pierre-Paul to Cameron Wake.

Are you saying Chandler Jones had poor measurables? I was commenting on rookie expectations . My point was that it is unreasonable to expect much from Buchanan in his rookie year merely because of his length, etc. He was not a first round pick (like Jones or Matthews) for a reason. Cameron Wake was cut and went up to Canada for a few years where he led the CFL in sacks. JPP played one year of football before coming to the NFL. I'm sure there are 7th round guys who come in and light it up, but not many. Let's give the kid some time.

 

[VrabelJr]

Chandler Jones? Poor measurables? Are we talking about the same person?

 

[Get it shawtaay]

A couple of points:

1. patchick is absolutely correct, in that attaching a stigma to "workout warriors" is foolish when evaluating edge rushers. The moves it takes for a pass rusher to succeed in the NFL demand a lot of physical tools - length, explosion, strong and quick hands, etc. Getting a player with any of these tools, much less more than one, in the 7th is fortuitous. Lets see how he does.

2. To dismiss Beauharnais as a "D1 overachiever" is premature. Lets see the guy play. He is an instinctive player. Most of our backup linebacker options are athletes who lack positional instincts (Fletcher, Tarpinian, etc.) so he could very well distance himself through his decision-making and game speed.

Overall, no I do not have expectations for Michael Buchanan. But I do not expect any more or less from him than I do Jake Bequette, Jermaine Cunningham, Justin Francis, Marcus Forston, Jason Vega, etc. After Jones and Ninkovich there's a lot of spots to be filled.

 

[Get it shawtaay]

Are you saying Chandler Jones had poor measurables? I was commenting on rookie expectations . My point was that it is unreasonable to expect much from Buchanan in his rookie year merely because of his length, etc. He was not a first round pick (like Jones or Matthews) for a reason. Cameron Wake was cut and went up to Canada for a few years where he led the CFL in sacks. JPP played one year of football before coming to the NFL. I'm sure there are 7th round guys who come in and light it up, but not many. Let's give the kid some time.

Her point is that Chandler Jones had Tarzan-like measurables but was a lousy college player.

 

[Mack Herron]

Her point is that Chandler Jones had Tarzan-like measurables but was a lousy college player.

Okay, thanks (although "lousy" may be a tad overstated). I share your expectations. Every position has physical demands, especially the skill positions. I remember Parcells saying that "the bus station is full of guys who ran a 4.4." If a player's potential could be distilled to numbers on a piece of paper, the draft wouldn't be the crap shoot that it is. Heck, even a first round pick is roughly even money to shine. That's one reason its fun to speculate about who will surprise.

 

[patchick]

Okay, thanks (although "lousy" may be a tad overstated).

Agreed, Jones was not lousy. But not an elite impact player in college, despite his elite physical tools -- and his draft position rightly reflected the tools more than the production. That was my point, that when it comes to pass-rushing DEs and OLBs, elite physical tools have been the best predictor of success, regardless of college production.

Buchanan doesn't quite match Jones in raw materials (few do), but he's right at the next tier. He was one of my draft hopes/predictions because he struck me as something of an undervalued stock following a disappointing senior year. As a junior he put up a strong 64 tackles, 7.5 sacks, 13.5 TFL and 1 FF, so he's not a total stiff on the field. And his senior year not only came on the heels of his broken jaw fiasco, but was a trainwreck for the entire Illinois program. (They didn't beat a single major-conference opponent.) Plus on top of his measurables, Buchanan has shown an ability to play in space. He played standing up a fair bit in college, and looks surprisingly fluid in coverage for a 6'5" 255 guy.

Nobody with that much potential lasts to the 7th without plenty of reason. (Even Dennard's arrest wouldn't have landed him there if Dennard had been a bit taller or faster.) So I fully acknowledge that Buchanan is a long shot with all of the question marks you raised, but IMO he's a long shot of the "swing for the fences" variety: if they hit on this guy, they just might hit big.

 

[Se7eN]

Agreed, Jones was not lousy. But not an elite impact player in college, despite his elite physical tools -- and his draft position rightly reflected the tools more than the production. That was my point, that when it comes to pass-rushing DEs and OLBs, elite physical tools have been the best predictor of success, regardless of college production.

Buchanan doesn't quite match Jones in raw materials (few do), but he's right at the next tier. He was one of my draft hopes/predictions because he struck me as something of an undervalued stock following a disappointing senior year. As a junior he put up a strong 64 tackles, 7.5 sacks, 13.5 TFL and 1 FF, so he's not a total stiff on the field. And his senior year not only came on the heels of his broken jaw fiasco, but was a trainwreck for the entire Illinois program. (They didn't beat a single major-conference opponent.) Plus on top of his measurables, Buchanan has shown an ability to play in space. He played standing up a fair bit in college, and looks surprisingly fluid in coverage for a 6'5" 255 guy.

Nobody with that much potential lasts to the 7th without plenty of reason. (Even Dennard's arrest wouldn't have landed him there if Dennard had been a bit taller or faster.) So I fully acknowledge that Buchanan is a long shot with all of the question marks you raised, but IMO he's a long shot of the "swing for the fences" variety: if they hit on this guy, they just might hit big.

If I remember correctly he was previously projected to be a first round pick but due to the jaw fiasco (poor character exhibited by fighting) and the result of that - being straw fed which made him lose a lot of his mass he was a lot weaker which explains the drop off in production during his senior year. Basically it's a pick with a high ceiling despite it being in the 7th round.

Given a red shirt year for Buchanan to learn and bulk up again I believe he could become a contributor.