My Blueprint for the Defense

Ivan said:

Agree completely, especially with your last line, Belichick sounded like that exactly his intention, he has a boatbuilding of going defensive DE players who are going to have to fight it out to win the roster spots, and he was pretty clear what he expects from them to win those spots, get with the program or your gone.

Click to expand...

I'll accept this analysis the very FIRST time a 4th rounder or earlier draftee is cut. Until then, I expect Grissom and Flowers to make the 53, even if they contributes very little (see White in 2014),

mayoclinic said:

It's early, but I'm very encouraged by the potential versatility of Brown-Grissom-Wells in addition to the existing players. Wells is reportedly an ace STer, and a hybrid LB/S, and should fill the Jonathan Casillas role, and hopefully bump Chris White down the depth chart/off the roster. He has 4.43 speed at 223#, and Grissom seems like he could well be the #4 option at both DE and LB (not counting Easley as a DE): Jones-Ninovich-Sheard-Grissom at DE and Collins-Hightower-Mayo-Grissom at LB.

Right now I'm thinking of something like this:

DT (320#): Brown, Branch, Siliga
Hybrid DT/DE: Easley, Chris Jones, maybe Moore
EDGE (both DE and LB): Chandler Jones, Ninkovich, Sheard, Hightower, Collins, Grissom, Buchanan
Off LOS LB: Mayo, Wells

That's a pretty strong and versatile 15. Wells also figures into the back end as a LB/S hybrid.

That's ignoring Flowers and ****son, who could obviously have a role, but I'm less clear on how they fit as versatile hybrids. But competition will sort things out.

Click to expand...

You have 16 front seven players (your 15 plus Flowers) without even considering LB/LTers who are expected to play almost zero reps at LB. Belichick has found a place for 1-3 such players on almost all of his rosters.

I agree that competition will sort things out. Let's remove Chis Jones, Buchanan, Moore and Wells. That gives us a core of 12 players. And, yes, I presume that the 4th rounders will make the team.
=================
This would leave THREE positions open for special teamers and backups such as
Jones, Moore, Buchanan, Wells, ****son, White, Freeney, Skinner, Gordon and Fleming.
yes, competition will be tough in the front seven: 9 players for 3 positions.
===============
DT - Brown, Branch, Siliga
DT/DE - Easley, Flowers
EDGE - Jones, Ninkovitch, Sheard, Hightower, Collins, Grissom
ILB - Mayo
======================

mgteich said:

You have 16 front seven players (your 15 plus Flowers) without even considering LB/LTers who are expected to play almost zero reps at LB. Belichick has found a place for 1-3 such players on almost all of his rosters.

I agree that competition will sort things out. Let's remove Chis Jones, Buchanan, Moore and Wells. That gives us a core of 12 players. And, yes, I presume that the 4th rounders will make the team.
=================
This would leave THREE positions open for special teamers and backups such as
Jones, Moore, Buchanan, Wells, ****son, White, Freeney, Skinner, Gordon and Fleming.
yes, competition will be tough in the front seven: 9 players for 3 positions.
===============
DT - Brown, Branch, Siliga
DT/DE - Easley, Flowers
EDGE - Jones, Ninkovitch, Sheard, Hightower, Collins, Grissom
ILB - Mayo
======================

Click to expand...

A few comments:

1. You are confusing my discussion with a roster prediction thread. I leave that exercise to you and others - there are usually about 50 such threads, going on forever. I'm not interested in that. Competition will sort things out. I'm discussing who I see fitting into a defensive approach that values versatility and interchangeability. Certain guys fit well into that approach. Others don't. Whether they have adequate value in other ways is a different question. Darrelle Revis had no positional versatility at all, but no one ever questioned his value.

2. STs is obviously highly important to BB, and whoever is on the back half of the roster had better be adept at STs. Gronk, Jamie Collins, Vince Wilfork and Chandler Jones all played on STs. That said, there's no reason that the last 5+ guys on the roster have to be "ST only" guys. They can be ST studs and also have a role in the offense. I don't see guys like Chris White having any value at all other than on STs, so if someone like Matthew Wells can provide strong ST play AND positional versatility/depth, then it's an upgrade, IMO. That will all be sorted out come roster time.

3. I personally wasn't a huge fan of the Trey Flowers pick, and didn't quite see how he fits. Geneo Grissom is an obvious fit in terms of versatility and ability to play different roles. I can understand Jordan Richards, Matthew Wells and Darryl Roberts. I can understand Zach Moore and Michael Buchanan in terms of their versatility - whether they develop enough to warrant a roster spot is another matter entirely. But to me Flowers seems like a pure 4-3 base end, with limited athleticism and upside, and not particularly explosive. Mediocre 10-split and 3-Cone. Not a guy who can play in space, or who is adept at moving around the DL, or playing in different schemes. A guy with a great motor and a good edge setter, but I'm not sure how he fits. Obviously, that may just be indicative of my lack of insight, as has been the case before. But 4th round pick or not, I'm not pencilling him in as a lock on the defense for now.

Given the double dip at DE and the interest in Jordan Richards and Geneo Grissom, I personally would have preferred Owamagbe Odighizuwa/Danielle Hunter at 64 (or with a trade back) and then Richards at 97 and Grissom at 101. I think either Odighizuwa (74) or Hunter (88) would have fit much better in terms of versatility in a multi-front hybrid defense. But I'll suspend judgment on Flowers for now and see how he pans out.

I'd just like to point out that Arkansas shut Ole Miss and LSU out on back to back weeks. Both were Top 20 teams. Held Bama to 14. Thumped Texas 31-7 in their bowl game. Flowers was the best defensive player on a very good defense. Can't always judge players by their combine numbers. Our de's were terrible at setting the edge. Flowers is very good vs the run. Long arms. Decent pass-rusher. I'll take that as my LDE 7 days a week.

Grissom is actually the one I don't see a fit for. He doesn't look strong enough to start as a 4-3 de. Not athletic enough to cover and play in space. I think he'll be the situation pass-rusher. Flowers is the better player and will be an eventual starter once Nink leaves.

Hopefully the following will help people get more comfortable with Trey Flowers:

1. Most productive pass rusher in the SEC last year
2. He had the most QB pressure in the power 5 conferences. He beat Kikaha, Orchard, Preston Smith, Vic Beasley etc
3. He was in the top 5 best EDGE defenders versus the run in CFB
4. La'el Collins gave up FOUR QB pressures last season. Flowers got three of them.

Where Flowers' lack of athleticism lets him down is in finishing off with sacks. He forces the QB of his spot but doesn't always finish. I'm pretty sure that BB has said that sacks are less important than pressures and hurries so this shouldn't be an issue for BB.

At the end of the day, Flowers was drafted in the 4th round so he's slated as a backup. Judging by the numbers I've just given, at the very least, he's going to be a quality backup.

Lack of athleticism here means short shuttle and 3-cone, yes? Because his power (broad, high jumps) metrics were very good. On combine paper there's not much difference between Grissom and Flowers, but nobody's calling Grissom a poor athlete (obviously MCL factors into those combine results...) They're calling Grissom a high-upside project.

Add his power to the long arms and its not hard to see why Flowers was such a dominant edge defender, run or pass.

Both these guys have meh to poor 3 cones and short shuttles, but they have long arms and good power numbers. The exact opposite of Jake Bequette, who had great 3 cone and short shuttle times, and meh power numbers and short arms.

Jake Bequette, #90 2012 Great 3-cone, great SS, short arms, not great explosion. Agile, not powerful.


Michael Buchanan, #226 2013 Arms get longer, agility worse.


Zach Moore, #198 2014 Agility is even worse, but broad jump improves by about a foot.


Geneo Grissom, #97 2015 Trey Flowers, #101 2015
Agility is in the toilet compared to Bequette, but both these guys can jump and keep OTs off their bodies. Seems to be a developing pattern.

Ivan said:

Belichick sounded like that exactly his intention, he has a boatbuilding of going defensive DE players...

Click to expand...

Exactly...

Wait, what??

Off The Grid said:

Exactly...

Wait, what??

Click to expand...

Lmao

I have swipe to text and it causes all sorts of things to come up, and sometimes I don't edit before posting

Off The Grid said:

Exactly...

Wait, what??

Click to expand...

A boatload of young defensive players

2015 New England Patriots Defense (25 minimum)

DT (5) - Branch, Siliga, Brown, Chr. Jones, Easley
DE (5) - Ninkovich, Sheard, Cha. Jones, Grissom, Flowers
LB (5) - Mayo, Hightower, Collins, xxxxx, Freeny/White
S (5) - Chung, McCourty, Harmon, Richards, Ebner/Wilson
CB (5) - Arrington, Dennard, Ryan, Butler, Roberts

Practice Squad Allotment (Defense):

1 - Defensive End (Buchanan/Moore)
1 - Defensive Tackle (pillage from roster cuts)
1 - Linebacker (too many to consider from)
1 - Safety (Jean/King)
1 - Cornerback (Green/Swanson)

http://www.nepatriotsdraft.com/2015-nfl-undrafted-free-agents

http://www.patriots.com/team/roster

unoriginal said:

Jake Bequette, #90 2012

Code:

Height: 6045
Weight: 274
40 Yrd Dash: 4.82
20 Yrd Dash: 2.83
10 Yrd Dash: 1.71
Vertical Jump: 34
Broad Jump: 09'05"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.07
3-Cone Drill: 6.90
Arm span: 32

Great 3-cone, great SS, short arms, not great explosion. Agile, not powerful.


Michael Buchanan, #226 2013

Code:

Height: 6053
Weight: 255
40 Yrd Dash: 4.78
20 Yrd Dash: 2.76
10 Yrd Dash: 1.65
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 22
Vertical Jump: 33
Broad Jump: 09'05"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.44
3-Cone Drill: 6.91
Arm span: 34

Arms get longer, agility worse.


Zach Moore, #198 2014

Code:

Height: 6054
Weight: 269
40 Yrd Dash: 4.84
20 Yrd Dash: 2.80
10 Yrd Dash: 1.67
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 23
Vertical Jump: 33 1/2
Broad Jump: 10'03"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.46
3-Cone Drill: 7.41
Arm span: 33.75

Agility is even worse, but broad jump improves by about a foot.


Geneo Grissom, #97 2015

Code:

Height: 6033
Weight: 262
40 Yrd Dash: 4.81
20 Yrd Dash: 2.78
10 Yrd Dash: 1.65
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 20
Vertical Jump: 37
Broad Jump: 09'09"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.38
3-Cone Drill: 7.24
Arm span: 33.5

Trey Flowers, #101 2015

Code:

Height: 6021
Weight: 266
40 Yrd Dash: 4.93
20 Yrd Dash: 2.88
10 Yrd Dash: 1.73
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 28
Vertical Jump: 36 1/2
Broad Jump: 10'01"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.40
3-Cone Drill: 7.34
Arm span: 34.25

Agility is in the toilet compared to Bequette, but both these guys can jump and keep OTs off their bodies. Seems to be a developing pattern.

Click to expand...

Nice post. I so think the 3cone is important to a pass rusher though. Just think about what happens during a pass rush and what happens in a 3cone and the mechanics of both are almost the same. Having said that, some DEs aren't pure speed rushers and benefit more through length and strength - that's where Flowers wins.

ATippett56 said:

2015 New England Patriots Defense (25 minimum)

DT (5) - Branch, Siliga, Brown, Chr. Jones, Easley
DE (5) - Ninkovich, Sheard, Cha. Jones, Grissom, Flowers
LB (5) - Mayo, Hightower, Collins, xxxxx, Freeny/White
S (5) - Chung, McCourty, Harmon, Richards, Ebner/Wilson
CB (5) - Arrington, Dennard, Ryan, Butler, Roberts

Practice Squad Allotment (Defense):

1 - Defensive End (Buchanan/Moore)
1 - Defensive Tackle (pillage from roster cuts)
1 - Linebacker (too many to consider from)
1 - Safety (Jean/King)
1 - Cornerback (Green/Swanson)

http://www.nepatriotsdraft.com/2015-nfl-undrafted-free-agents

http://www.patriots.com/team/roster

Click to expand...

I think we'll keep 6 corners. Bradley Fletcher over our 5th safety. Prob Ebner cut. My surprise vet cut is Chung. Harmon starts. Played a lot in passing situations last year already. Richards backs him up.

The three backup LB's will be interesting to follow.I'll put Grissom as olb/de. He makes it. The other two, who knows? Chris White and Wells??

I would not be surprised if we don't scoop up some veteran cuts.. namely Brandon Carr.

mayoclinic said:

A few comments:

1. You are confusing my discussion with a roster prediction thread. I leave that exercise to you and others - there are usually about 50 such threads, going on forever. I'm not interested in that. Competition will sort things out. I'm discussing who I see fitting into a defensive approach that values versatility and interchangeability. Certain guys fit well into that approach. Others don't. Whether they have adequate value in other ways is a different question. Darrelle Revis had no positional versatility at all, but no one ever questioned his value.

2. STs is obviously highly important to BB, and whoever is on the back half of the roster had better be adept at STs. Gronk, Jamie Collins, Vince Wilfork and Chandler Jones all played on STs. That said, there's no reason that the last 5+ guys on the roster have to be "ST only" guys. They can be ST studs and also have a role in the offense. I don't see guys like Chris White having any value at all other than on STs, so if someone like Matthew Wells can provide strong ST play AND positional versatility/depth, then it's an upgrade, IMO. That will all be sorted out come roster time.

3. I personally wasn't a huge fan of the Trey Flowers pick, and didn't quite see how he fits. Geneo Grissom is an obvious fit in terms of versatility and ability to play different roles. I can understand Jordan Richards, Matthew Wells and Darryl Roberts. I can understand Zach Moore and Michael Buchanan in terms of their versatility - whether they develop enough to warrant a roster spot is another matter entirely. But to me Flowers seems like a pure 4-3 base end, with limited athleticism and upside, and not particularly explosive. Mediocre 10-split and 3-Cone. Not a guy who can play in space, or who is adept at moving around the DL, or playing in different schemes. A guy with a great motor and a good edge setter, but I'm not sure how he fits. Obviously, that may just be indicative of my lack of insight, as has been the case before. But 4th round pick or not, I'm not pencilling him in as a lock on the defense for now.

Given the double dip at DE and the interest in Jordan Richards and Geneo Grissom, I personally would have preferred Owamagbe Odighizuwa/Danielle Hunter at 64 (or with a trade back) and then Richards at 97 and Grissom at 101. I think either Odighizuwa (74) or Hunter (88) would have fit much better in terms of versatility in a multi-front hybrid defense. But I'll suspend judgment on Flowers for now and see how he pans out.

Click to expand...

I think you are being a bit hard on Trey Flowers. I watched some tape on him and he looks athletic enough to me. Is he a super athlete? Nope. Is he as versatile as some other guys? Nope.

I think he can carve out a nice role for himself on this team. I see him as a match up specific edge setter that you have in there vs the power run fronts and teams. Not to mention goal line situations. This is not to snub his ability to pass rush cause I think he has that too. Considering where you were in the draft I am personally happy with the pick.

Also with all the versatility and redundancy we have I think have a "pure breed" so to speak is not such a bad thing. In the end if he can win his match up with the OT he doesn't need to do anything else. That is plenty for me. The question is can he.

BobDigital said:

I think you are being a bit hard on Trey Flowers. I watched some tape on him and he looks athletic enough to me. Is he a super athlete? Nope. Is he as versatile as some other guys? Nope.

I think he can carve out a nice role for himself on this team. I see him as a match up specific edge setter that you have in there vs the power run fronts and teams. Not to mention goal line situations. This is not to snub his ability to pass rush cause I think he has that too. Considering where you were in the draft I am personally happy with the pick.

Also with all the versatility and redundancy we have I think have a "pure breed" so to speak is not such a bad thing. In the end if he can win his match up with the OT he doesn't need to do anything else. That is plenty for me. The question is can he.

Click to expand...

You and everyone else may well be right - I certainly don't make any claim to be omniscient. I don't dislike Flowers, I just don't see a natural fit for a defense of interchangeable parts, and there were other guys within range who I thought would fit that approach better, and who I would have targeted. I'm sticking with that, but that doesn't mean I'm not hoping for the best with Flowers, and I'm certainly not saying that he can't carve out a role. Competition will determine who stays and who goes, more than theoretical "fit".

mayoclinic said:

You and everyone else may well be right - I certainly don't make any claim to be omniscient. I don't dislike Flowers, I just don't see a natural fit for a defense of interchangeable parts, and there were other guys within range who I thought would fit that approach better, and who I would have targeted. I'm sticking with that, but that doesn't mean I'm not hoping for the best with Flowers, and I'm certainly not saying that he can't carve out a role. Competition will determine who stays and who goes, more than theoretical "fit".

Click to expand...

Well I am not saying you are wrong Mayo. He does go against the grain of what the Pats seem to be trying to do and it was surprising they picked him. Personally I would have preferred Diggy at 64 and counted myself lucky to get him there. Maybe they just felt getting that safety was more important and by the time their picks rolled around again he was gone and he considered this guy a good option.

Assuming they were going to pick the safety anyway at 64 and not trade up then I understand this pick more. I am with you that other guys would have fit better but maybe by the time their chanced rolled around again they figured this was their best option. I am not sure if you disagree with this or not seeing as how everyone you named you would have preferred was picked above of where Flowers went. Personally at that point in the draft if I wanted a DE this is the guy I would have picked. Not a perfect scheme fit but probably the best DE left.

BobDigital said:

Well I am not saying you are wrong Mayo. He does go against the grain of what the Pats seem to be trying to do and it was surprising they picked him. Personally I would have preferred Diggy at 64 and counted myself lucky to get him there. Maybe they just felt getting that safety was more important and by the time their picks rolled around again he was gone and he considered this guy a good option.

Assuming they were going to pick the safety anyway at 64 and not trade up then I understand this pick more. I am with you that other guys would have fit better but maybe by the time their chanced rolled around again they figured this was their best option. I am not sure if you disagree with this or not seeing as how everyone you named you would have preferred was picked above of where Flowers went. Personally at that point in the draft if I wanted a DE this is the guy I would have picked. Not a perfect scheme fit but probably the best DE left.

Click to expand...

Again, I'm not bashing the Flowers pick, and not saying that he can't carve out a role. You are probably right in that he was likely the top rated 4-3 base end left on the board at that point (Za'darius Smith is the only other guy who I would think rated comparably). But there were multiple guys I had rated higher on my board who offered much more versatility, so I find the pick a curious one. Maybe BB just loved his motor, or thought he was just a better base end and edge setter and wanted that specific skill set. But given that Odighizuwa and Hunter slipped into the 3rd round and Hardison to the end of the 4th, any of those options would have made more sense to me:

- Odighizuwa (or Hunter, though he may have been a bit more redundant with the Grissom pick) at 64 or with a slight trade back, then Richards and Grissom
- Richards at 64 and Grissom at 97, then Hardison at 101

Either of those would have made more sense to me, given the team's intent on stockpiling on the front 7. A lot more flexibility to mix and match combinations and move guys around. Either guy plus Grissom would have added a lot more moving pieces to a defense which already has a ton. Maybe that's the point - maybe BB wanted someone with a more circumscribed role (a "pure breed", as you so aptly put it). But I don't recall anyone championing Flowers ahead of Odighizuwa and Hardison pre-draft. BB obviously liked Flowers better, for whatever reason. I'll be curious to see how he fits in.

I thought he'd go in the 3rd. That's why I didn't mock him to us at 96 or below. I liked Diggy more. Guessing he didn't pass physical because of his hip.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england.../threads/my-3-round-horizontal-board.1118951/

mayoclinic said:

3. I personally wasn't a huge fan of the Trey Flowers pick, and didn't quite see how he fits. Geneo Grissom is an obvious fit in terms of versatility and ability to play different roles. I can understand Jordan Richards, Matthew Wells and Darryl Roberts. I can understand Zach Moore and Michael Buchanan in terms of their versatility - whether they develop enough to warrant a roster spot is another matter entirely. But to me Flowers seems like a pure 4-3 base end, with limited athleticism and upside, and not particularly explosive. Mediocre 10-split and 3-Cone. Not a guy who can play in space, or who is adept at moving around the DL, or playing in different schemes. A guy with a great motor and a good edge setter, but I'm not sure how he fits.

Click to expand...

I'm with you -- that position is one where explosiveness is at a premium. But I put the Trey and Tre picks in a similar category. They're both guys who had great college careers with top programs who I thought were seriously overrated because they had marginal athleticism. If they had gone in round 2 as widely projected, I would have loathed the picks. In the 4th, eh, I can live with that.