How Many Defensive Front Seven Players Do We Need On The 53?

[mgteich]

I understand that players play more than one position, and that labels are misleading because of the different packages. But that doesn't change the bottom line decision. I was struck by Steve Balestrieri's conclusion that we need SEVENTEEN.

I have listed 15 for years: 5 DE's, 5 DT's and 5 LB's. And yes, we sometimes keep a 6th LB who is a special teamer. Sometimes this position is taken form the DL, sometimes not.

Steve lists Will Smith as an OLB since he is primarily a pass-rusher. I'm indifferent to that label.

The top 10 players should get on the field and get lots of reps. I see those as
DE: Ninkovich, Jones, Smith, Buchanan
DT: Wilfork, Kelly, Easley
LB: Mayo, Hightower, Collins
We NEED to keep a backup NT; Siliga is the man. That's ELEVEN players.
We NEED a 4th LB, the first LB off the bench in case of injury. That's TWELVE players.
===================================================
How many more do we need? My answer is about 3, projected as Moore, Beauharnais and Armstead at the moment.

Is your NUMBER different? Discuss.
==========
The decision make a big difference. Steve carries only 9 DB's, 8 OL's and 0 FB's.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

I tend to agree with you and would say that 16 is the right number. 17 is too many front seven players, unless one or two of them are on the mend, and need to be scratched for a week or two, but not hurt enough to land on PUP or IRdtr (e.g., Wilfork or Smith). I suppose we could also protect a developmental talent like Moore, if he shows flashed in pre-season, but that's less about what we need than how we manage our talent pool for the longer term. I generally like the idea of having more depth along the DL, as that keeps players fresh, and fresh pass rushers are more effective pass rushers. However, 10 DL is generally plenty, if they are all available to play, but that depends on the flexibility of the individual players. I'd like to see 6 LBs; White is the LB STer you reference, and we need a backup who can help in coverage and be serviceable against the run if Mayo or Collins go down.

Your list seems reasonable, although Moore might be a stretch, as by all accounts he isn't ready for prime time. Still, he could fill Bequette's vital role as DE who doesn't see the field. He certainly has more upside.

 

[signbabybrady]

I've always considered 4 DE 4 DT and Six LB with another player or two more geared toward STs and/or long term development. In theory that allows for a back up at each position. Any more than that and your borrowing depth from another spot.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

As I said above, I think the question of the number and group of linemen will be a function of player flexibility and BB's creativity (as well as health, salary, etc.). Somebody else might be able to do this better than I, but to illustrate what I'm thinking, here are some typical fronts to consider, the players that fit the roles and their most obvious backups:

The traditional base defense is the easiest to envision folks roles:
Jones-Wilfork-Kelly-Ninkovich
Top backups would be:
Smith-Siliga-Chr. Jones-Buchanan
(It remains to be seen how well Armstead, Easley, and Moore fit in, but I would imagine that Armstead and Easley would rotate in alongside one of the bigger DTs, and Smith gets a fair amount of time at DE. Buchanan probably sees the field very little in this defense.

The sub-defense has lots of options obviously and will change, depending on the opponent and situation, but to keep it simple, I'm thinking in terms of a base-sub defense, where we face a 3WR set on 1st down or other situations where the run is a concern. There, we're looking at:

Jones-Wilfork-Easley-Ninkovich
Smith-Kelly-Armstead-Buchanan

With the addition of Armstead, Easley, and Smith, and the presumed health of Wilfork and Kelly, our sub defense just got a lot more flexible. The NASCAR package, where we would rotate Carter or Jones inside next to a DT to generate more interior penetration has more competition with the addition of Armstead and Easley at DT. We may still see Jones or Smith in there, but the added talent of our smaller DTs will give them a chance to rotate at DE, get some rest, and keep them fresher for late in games.

With injury concerns for Kelly, Wilfork, and Easley and much to prove for Armstead, it's hard to see how Chris Jones and Siliga don't both make the team from the current roster. If Moore is on the roster, as you suggest, that would be 11 DL.Of course, Kelly fits the mold of a veteran who is cut (Didn't quite work out initially, has some health questions, and provides cap and cash savings, if cut.)

 

[Big-T]

10 DL is a must, for me.

The best way to keep a consistent pass rush is to keep the line fresh. It will also help against the run having fresh tackles in the game.

It leads to more scenario specific things too - say up by 21 the opposition is going pass happy to try keep up: throw Easley & Kelly/Armstead in with Buchanan & Chandler Jones and cause some havoc!

Opposition is trying to run it down the middle? Go 3-4 with Kelly, Siliga & Wilfork!

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Tough to say this early on but my hope is that Wilfork actually is healthy enough to play well, that Easley is the real deal, that Buchanan and Beauharnais make big 2nd season jumps, to the point that they are legit and viable backups, and that Armstead can actually play at a NFL level. It would also be great if Smith is able to contribute at an Andre Carter'ish level.

 

[mgteich]

I have 8 DL's plus 2 of Chris Jones, Armstead and Moore. If Chris Jones is there because of the injury status of the others DT's then either Armstead or Moore won't be. I have no problem with Moore ending up on the Practice Squad.

With injury concerns for Kelly, Wilfork, and Easley and much to prove for Armstead, it's hard to see how Chris Jones and Siliga don't both make the team from the current roster. If Moore is on the roster, as you suggest, that would be 11 DL.Of course, Kelly fits the mold of a veteran who is cut (Didn't quite work out initially, has some health questions, and provides cap and cash savings, if cut.)

 

[mgteich]

I also think 10 DL's is the right answer. I would also note that at least a couple need to be outside rushers in the sub package.

10 DL is a must, for me.

The best way to keep a consistent pass rush is to keep the line fresh. It will also help against the run having fresh tackles in the game.

It leads to more scenario specific things too - say up by 21 the opposition is going pass happy to try keep up: throw Easley & Kelly/Armstead in with Buchanan & Chandler Jones and cause some havoc!

Opposition is trying to run it down the middle? Go 3-4 with Kelly, Siliga & Wilfork!

 

[mgteich]

I've always considered 4 DE 4 DT and Six LB with another player or two more geared toward STs and/or long term development. In theory that allows for a back up at each position. Any more than that and your borrowing depth from another spot.

Because of the various sub packages, I am more comfortable with 5DE-5DT-5LB. 2 of the DE's need to be pass-rushers (some would call them sub LB's). Since the average number of LB's on the field is about 2.2, I think that 5 is fine (including one special teamer).

 

[SalemPats]

Injuries happen and Easley can move along the line as well, so there is felxibility. We may have a shocking cut, but we'll see. It's a great battle at training camp

 

[mgteich]

Perhaps it is time to consider that our most common formation is the nickel with 4 DL's and 2 LB's. Then we would "start" with 8 DL's and 4 LB's and consider what else we need. IMHO, the last 3-4 would only be active if they are top special teamers.

 

[Ivan]

16

9-10 DL and 6-7 LB, how it ultimately breaks down has to do with positional flexibility. I generally break it down to 26 on defense including the punter, and 27 on offense including the LS and kicker.

 

[Ring 6]

My early guess is:

DE- Jones, Nink, Smith, Buchanan (Moore to ps)
DT- Wiflork, Kelly, Easley, Siliga, Jones (armstead cut)
LB- Mayo, Collins, Hightower, Hull and 2 LBs still TBD
That is 15. I could see Armstead too, but 6 DTs is an awful lot.

 

[Ivan]

My early guess is:

DE- Jones, Nink, Smith, Buchanan (Moore to ps)
DT- Wiflork, Kelly, Easley, Siliga, Jones (armstead cut)
LB- Mayo, Collins, Hightower, Hull and 2 LBs still TBD
That is 15. I could see Armstead too, but 6 DTs is an awful lot.

I pretty much agree but have Beauharnois making the team and I think that Easely is going to see snaps as part of the DE rotation as well as inside.

 

[Ring 6]

I pretty much agree but have Beauharnois making the team and I think that Easely is going to see snaps as part of the DE rotation as well as inside.

Yes, Beauharnais has a pretty good shot.
I disagree on Easley playing DE. His #1 strength is being an inside pass rusher.

I expect the 3rd down DL to be
Ninkovich-Smith-Easley-Jones. I would expect better pressure up the middle than we have seen since Seymours prime.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

Yes, Beauharnais has a pretty good shot.
I disagree on Easley playing DE. His #1 strength is being an inside pass rusher.

I expect the 3rd down DL to be
Ninkovich-Smith-Easley-Jones. I would expect better pressure up the middle than we have seen since Seymours prime.

Agreed on Easley. Rookies learn their first job first on the NEP. He played all over the line in college, but that doesn't translate to the same in his first NFL season, especially coming-off an injury that will likely limit his full-contact practice time. If he can set the edge effectively, I could see him getting moved about in future years, if the DT position becomes deep relative to DE, but that's too far-off to speculate. Right now, we've got Jones, Nink, and Smith all looking like better options at DE.

 

[goheels22002]

Nice problem to have. The depth in the secondary is also most impressive once Browner shows up in Week 5. Barring injuries, this defense is stacked. If the tough cuts come down to Armstead, Chris Jones and Beauharnais, that says a lot. Those guys are good young players, but right now none of them make the 53 on my list. Siliga is the last man in. I loved bringing in Kelly last season, but he's got to be sound or he may the odd man out if Armstead is what he was reputed to be.

With all the beef around them to keep the OL busy, Chandler Jones and Jamie Collins should see some exotic pass-rush packages a la the NY Giants 2007 to use their speed against struggling and tired blockers. I can't remember which game it was last season, (the Rams maybe?) but there was a game when the Pats just blitzed from all over the place and looked terrific. A team like Miami with a completely re-built line is an exceptional opportunity to let the dogs hunt.