Taking Christian Barmore was a gamble.

[BTTA]

Wasn’t this highlighted by reports as a major reason drafting has been poor. BB relying on his personal network and connections and ignoring his own personnel department.

This seemed, to me, to be more about speculation entering an echo chamber and becoming "fact" through repetition rather than knowledge.

 

[Sicilian]

The biggest thing to watch is how Shelvin turns out, especially when Shelvin was picked using the 4th that we traded away.

.

Kind of, but we still had the choice two picks before Shelvin went and didn't pick him. Maybe we would have if we hadn't already gone with Barmore in the second, but it wouldn't have been the first time BB double dipped at a position that needed some help, and even with the FA additions there's room for youth and development on the DL. I'm not sure this was a Barmore vs. Shelvin situation in their eyes. Outside of the positions that are meant to take 100% of the snaps (like QB, K, etc), I have a hard time drawing strategy conclusions from players taken two rounds apart from one another.

Now, if Shelvin turns out really good and Stevenson doesn't, that's a legit second guess. But Barmore is his own thing in this scenario, IMO.

 

[Zuma]

Kind of, but we still had the choice two picks before Shelvin went and didn't pick him. Maybe we would have if we hadn't already gone with Barmore in the second, but it wouldn't have been the first time BB double dipped at a position that needed some help, and even with the FA additions there's room for youth and development on the DL. I'm not sure this was a Barmore vs. Shelvin situation in their eyes. Outside of the positions that are meant to take 100% of the snaps (like QB, K, etc), I have a hard time drawing strategy conclusions from players taken two rounds apart from one another.

Now, if Shelvin turns out really good and Stevenson doesn't, that's a legit second guess. But Barmore is his own thing in this scenario, IMO.

I really wanted Shelvin...but if the game has changed then screw it. HOWEVER...one of the things that's amazing about BB is his incredible ability to zig when the league zags AND make it work. Maybe in the future traditional NT 3 down players will become a thing again...but not today.

 

[Sicilian]

I really wanted Shelvin...but if the game has changed then screw it. HOWEVER...one of the things that's amazing about BB is his incredible ability to zig when the league zags AND make it work. Maybe in the future traditional NT 3 down players will become a thing again...but not today.

I think anytime you can get a guy who can contribute on all 3 downs its better than someone who is only a run stuffer or pass rusher (I know, I know, I should write a dissertation on this GROUND BREAKING idea). But there's definitely still a role for your traditional NT, and I think BB has consistently looked for one in recent years: Branch to Shelton to Beau Allen. This is really the first year they haven't had an established veteran who could fill that role (though Carl Davis when healthy did a good job at it last year... the run D was noticeably better I think when he played). So I'm not sure he's moving away from it, it's just that it's harder and harder to find experienced players in that role because teams are using them for fewer snaps.

 

[zydecochris]

During barmore’s red shirt sophomore season, he was only used on about 50 percent of the defensive snaps for Alabama.

I know he had a lingering knee issue early, but that seems pretty low!

Unless there were other injuries, there may be more to this story…

Last year Alabama rotated players on their DL more than just about any team, to keep the DL fresh and because their excellent DL depth made that option available. Barmore’s primary role was as a high energy pass rush specialist and behind-the-line disruptor (primarily passes, but he blew up plenty of run plays in the backfield also) and he really excelled in that role especially in the last four games on the biggest stages. I expect that to be his role on the Pats early on, and that could be valuable in itself. Whether he becomes as effective at defending the run and maintaining gap discipline remains to be seen and may take a while to ascertain.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I think Gruden would make a good role in an FO. His handling of shedding weight and accruing capital by way of handling the Mack trade was really, really well handled. He fetched everything and then some. He has a decent handling of fetching value for trades.

As far as his coaching, maybe it's slightly outdated or something. I dunno. I've not watched the Raiders much to know what their issues are. But he certainly hasn't done any better than that one decent season Carr had before he came into the fold.

Look at what he did in Tampa before leaving. He left them with absolutely no talent.

He's been an overrated coach and bad at evaluating talent if we're being honest.

They owe him a ton of $ so he's not going anywhere but he's been bad. Look at what he turned the Mack trade into and how hurting they are on the DL.

 

[Vindicate]

Look at what he did in Tampa before leaving. He left them with absolutely no talent.

He's been an overrated coach and bad at evaluating talent if we're being honest.

They owe him a ton of $ so he's not going anywhere but he's been bad. Look at what he turned the Mack trade into and how hurting they are on the DL.

Yeah, I don't disagree with you - I tried clarifying that later in response to another poster, but it didn't read well in my initial post.

What I was going to get at is he'd be a good person to potentially have a spot for who, when a trade is happening, or the conditions are calling for a player to be traded, you tap Gruden and say "okay, were going to be splitting with Julio Jones. What's you input on how we fetch the most return we can given the circumstances."

It's very possible that this role doesn't exist, and I'm not 100% confident that he's even great at that role were it to exist, but I just found the return he got for Mack was incredible, even with how great of a talent Mack is.

You could say that the return he got for Mack was majorly dependent on a team like the Bears proposing the king's ransom to begin with. But that only comes from a situation where patience and decisiveness intersected very well in that particular moment.

Again, I don't know if he'd be able to replicate it I'm just kinda spitballing here.