The NFL Draft, Day 1, Round 1, thread

[manxman2601]

Because you said "No" when I asked you a question to which you're now saying "Yes".

What are you on about? I've said he's a sub package player which makes him a majority of downs player and then I said he can increase the number of snaps he gets because he can back up the DE spots. I'm not sure why you are trying to twist that, because I've been consistent on that stance for weeks.

If you are saying that unless he plays a 100% of snaps then he's a part time player then I'd agree but that's a silly stance. All our DL should be part time players if that's the case because we need to rest them from time to time. I anticipate Easley getting as many snaps as Ninkovich certainly and probably Chandler Jones too if they do it right.

 

[ATippett56]

Lots of IFs by Prisco. Would've been picked higher IF he didn't blow out his knees, might be a star IF he's healthy. And guess what, I might have been a billionaire IF I created Microsoft, but guess what, I didn't. Too many IFs to be wasted on a 1st round pick.

Where do you read the name "Prisco"?

 

[Deus Irae]

What are you on about? I've said he's a sub package player which makes him a majority of downs player and then I said he can increase the number of snaps he gets because he can back up the DE spots. I'm not sure why you are trying to twist that, because I've been consistent on that stance for weeks.

If you are saying that unless he plays a 100% of snaps then he's a part time player then I'd agree but that's a silly stance. All our DL should be part time players if that's the case because we need to rest them from time to time. I anticipate Easley getting as many snaps as Ninkovich certainly and probably Chandler Jones too if they do it right.

I'm not sure why you

1.) Think this is debating when all I did was ask a question and follow up for clarification

2.) Can't just say "Got it. Then yes." about something that's just a clarification

When I initially asked you if you saw Easley as a part time player, you said no. Your follow up posts clearly show that you see Easley as a part time player. What's most interesting to me is that you think he'll get equal reps with Ninkovich and Jones, not that you think a rookie will be a part time player.

 

[patfanken]

My 2 cents

1. Based on a lot of info I've read lately, it wasn't likely that Easly was going to get past the Seahawks at 32, so there is evidence that the Pats really wanted him at that spot

2. Clearly the Pats have had more than enough medical information to determine that the ACL injury risk was a reasonable one. Certainly a lot more than we have

3. It would also seem that the Pats see him as having some special skills since he clearly goes against the mold of their past model of what a defensive lineman should look like. Nix, Hageman, Jernigan, Tuitt, were all there for them to take, and/or would have been there if they traded down.

4. Mallet might still be a trade possibility, but I don't see it netting us the 33rd or 65th pick. I think for the Texans to sell a Mallet deal to the Pats, I suspect it would have to be done this way. Give us a low pick this year (say a 5th) and then a conditional pick that would run from a 4th to a 1st next year based on how well Mallett plays. I would think the Texans and their fans would be thrilled to give the Pats a first for Mallett if he wound up being a top 15 rated QB or led them to at least one playoff win, or less picks if he was mere a decent starter. (2nd or 3rd)

I can't see them giving us such an important pick (33) for a guy who hasn't played a significant snap in a regular season game. But if he becomes an impactful starter for BOB, a high pick next year would be a fair value.

 

[Coach42]

Don't fall into his trap of arguing semantics. Very valid point about Easleys positional flexibility. Hopefully, Armstead can do the same so we aren't running our D Line into the ground again.

What are you on about? I've said he's a sub package player which makes him a majority of downs player and then I said he can increase the number of snaps he gets because he can back up the DE spots. I'm not sure why you are trying to twist that, because I've been consistent on that stance for weeks.

If you are saying that unless he plays a 100% of snaps then he's a part time player then I'd agree but that's a silly stance. All our DL should be part time players if that's the case because we need to rest them from time to time. I anticipate Easley getting as many snaps as Ninkovich certainly and probably Chandler Jones too if they do it right.[/QUOTE

 

[Coach42]

The days of ACL injuries ending career has passed. Keenan Allen just last year showed that.

 

[Deus Irae]

Don't fall into his trap of arguing semantics. Very valid point about Easleys positional flexibility. Hopefully, Armstead can do the same so we aren't running our D Line into the ground again.

It's not a question of semantics. It's a question of usage, and both my initial question and my followup were legitimate. Try reading posts before commenting, because it may help you avoid looking foolish. As I've noted more than once, Manxman and I are pretty similar in our take about Easley.

 

[Deus Irae]

The days of ACL injuries ending career has passed. Keenan Allen just last year showed that.

"They're all different,'' Andrews said. "There's still a big spectrum in how they heal and how they come back . . . It's hard to predict recovery from an ACL surgery, and to say that we're getting them back quicker than we used to would be false information from my standpoint.''

Many don't come back at all. A 2010 study published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine found that only 63 percent of NFL athletes who had an ACL reconstruction returned to play another game. Roughly two out of three. And two years after ACL surgery, Andrews said, about 55 percent of NFL players are no longer playing in the league. For the majority, an ACL still is pretty synonymous with the end of a career.

"That's the real fact,'' Andrews said. "It's not a good injury to have regardless of how good a job we do.''

http://www.newsday.com/sports/footb...-spelling-doom-for-football-careers-1.5335284

A study presented Friday at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine’s Specialty Day reported new data that showed most high-level college football players return to the field after an ACL reconstruction.


"Our data shows that about 82% of Division 1 NCAA football players return after ACL surgery, with that percentage reaching up to 94% when we focus on players who were starters before being injured," commented lead author Dr. Jimmy Hoshang Daruwalla from the Emory University Department of Orthopaedics in Atlanta. "Athletes who rarely saw playing time returned about 73% of the time, while those who saw at least some playing time returned at a rate of about 88%."

http://www.nflevolution.com/article...considered-career-ending?ref=0ap2000000334619

 

[ripatsfan91]

Dominique Easley arm length - 32 7/8"

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/dominique-easley?id=2543487

Chandler Jones arm length - 35 1/2"

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/chandler-jones?id=2533538

Chandler Jones needs longer arms going up against tackles... Easley will be fine

Easley has longer arms than Geno Atkins (32") and Aaron Donald (32 5/8")

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/geno-atkins?id=496762

 

[ripatsfan91]

Another interesting piece of information Aaron Donald had a draft grade of 5.35 and Easley had a 5.32 (according to NFL.com)

I am sure this board would be up in arms if Donald was picked...

When healthy, I would take Easley over Donald.

 

[Coach42]

He clearly explained that the best, most effective defensive lines frequently sub. He would tell you (I know this from frequent conversations on the draft pages) ideally NO defensive lineman should be playing all 3 downs throughout the game. Easley's positional value is that he can relieve anyone on the defensive line allowing for more frequent rest and hopefully effectiveness later in games. Calling him a "part time player" implies that he's not good or at least not good enough to be considered a "starter". Which is not what he was, clearly trying to convey.

QUOTE="Deus Irae, post: 3823431, member: 5686"]It's not a question of semantics. It's a question of usage, and both my initial question and my followup were legitimate. Try reading posts before commenting, because it may help you avoid looking foolish. As I've noted more than once, Manxman and I are pretty similar in our take about Easley.[/QUOTE]

 

[Coach42]

94% that is a truly outstanding number. Good articles.

 

[BennyBledsoe]

I hope we pick up some more offensive linemen tomorrow. David Yankey would be great if he's still around by the time their next pick comes up.

 

[BritPat]

Well, I'm still gutted we didn't take Lee. Easley has a lot of talent and could turn into a great pick, but I'd rather have taken Lee and then looked at Sutton in the second round.

Hopefully we somehow end up with another second round pick and snag him.

 

[patchick]

Well, I'm still gutted we didn't take Lee. Easley has a lot of talent and could turn into a great pick, but I'd rather have taken Lee and then looked at Sutton in the second round.

Hopefully we somehow end up with another second round pick and snag him.

I'd love a #1 WR too, but the WR class is still incredibly rich. Not only is Lee still available but so are Allen Robinson (a favorite of mine), Cody Latimer (also 1st-round talent, IMO), Jordan Matthews (close to it), and more of almost every description. E.g., want a big downfield threat who will be hard to match up against? I think Martavis Bryant could end up outplaying Kelvin Benjamin. A flat-out burner teams will constantly have to account for? Try Donte Moncrief or Paul Richardson. Etc.

In contrast, the dropoff from Easley to Sutton is huge. Sutton would have been another piece in the DL depth; Easley changes the team's defensive options.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Lee still available. So much for the bogus Pats trade UP in the 1st round to take a WR.
Now if we can only put the Trade Mallet for high pick(s) threads to bed.

 

[Tunescribe]

LINEMEN!!! We still need linemen on both sides of the ball, not another freakin' WR. I want to start day two with the best center or guard available ... Another stud defensive tackle would be fine as well.

 

[condon84]

I hope we didn't just draft the Ras-I of the defensive line.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Easley is not a pass rusher, which is what we need. He's not big and can be swallowed by one on one blocks. His knees make him a HUGE question mark for his career and quite honestly, he's a question mark to give us ANYTHING next season. Just a horrible pick. Sure maybe Seattle would have picked him at 32, as a LUXARY pick, they already have a dominating defense, he would have been someone they used in their rotation, not someone they'd need as a starter. Absolutely horrible pick, the last person I wanted them to pick. I will gladly eat crow if I'm wrong, but 2 blown out knees tell me I'm gonna be right. No way he'll be explosive after 2 torn ACLs. Only thing explosive about him is his ACLs.

There is a reason why you have a negative 18 rating.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Belichick's response yesterday? He used the word "explosive" several times in describing Easley. I've never heard him say that about ANY draft pick. Usually, it's something like "he was productive in college. We'll see how it goes. blah blah blah."