Needs Analysis: Linebacker

[patchick]

and Kiwanuka is a 4-3 end, there is no evidence that he could adapt to a 3-4 OLB.

True -- I was trying to be inclusive, but let's drop Kiwanuka...and add the bottom half of 2006 which I accidentally skipped (Lawson & Carpenter).

So the new rough count gives us 10 round-1 picks since 2006, quite a few of whom were intensely coveted on this board, and I think you'd have to say none have lived up to the hype. Pretty sobering, really. Meanwhile the 3-4 ILB objects of our 1st-round affection have been a pretty impressive group (e.g. Willis, Harris, Mayo).

There are lots of different ways to interpret this. E.g. it's a bigger positional transition so harder to predict; fewer 3-4 ILBs have been drafted high so it's a more select group; 3-4 OLB requires more of an athletic freak so teams are forced to gamble on players with raw physical talent; or simply random chance. Interesting, though.

 

[cstjohn17]

True -- I was trying to be inclusive, but let's drop Kiwanuka...and add the bottom half of 2006 which I accidentally skipped (Lawson & Carpenter).

So the new rough count gives us 10 round-1 picks since 2006, quite a few of whom were intensely coveted on this board, and I think you'd have to say none have lived up to the hype. Pretty sobering, really. Meanwhile the 3-4 ILB objects of our 1st-round affection have been a pretty impressive group (e.g. Willis, Harris, Mayo).

There are lots of different ways to interpret this. E.g. it's a bigger positional transition so harder to predict; fewer 3-4 ILBs have been drafted high so it's a more select group; 3-4 OLB requires more of an athletic freak so teams are forced to gamble on players with raw physical talent; or simply random chance. Interesting, though.

I would keep Kiwanuka, he played a lot of LB last year before he got hurt. He could have been an ideal OLB in a similar role to Vrabel / Willie Mac.

Good analysis, it shows why there is such a premium on players who can get to the QB. I also wonder in the level of competition is a factor, as OLB on the defensive right you are going against the LT, these are usually dominant freaks of nature. In college you might face 2-3 cupcakes per year or play on a team that is stacked creating more 1:1 positions.

Based on your analysis I will stick with my plan, if a Lawrence Taylor, Ware, Merriman type player is available at pick 24, then 'hell ya' lets take him. If not don't reach it is not a pressing need and take an impact player from another position.

 

[DaBruinz]

and Kiwanuka is a 4-3 end, there is no evidence that he could adapt to a 3-4 OLB.

Other than him playing as a 4-3 OLB in his 1st year... He moved down to 4-3 End after Osi went down.

 

[14thDragon]

A couple of stray thoughts...

First, there's a conversation that I keep seeing here a lot, it usually goes something like this:

A: OLB isn't a round-1 need.
B: Are you saying a DeMarcus Ware type wouldn't be a huge upgrade to this defense? Because that's where you get that kind of player.

How about
C. The defense needs to improve the pass rush, so a good pass rushing OLB is a need in the draft, and day one is a good place to start. Woods, Redd, and to some extent Crable have not shown enough to be considered locks for the team.

Second stray thought...

Pierre Woods
Gary Guyton
Eric Alexander
Vince Redd

Is anybody else struck by what a large number of UDFA linebackers that is? It's especially weird given that guys like Woods and Guyton were incredible physical specimens who had reasonably productive careers at major college programs.

Well given the number of UDFA brought in at the LB position and the fact the team usually keeps somewhere around 9 LB, and very few draft picks invested at the position, it makes a decent amount of sense. I think if we did some research into other 3-4 teams, you would find a simlar number of UDFA LBs.

 

[patchick]

Well given the number of UDFA brought in at the LB position and the fact the team usually keeps somewhere around 9 LB, and very few draft picks invested at the position, it makes a decent amount of sense. I think if we did some research into other 3-4 teams, you would find a simlar number of UDFA LBs.

It's a fair point, but the draft picks aren't as few as you might think -- 7 LBs drafted since 2005. Only the ones taken this year are still on the roster.

 

[14thDragon]

It's a fair point, but the draft picks aren't as few as you might think -- 7 LBs drafted since 2005. Only the ones taken this year are still on the roster.

To be fair, 3 of those were from 2008.

Of the other 4, 2 spent their first year on IR.

So the guys that got to develop were the UDFA.

 

[Synovia]

To be fair, 3 of those were from 2008.

Of the other 4, 2 spent their first year on IR.

So the guys that got to develop were the UDFA.

The problem is, anything after about the 4th round isn't any more likely to stick than a UDFA. You're throwing darts at that point. What you expect out of 6th and 7th round picks is essentially roster filler for preseason. The majority of these guys don't make it through their first season before being cut.


Before Crable/Meyo, the last first day pick the pats spend on a LB was Andy Katzenmoyer, IIRC.

 

[patchick]

The problem is, anything after about the 4th round isn't any more likely to stick than a UDFA. You're throwing darts at that point. What you expect out of 6th and 7th round picks is essentially roster filler for preseason. The majority of these guys don't make it through their first season before being cut.


Before Crable/Meyo, the last first day pick the pats spend on a LB was Andy Katzenmoyer, IIRC.

Ooh, this fits together really coherently with the discussion we're having in another thread, so I'm going to import it. Over there, you said:

The Ravens and Steelers could afford to use lower picks because they had premium players (A.Thomas, Porter, etc) already, and could afford to give them time to develop. The Patriots can't.

Check out the symmetry -- the Patriots were actually doing exactly what you praise the Steelers & Ravens for! They had premium players at OLB (McGinest, Vrabel, Colvin, and now Thomas) so they could afford to use lower picks. Then last year as the position got thinner they spent a day-one pick (Crable), while still "developing" Woods and some new late/UDFA guys.

 

[RayClay]

Continuing on with the series...I move onto the position that was considered such a need going into the April draft, and between Mayo, Guyton, Redd, Ruud & Crable, not to mention the progress of Woods, it seems the team may have settled that issue, to say the least. As you'll see, I don't really see LB as an area of need, and think all its need can be filled with players that are on the roster or PS...


LINEBACKERS (11), 6 signed, 5 unsigned

OLB - Thomas (2011)
OLB - Vrabel (2009)
ILB - Mayo (2012)
ILB - Guyton (2009)
ILB - Bruschi (2009)
OLB - Crable (2011)


FA
OLB - Woods (RFA)
ILB - Alexander (RFA)
LB - Izzo

Practice Squad
OLB - Redd
ILB - Ruud

LOCKS (6):
Thomas, Vrabel and Crable are locks on the outside. Mayo and Guyton are locks inside, with Bruschi a lock providing he returns for another season.

SPOTS UP FOR GRAB (3):
1) Backup OLB/situational pass rusher and or long term replacement for Vrabel 2) Versatile ILB, who can fill in and or rotate at WILB & SILB 3) Depth at either position, but with the ability to contribute on ST

CURRENT COMPETITION FOR OPEN SPOTS (5):
- Woods has shown he can be the 3rd OLB on the roster, and has been a consistent contributor on ST. He would be worth retaining if the price is right
- Redd is a very intriguing prospect on the practice squad. It will be interesting to see how much he progressed, he will have the opportunity to compete for a roster spot.
- Izzo is a leader on ST, and until a player demonstrate they can replace him in that regard, he will likely have a spot. Ideally, another younger player can do his job on ST and provide more upside as a contributor on defense.
- Ruud is spending the year on IR and seems to be unlikely to beat out the competition for a roster spot.
- Alexander has been a great ST player, but has little upside on defense and can probably be replaced via the draft, doubtful he will be re-signed.


PLAN OF ACTION VIA DRAFT/FREE AGENCY:
- This position seems to be in good shape short term and long term. The team will likely grab another ILB to bring into the mix with Mayo & Guyton, presumably anywhere in the draft where they can find good value.
- Hopefully between Crable, Redd & Woods (RFA), they have a potential long term replacement for Vrabel. If they see a player with greater upside or potential, likely during Day 1 of the draft, they could take that player. Otherwise, and especially if Woods is brought back, OLB is not a need.

Bottom Line: 2-3 players needed, all which could come internally. They could add another player via the draft at ILB, but OLB will only be augmented if a) Woods is not resigned b) a high upside 3-4 OLB presents itself in the draft. If Izzo does not return, look for the ST position to be filled internally first, but the team could spend some Day 2 picks and UDFA taking flyers on either LB position.

Respectfully, you have to be kidding. They haven't generated any pass rush at all for a while and that is the linebackers job. Look a year or two down the road and they have one reliable starter.

Woods is hardly a proven starter, he's a hopeful starter. If every low round/FA we hoped turns into a monster did, Tully Banta Cain would be just starting to reach his prime.

Just because we have a bunch of free agent bodies doesn't mean one will make it. You're expecting all of them too? I guess you out all your money on one number at roulette.

I can't understand why this self delusion ar linebacker exists. We had zero rush this year. We lost one player (not an unexpected occurrence when all but one starter is on the shady side of 30) and needed to take two retirees out of mothballs so we could field a defense.

Our DL has 3 1st round picks and 3 experienced backups that can come in and do the job.

Hopefully the team isn't counting on wishful thinking to fill the LB corps of the present and future. Expecting no Injuries and the 1 or 2 fa/7th round picks to exceed expectations is what got us into this situation in the first place. Other 3-4 teams restock with more than one top draft pick or young free agent every five years and it shows.

Its nice when Pittsburgh or Baltimore overstocks, but its not something that can be counted on.

Despite our great coaching, failing to stock LB and Defensive back is going to cause us to come up short sometimes. Not like it hasn't happened, why do people insist on denying what they see?

 

[RayClay]

Ooh, this fits together really coherently with the discussion we're having in another thread, so I'm going to import it. Over there, you said:



Check out the symmetry -- the Patriots were actually doing exactly what you praise the Steelers & Ravens for! They had premium players at OLB (McGinest, Vrabel, Colvin, and now Thomas) so they could afford to use lower picks. Then last year as the position got thinner they spent a day-one pick (Crable), while still "developing" Woods and some new late/UDFA guys.

Exactly who did they develop while McGinest and Bruschi from the Parcells era were in their prime? Chatham? TBC?

Look at the Steelers drafts. It's a joke to compare ours to theirs. remembering DE Woodley is a LB in both our systems, that's a 14th and 15th in the first two rounds of 2007. Add a 3rd and a 5th last year with an existing high first rounder in Farrior etc. etc. I'm not going to compare the draft and player credential totals since 2001, because its obvious, why belabor the point?

In that whole time the Pats got a real bargain in Vrable (also counts as Pittsburgh depth draftee) and some use out of an oft injured Colvin. Now we have an oft injured A.D. who I certainly hope becomes a fixture but really hasn't done it yet consistently.

Meanwhile, guys on the IR with zero stats and undrafted free agents are locks. There's a river in Egypt.....

 

[14thDragon]

Despite our great coaching, failing to stock LB and Defensive back is going to cause us to come up short sometimes. Not like it hasn't happened, why do people insist on denying what they see?

The question where is the greater value in the upcoming draft, at defensive back or at linebacker. I'm leaning more defensive back right now, I would like to see another OLB drafted in the first 2 rounds this year, but would be leaning more second then first. I would settle for a third.

But I think the situation with the DBs needs to be addressed first.

 

[dryheat44]

Look at the Steelers drafts. It's a joke to compare ours to theirs. remembering DE Woodley is a LB in both our systems, that's a 14th and 15th in the first two rounds of 2007. Add a 3rd and a 5th last year with an existing high first rounder in Farrior etc. etc. I'm not going to compare the draft and player credential totals since 2001, because its obvious, why belabor the point?

..

I think you're letting a crush on the Steelers affect reality. Out of the 11 linebackers on the Steelers roster, FIVE were signed as undrafted free agents, including James Harrison. Two more (Farrior and Fox) were drafted by other teams and signed FA. That makes four linebackers on the roster drafted by the Steelers, one in each round 1-4 over the last few years. The first and third rounders have done nothing so far. If they're so infallible, why was Vrabel a reserve defensive end for them? They've traded Kendrell Bell, who was a 2nd round bust for them.

Sometimes the grass just looks greener.

 

[patchick]

Exactly who did they develop while McGinest and Bruschi from the Parcells era were in their prime? Chatham? TBC?

Look at the Steelers drafts. It's a joke to compare ours to theirs.

On the first point, the answer is nobody. I didn't to claim that the Patriots succeeded in developing anybody at LB. I was just responding to a poster who said that the Ravens & Steelers "did things the right way" by trying to develop late-round and UDFA guys behind premium players then drafting day 1 when the need became urgent. That poster seemed to be lamenting that the Pats didn't follow that same strategy. In fact, the Pats followed that exact same strategy. I'd argue they just waited a year too long to shift to phase 2 (not that I'm still obsessed with the Stewart Bradley episode or anything. No, not me.)

On the Steelers' drafts -- my post was responding to an argument for drafting outside pass-rushers high, I was talking ONLY about that position, not ILB. That's why my statements must have looked odd to you.

 

[dryheat44]

I'd argue they just waited a year too long to shift to phase 2 (not that I'm still obsessed with the Stewart Bradley episode or anything. No, not me.)

.

Then you definitely don't want to read this bit from the incomparable Football Outsiders:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Then you definitely don't want to read this bit from the incomparable Football Outsiders:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

If patchick doesn't wallop you to within an inch of your life, I will.

Damned iggles. :enranged:

 

[patchick]

Then you definitely don't want to read this bit from the incomparable Football Outsiders:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Is it too early in the day to start drinking?

 

[dryheat44]

Is it too early in the day to start drinking?

No....but I'm almost certainly the wrong person to ask. Unless I'm still horizontal, it's not too early.

 

[DaBruinz]

I KNOW many of us wanted Bradley. And I know that, if the Pats had him, things would be different. How different? Who knows. What I do know is that I hope the Pats make a full court press to get this kid when he's a UFA.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Is it too early in the day to start drinking?

As long as you and Uncle Heatster are snuggled down with your Rainbow Ripple, I've identified Clint Sintim as an OLB whom I like to move inside at SILB...any thoughts?

 

[RayClay]

The question where is the greater value in the upcoming draft, at defensive back or at linebacker. I'm leaning more defensive back right now, I would like to see another OLB drafted in the first 2 rounds this year, but would be leaning more second then first. I would settle for a third.

But I think the situation with the DBs needs to be addressed first.

They need both. They waited too long at linebacker so they need to either draft more, find a promising young FA, or hope they get lucky with a free agent/bottom rounder, or be an injury away from inadequacy at the position.

Of course they could retread those tires with their own (seau colvin) or someone else's AARP member and be in the same position, but a year worse next year.