Anyone Else Think Connor Barwin Is Overrated?

[maverick4]

If you look at that highlight reel, he relies heavily on his speed, and on occasion goes inside when the tackle over-compensates on the outside. His repertoire is limited. As I said before, it's admittedly effective and will get him a job as a situational pass rusher in the NFL. He's definitely not a 1st rounder though, no matter how much you obsess over semantics.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

If you look at that highlight reel, he relies heavily on his speed, and on occasion goes inside when the tackle over-compensates on the outside. His repertoire is limited. As I said before, it's admittedly effective and will get him a job as a situational pass rusher in the NFL. He's definitely not a 1st rounder though, no matter how much you obsess over semantics.

bahhh....you dont know what you're looking at.......case closed

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

If you look at that highlight reel, he relies heavily on his speed, and on occasion goes inside when the tackle over-compensates on the outside. His repertoire is limited. As I said before, it's admittedly effective and will get him a job as a situational pass rusher in the NFL. He's definitely not a 1st rounder though, no matter how much you obsess over semantics.

I'm sorry, you say he relies heavily on speed - that's a bad thing? And then you say he goes inside when the OT overcompensates outside - presumably that's because Barwin's outside speed was an issue - and Barwin serendipitously finds himself with an inside rush lane? Was that because he didn't rely on his outside speed on that play?

Semantics, that's an interesting word. Here's the words use NFL Draft Scout used to describe his pass rush: "Can get under the offensive tackle's pads and push him into the quarterback. ... Has effective stutter and spin moves." Let's see, you say he has just the speed rush outside, but pushing the OT into the QB is, semantically speaking in some quarters, called a "bull" rush. And then there are these other terms, "stutter" and "spin"...I think both of those can be used to set up an inside rush off the Tackle overcompensating for the "speed" rush. Now mind you it's just a clip, and by your own acknowledgement clips aren't very useful, but could it be possible that inside rush where the Tackle overcompensated came off the "stutter" move? I wonder if you watched that clip again, for fun as opposed to informational purposes, if there would be any evidence of Barwin geting his hands under the Tackle's pads and pushing him into the QB? Just asking mind you.

 

[maverick4]

It's very interesting that you keep busting a load over Barwin's athletic measurables, his intangibles, his one year of production, and want the Pats to spend their #1 on him, when Trevor Scott was the exact same prospect last year, went in the 6th round last year, and only played on passing downs this year in the NFL because he is a liability against the run.

Since you keep conveniently glossing over the rest of those scouting reports:
----------
"Still very raw and needs a lot of work in the technique department...Pass rush repertoire is pretty limited...Is not stout at the point of attack and can get pushed around...Doesn't do a great job against the run...Must get stronger...May lack a true position."
Connor Barwin | Cincinnati Scouting Report - 2009 NFL Draft Prospect

Because of his inexperience at the position, Barwin needs to improve his technique. He especially needs to do better staying low off the snap. He'll get too high allowing blockers to get under his pads and drive him back. Strength for a defensive end is only average...It's unknown if Barwin will be able to make the jump to outside linebacker. He doesn't appear to have great lateral agility and struggles changing direction. In college, he made up for any athletic deficiencies with hard work and relentless effort. Still, he'll need to get stronger.
Scouting report: ConnorBarwin - Mocking The Draft

Not a particularly smart or instinctual player. Doesn’t recognize developing plays and struggled to react to play action and screens. Needs to be stronger at the point of attack.
2009 NFL Draft Prospects: Connor Barwin, DE/TE, Cinncinati | The 3rd String Safety

...has gotten by on athleticism so far...needs to improve his strength and work on his technique...could be a tweener?...may offer little against the run...
Connor Barwin Scouting Report - The War Room Report

 

[DaBruinz]

Box is just going to play 'earmuffs' to your points and ignore them. Else, he'll just reiterate that he's an armchair expert who knows talent when he sees it, more than anybody, and anyone who disagrees with him will get some stupid emoticon smirk.

By the way, Barwin isn't even 'decent' against the run. He's below average to bad. Right now people are talking about an NFL situational pass rusher as if he won't last to the second round.

You need to stop confusing every intelligent poster with yourself. Box doesn't do stupid ignorant things like you do. He also doesn't claim to be an expert. That is you spewing garbage out your arse again. It would be better for you to just STFU than to sit here and lie about what people say.

I find it funny that you claim that Barwin isn't decent against the run when you've said you've never watched him. And I can pull a site up that doesn't say he's bad. In fact the site I can pull up has a better reputation than 99% of the sites out there.

You are the one making all the jackarse comments. All people are doing is rebutting them with actual fact. Something that you can't be bothered to do. In fact, you are the one who "earmuffs" the comments.

 

[bucky]

I find it funny that you claim that Barwin isn't decent against the run when you've said you've never watched him. And I can pull a site up that doesn't say he's bad. In fact the site I can pull up has a better reputation than 99% of the sites out there.

I'm not contesting the fact that you can do this. But if you could actually post a link to the site, or even better the profile itself, it would be great to know what you're talking about.

 

[DaBruinz]

I have watched a ton of clips of Barwin in the past week, and he has ONE pass rush move - he runs around the offensive tackle. He has no other major moves, though that one move was effective in college (it won't be as effective in the NFL). When tackles over-compensate on the outside he goes inside. As I said, he looks like a decent situational pass rusher and good intangibles, but has major question marks over whether he can play OLB.

So you've watched "CLIPS"? Yeah, that tells you the whole game. NOT. Why do you insist on proving yourself to be ignorant. Barwin has more than one pass rush move. He has several. And, if you actually bothered to watch the combine, you'd have seen that he was one of about 4 OLB prospects who actually ran the drills the way the coaches said. EXACTLY the way they said.

Is he raw? Yep. BUt he's shown the ability to learn QUICKLY and the EXCEL at what he's learned. Those are two items that you ignorantly sweep aside as if they mean NOTHING.

Antonio Gates made the switch to TE from basketball, meanwhile a smart, raw athletic freak in Ben Watson hasn't panned out as a 1st round pick. There are maybe 5 other more polished OLB's in this draft than Barwin who has never played OLB before. I can see a justification for using a 3rd on him, but since so many here including you Box think he won't even be there at #23 or want to use #23 on him, that is over-rating him right there.

Ben Watson wasn't RAW. That is you lying through your teeth again.

Please name these 5 "more polished OLBs" because I can guarantee you that they aren't polished in the 3-4 2 gap system. No matter what friggin lying BS you decide to post.

 

[DaBruinz]

Yet another example of how Barwin is definitely over-rated at this point.

Trevor Scott had just as crazy athletic measurables, a similar TE/DE background, even more production from the defensive side, and somehow Barwin will go 5 rounds higher according to the armchair experts here.

One thing I will say is world class about Connor Barwin are his PR and marketing skills. He definitely knows how to interview and brand/position himself as best as he can.

I am calling you out on your BS. How can you compare Trevor Scott, who played at the University of Buffalo to Connor Barwin, who played at the University of Cinncinnati?

First off, Trevor Scott had 2 seasons at DE, not 1. Scott also didn't play on special teams for Buffalo while Barwin did for Cinncinnati. Barwin was moved to DE, not because he was a lousy TE, but because Cinncinnati needed the help there. Unlike Scott, who was a failure as a TE. Also, Scott never played basketball, like Barwin did.

Comparing the two the way you are doing and acting like they are exactly the same type of player is pretty ignorant. In fact, it stinks of someone craving attention.

The other concept that you haven't grasped yet is that you can't compare where a player was drafted from one year to the next because the level of talent is different from year to year.

 

[DaBruinz]

I never said it was a waste of a pick to take Trevor Scott. Scott was good value in the SIXTH ROUND, a solid backup and situational pass rusher, who is weak against the run and can't hold his position at the point of attack. That is pretty much what is going to happen to Connor Barwin. Barwin has the skills to play, he'll be similar to Scott in how he's used, and that is NOT worth a 1st round pick as so many here are salivating over.

Again, you act like you can predict the future. Can you? Should we just call you Ms. Cleo? Because that is how arrogant you are acting. Especially with all the misinformation you are spewing.

If the Pats were to draft Barwin, Barwin wouldn't be used similar to Scott because Scott wasn't an OLB in the 3-4 2 Gap. Scott is a DE who was used in situational pass rushing instances. Barwin would be used on Special Teams and would get reps to help him develop his skills as a 3-4 OLB. And with Bruschi and Thomas on this team, he's got 2 of the best teachers around. Not to mention BB.

 

[mayoclinic]

goodbye Mr. Happy. I think that here is a real chance for BB to draft Matthews at #23.

But, I think he will put him at ILB instead of OLB. He has the size, 6'3 246 vs Mayo 6'1 242. He has the speed and the kid has played in the middle in college. He would be willing and able to take on blockers. He and Mayo would be the ILB's of the future, with Guyton as a backup. Tedy is probably in his final year.

I would be fine taking Matthews at #34 and converting him to SILB, if BB thought he would work there. But I think that he is a bigger question mark at being able to be an effective SILB than Barwin is at becoming an elite 3-4 OLB, and I would prefer Barwin at 23. Taking on blockers doesn't seem to be Matthews' strength, and he has pretty scant experience playing inside, but I could be wrong.

 

[DaBruinz]

Then you've missed the threads and posts talking about how he might not even be there at #23, and how people would be happy taking him at #23. That seems ridiculous to me. Let some other team spend 4 years developing this raw player.

Of course it seems ridiculous to an attention starved person like yourself. You who thinks that you know exactly how a player is going to turn out because of a player you erroneously claim is similar and who currently plays on a different team in a different system.

BTW, I can remember people saying that the Bills were stupid for taking Donte Whitner at #9 a few years ago and then taking John McCargo at the end of the first. Whitner's been a great player for them. McCargo not so much.. But Whitner was rated as a 1-2 round pick at the time. Whitner turned out to be a good player.

Then you have Ernest Shazor. He was touted as a sure 1st rounder. And he went undrafted.

Tom Brady was a 6th round pick who people said wouldn't make it. Yet, he's all but guaranteed himself a spot in the Hall of Fame. Ryan Leaf had all the attributes of a Hall of Fame QB except he had the unwillingness to practice. He turned into a bust.

Every year there are players who step up and open eyes. And every year there are players who are duds. Who they are won't be determined until after the draft. However, by all accounts, Barwin won't be a dud. He'll be one of the studs, regardless of where he's taken. Because he works hard on and off the field. Because he's a FOOTBALL PLAYER who is athletically gifted, not a gifted athelete who is playing football. One has to wonder if you are capapble of understanding the difference.

 

[DaBruinz]

Yeah I know. Calling a player "raw" who only played DE one year and never played OLB in his life, must be insane.

Get a clue.

These sorts of comments coming from you???

You are the last person who should be telling others to get a clue.

Tell me something, when Barwin was lining up on Special Teams, was he in a 3 point stance? Or was he standing up and having to read and react to what he saw in his lane?

 

[DaBruinz]

It's very interesting that you keep busting a load over Barwin's athletic measurables, his intangibles, his one year of production, and want the Pats to spend their #1 on him, when Trevor Scott was the exact same prospect last year, went in the 6th round last year, and only played on passing downs this year in the NFL because he is a liability against the run.

Since you keep conveniently glossing over the rest of those scouting reports:
----------
"Still very raw and needs a lot of work in the technique department...Pass rush repertoire is pretty limited...Is not stout at the point of attack and can get pushed around...Doesn't do a great job against the run...Must get stronger...May lack a true position."
Connor Barwin | Cincinnati Scouting Report - 2009 NFL Draft Prospect

You forgot this part..
"Basically got by on pure talent in 2008 but was still able to made a lot of impact plays and it's scary to think how good he could eventually be..."

Because of his inexperience at the position, Barwin needs to improve his technique. He especially needs to do better staying low off the snap. He'll get too high allowing blockers to get under his pads and drive him back. Strength for a defensive end is only average...It's unknown if Barwin will be able to make the jump to outside linebacker. He doesn't appear to have great lateral agility and struggles changing direction. In college, he made up for any athletic deficiencies with hard work and relentless effort. Still, he'll need to get stronger.
Scouting report: ConnorBarwin - Mocking The Draft

Its amazing you put up some wannabe site that has no credibility and act as if it means something. Not to mention that he proved that he actually has very good laterl agility and change of direction ability. Not like that of a CB, but then, Barwin is 4 inches taller and 40 lbs heavier than the typical CB.

Not a particularly smart or instinctual player. Doesn’t recognize developing plays and struggled to react to play action and screens. Needs to be stronger at the point of attack.
2009 NFL Draft Prospects: Connor Barwin, DE/TE, Cinncinati | The 3rd String Safety

Another no name site that has no credibility.

...has gotten by on athleticism so far...needs to improve his strength and work on his technique...could be a tweener?...may offer little against the run...
Connor Barwin Scouting Report - The War Room Report

They were evaluating him as a DE. Not an OLB. Not to mention that its pure speculation on their part how he might do against the run. Using the qualifier "MAY" should have been a dead giveaway. I guess it wasn't for you. BTW, Which of the prospects coming out don't need to work on their strength?

You keep going on about Scott be the same, but he wasn't. Not even in the same level of competition. Yet you act like they are exactly the same player. They aren't. And its your own ignorance that is preventing you from understanding that. Coming out of college, Scott was pegged as a DE. Barwin is being pegged as an OLB. DIFFERENT POSITIONS totally.

But, you clearly don't want to listen to reason. Its just beyond you. Just like it was with McDaniels. And you claiming he said stuff that he didn't.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm not contesting the fact that you can do this. But if you could actually post a link to the site, or even better the profile itself, it would be great to know what you're talking about.

NFLDraftScout.com. Its one of the respectable sites out there. Not one of the garbage sites that Maverick pulls up.

Not that I should have to post a damn thing since BOX already did.

 

[BPF]

Ladies, Gentlemen let's all settle down.

Barwin is a solid prospect but at this point in time I don't feel like he is a 1st Rounder. Looked like a 4th Rd pick initially but with his solid workouts he has moved up to the high 2nd category. It's ok to have differing opinions though. Box and DaBruinz bring solid points to the table when breaking down Barwin's skill set and how it would translate to OLB in the pros. If you like another prospect better, bring some knowledge to the table and let it rest at that.

 

[patchick]

It's very interesting that you keep busting a load over Barwin's athletic measurables, his intangibles, his one year of production, and want the Pats to spend their #1 on him, when Trevor Scott was the exact same prospect last year, went in the 6th round last year, and only played on passing downs this year in the NFL because he is a liability against the run.

Hold the phone there. If you want to argue for experience over measurables, you'd do better to sweep Trevor Scott under the rug.

You're talking about the Trevor Scott who was one of the biggest steals of last year's draft, right? The Trevor Scott who, despite being incredibly raw, used his terrific athleticism to tie for the lead in sacks among all rookies, eclipsing the performance of top picks like Chris Long, Vernon Gholston, Derrick Harvey and Phillip Merling? And your complaint is that he was only able to be a part-time starter, as a rookie out of the University of Buffalo? If that's the very worst brush you can tar Barwin with, maybe he's not so overrated after all.

 

[BPF]

Hold the phone there. If you want to argue for experience over measurables, you'd do better to sweep Trevor Scott under the rug.

You're talking about the Trevor Scott who was one of the biggest steals of last year's draft, right? The Trevor Scott who, despite being incredibly raw, used his terrific athleticism to tie for the lead in sacks among all rookies, eclipsing the performance of top picks like Chris Long, Vernon Gholston, Derrick Harvey and Phillip Merling? And your complaint is that he was only able to be a part-time starter, as a rookie out of the University of Buffalo? If that's the very worst brush you can tar Barwin with, maybe he's not so overrated after all.

I think in his own special way Mav is trying to tell us that Barwin wouldn't be a good value in the 1st Rd, he maybe a good player but he doesn't want to take him in Rd 1. At least I think that's what he's trying to communicate.

 

[patchick]

I think in his own special way Mav is trying to tell us that Barwin wouldn't be a good value in the 1st Rd, he maybe a good player but he doesn't want to take him in Rd 1. At least I think that's what he's trying to communicate.

And that is a totally reasonable position. I just thought it was funny that the example he used to argue against Barwin is one I'd use to argue for him! (BTW, unlike Barwin, Scott was moved to defense because he'd failed at TE. Not enough agility in space.)

 

[mayoclinic]

I think in his own special way Mav is trying to tell us that Barwin wouldn't be a good value in the 1st Rd, he maybe a good player but he doesn't want to take him in Rd 1. At least I think that's what he's trying to communicate.

You have a future ahead of you in the diplomatic corps, possibly as a language specialist or cultural attache.

I think that most people would agree that Barwin is a solid 2nd round prospect at the very least. The question is, how much does his unusual athleticism and versatility push him up, and how high is worth "reaching" for him given those attributes? We're all never going to agree.

For me, as I have repeatedly said, Barwin is my favorite potential 3-4 OLB conversion project since Ware and David Pollack in 2005. I prefer him by far to Bobby Carpenter and Manny Lawson (2006), Jarvis Moss and Lamarr Woodley (2007), or Vernon Gholston, Derrick Harvey, and Quintin Groves (2008). And 3-4 OLB is a definite position of need. So I'm willing to place a priority on the position and "reach" given the player's potential. But obviously, everyone has their own calculus on this, as well as how much they like other prospects (Matthews, Cushing, English, Brown, Maybin, Johnson, Ayers, Sintim, etc.).

We won't know whether he was a good "value" at any particular point in the draft for a couple of years. Chad Jackson was a concensus 1st round value on draft boards in 2006, and was a considered a "steal" when we traded up to get him at #36. We were widely listed among the draft winners that year because of our bold coup. The value didn't turn out to be there.

If Barwin becomes a pro-bowl caliber 3-4 OLB he will be exceptional value at 23. If he ends up being a bust, he will be poor value at 34, 47 or 58.

 

[patchick]

If Barwin becomes a pro-bowl caliber 3-4 OLB he will be exceptional value at 23. If he ends up being a bust, he will be poor value at 34, 47 or 58.

Good perspective, that.