Ron Brace at DE?

[ctpatsfan77]

I think he might be too slow for DE...and there are others that can fill in there who are more suited for that in a 3-4 alignment. But teh ONLY reason he was drafted because of WIlfork?? NOT at all. The team has not had a similar type NT backup, really since VW's rookie year...Traylor. Vince himself had wanted Raji...why?? Because having him out and a backup in will make him more effective when in...less worn out. THAT is quite important later in a close game when the D is a bit worn down. THAT is very important. That they also have Pryor is also good as having a 3rd NT is something they ALSO have not had since that year...Ethan Kelly. And if he had controlled his weight problem, might have been a good backup,

The odds that either Myron Pryor or Darryl Richard—let alone both of them—make the 53 are not that high.

 

[Pats726]

The odds that either Myron Pryor or Darryl Richard—let alone both of them—make the 53 are not that high.

Did I say anything about either making the 53?? It took EKelly a bit over a year to develop and be on the 53...I would not expect either of these players to do it quicker...I would think both might be solid candidates for the Practice Squad....

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I have never seen Brace play. However, it's interesting that the pre draft film of the guys had him making tacles outside the box and around the sideline.

Obviously, combine slow and football slow are two different things.

Can the guy take off 25 pounds or does he need to add pounds/beef?

 

[BradyManny]

Brace is just a plugger and won't be playing any DE.

The better question is could Wilfork slide over and play DE if Seymour walks? And I think the answer to that might be yes.

 

[RayClay]

Brace is just a plugger and won't be playing any DE.

The better question is could Wilfork slide over and play DE if Seymour walks? And I think the answer to that might be yes.

Always good when you can weaken two positions.

 

[BradyManny]

Always good when you can weaken two positions.

But its the best contingency plan, of course the D-Line will be weaker if either Seymour or Wilfork walks. But Brace, by next year, can hopefully provide comparable run stuffing abilities to Wilfork and Wilfork is athletic enough that he could play DE. Wilfork is just as athletic as Warren. It's not like Big Vince is the prototypical 3-4 NT. I love the guy and he's been tremendous there, but there were times last year where he wasn't holding his ground and if forced between the two, I would rather retain Seymour, who I thought looked dominant on the line, and who contributes on all 3 downs.

I know that's an unpopular opinion and it's not said to diminish Wilfork's contributions, merely re-state Sey's importance.

 

[Pats726]

But its the best contingency plan, of course the D-Line will be weaker if either Seymour or Wilfork walks. But Brace, by next year, can hopefully provide comparable run stuffing abilities to Wilfork and Wilfork is athletic enough that he could play DE. Wilfork is just as athletic as Warren. It's not like Big Vince is the prototypical 3-4 NT. I love the guy and he's been tremendous there, but there were times last year where he wasn't holding his ground and if forced between the two, I would rather retain Seymour, who I thought looked dominant on the line, and who contributes on all 3 downs.

I know that's an unpopular opinion and it's not said to diminish Wilfork's contributions, merely re-state Sey's importance.

I undesrtand what you are saying...but are you saying that Wilfork is easier to replace than Seymour?? I really do not think that is true...tough NTs are rare..a BIT rarer than DEs. I would like to keep both, but I think that possibility is slim. Also, you made the point about Wilfork not holding his ground. Might that have been because there was no similar backup and he was playing more than he should have?? Maybe with Brace behind WIlfork that will happen less.

 

[RayClay]

But its the best contingency plan, of course the D-Line will be weaker if either Seymour or Wilfork walks. But Brace, by next year, can hopefully provide comparable run stuffing abilities to Wilfork and Wilfork is athletic enough that he could play DE. Wilfork is just as athletic as Warren. It's not like Big Vince is the prototypical 3-4 NT. I love the guy and he's been tremendous there, but there were times last year where he wasn't holding his ground and if forced between the two, I would rather retain Seymour, who I thought looked dominant on the line, and who contributes on all 3 downs.

I know that's an unpopular opinion and it's not said to diminish Wilfork's contributions, merely re-state Sey's importance.

I disagree. Wilfork is ideal at NT. If we retain him, Jarvis, Wright or LeKevin would be decent until we draft or acquire someone.

Warren was decent at NT, but he's 6'5" and 300 listed. He's worked out to be a DE while Wilfork is more squat and has worked out to be a nose. He's also at least 325 and shorter.

Wright, Warren, LeKevin and Green have all been tried at nose because it's so hard to fill and all are better at DE. Now that we finally have a real NT type for a backup, We sit all the players who are better at end so we can take the best NT and hope he's more than a mediocre DE.

It doesn't make sense.

Wilfork is as good a young NT as you'll find. Unless they clone 400 lb. Ted, I don't know what prototype you're looking at.

 

[BradyManny]

I undesrtand what you are saying...but are you saying that Wilfork is easier to replace than Seymour?? I really do not think that is true...tough NTs are rare..a BIT rarer than DEs. I would like to keep both, but I think that possibility is slim. Also, you made the point about Wilfork not holding his ground. Might that have been because there was no similar backup and he was playing more than he should have?? Maybe with Brace behind WIlfork that will happen less.

That's a good point, plus Wilfork was fighting injuries at time last season.

As for replacing Seymour or replacing Wilfork - it's hard to do either. But I feel like getting a huge plugger to stuff the run on 1st and 2nd down (ie, a Brace) and developing him is a slightly easier task than finding a 3-4DE like Seymour who not only is a beast to move on run downs, but has the athleticism and upfield ability to pressure the QB. Case in point, look at the other side of the line with Ty Warren, who is a monster against the run but does not have Seymour's pass rushing ability.

I posited this in a thread not too long ago:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...visiting-reiss-defensive-participation-s.html

Consider, Seymour played in 6% more snaps despite playing at a position that has more depth and sees rotations more regularly.

If Wilfork starts to contribute more on passing downs as a result of being able to play more then due to having a guy to spell him at times (Brace), then perhaps he can match Seymour's value in my mind.

 

[BradyManny]

I disagree. Wilfork is ideal at NT. If we retain him, Jarvis, Wright or LeKevin would be decent until we draft or acquire someone.

Warren was decent at NT, but he's 6'5" and 300 listed. He's worked out to be a DE while Wilfork is more squat and has worked out to be a nose. He's also at least 325 and shorter.

Wright, Warren, LeKevin and Green have all been tried at nose because it's so hard to fill and all are better at DE. Now that we finally have a real NT type for a backup, We sit all the players who are better at end so we can take the best NT and hope he's more than a mediocre DE.

It doesn't make sense.

Wilfork is as good a young NT as you'll find. Unless they clone 400 lb. Ted, I don't know what prototype you're looking at.

I disagree - our run defense metrics are brutal on the defensive rightside anytime Seymour has been injured, and our defense has suffered greatly.

Put simply, I think Seymour is a slightly better player than Wilfork and the metrics confirmed what I saw, that Wilfork was not doing quite as well as Sey at defending the run last year:

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

When running at Sey (left tackle, defensive right end), the Pats had the 2nd best run defense in the league. When running at Wilfork (mid), the Pats had the 15th best run defense in the league.

I know its an oversimplification, but it passes the eye check.

As for prototypical 3-4 NT, to me, Brace is as close as Big Vince is, he probably won't ever be as good a player, but he might be a good enough run stuffer.

 

[ALP]

I disagree - our run defense metrics are brutal on the defensive rightside anytime Seymour has been injured, and our defense has suffered greatly.

Put simply, I think Seymour is a slightly better player than Wilfork and the metrics confirmed what I saw, that Wilfork was not doing quite as well as Sey at defending the run last year:

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

When running at Sey (left tackle, defensive right end), the Pats had the 2nd best run defense in the league. When running at Wilfork (mid), the Pats had the 15th best run defense in the league.

I know its an oversimplification, but it passes the eye check.

As for prototypical 3-4 NT, to me, Brace is as close as Big Vince is, he probably won't ever be as good a player, but he might be a good enough run stuffer.

in all ur arguments to keep seymour, u never mention the injury card....Wilfork has missed veyr little if any games since beign drafted, and yet we all know that Seymour is bothered by injuries on and off.....

 

[BradyManny]

in all ur arguments to keep seymour, u never mention the injury card....Wilfork has missed veyr little if any games since beign drafted, and yet we all know that Seymour is bothered by injuries on and off.....

That's certainly a factor - but to me, it's not enough to deter me from making Seymour the #1 priority in the offseason.

 

[BradyFTW!]

in all ur arguments to keep seymour, u never mention the injury card....Wilfork has missed veyr little if any games since beign drafted, and yet we all know that Seymour is bothered by injuries on and off.....

I disagree. Sure, Seymour was PUPed in 2007, but other than that? He came back, got healthy, and returned to his dominant form, showing no ill effects from the injury. Looking at them going forward, his injury prospects are no worse than Wilfork's. Maybe even better, when you consider that he's less prone to small injuries while playing his real position, and reportedly sustained his major injury while run-blocking (which he doesn't do anymore).

One major injury doesn't make a guy injury-prone. It makes him unlucky. Case in point: are we going to start calling Brady injury-prone now? Was Drew Bledsoe injury-prone because Mo Lewis almost killed him that one time?

FWIW, I agree with BradyManny. While Vince Wilforks don't grow on trees, at the end of the day you could replace a lot of his value with a guy like Ron Brace. You'd definitely lose quite a bit, talent-wise, but considering the money saved (versus what Wilfork is asking for), I wouldn't be surprised if the front office goes that route. With Seymour, you flat-out can't replace his versatility. He's a monster against the run and against the pass, and there is literally NO other 3-4 DE that can claim that to nearly the extent that he can.

As for the original question, no way Brace is a DE.

 

[Synovia]

FWIW, I agree with BradyManny. While Vince Wilforks don't grow on trees, at the end of the day you could replace a lot of his value with a guy like Ron Brace. With Seymour, you flat-out can't replace his versatility. He's a monster against the run and against the pass, and there is literally NO other 3-4 DE that can claim that to nearly the extent that he can.

Completely disagree. Wilfork can't be replaced by Brace for exactly the same reason: hes great against both the run and the pass. He collapses the middle of the pocket on passing plays, and thats something Brace will never be quick enough to do. I think replacing either one of Wilfork or Seymour leads to a big downgrade in the defense. They're both unique talents.

 

[makoute]

I disagree. Sure, Seymour was PUPed in 2007, but other than that? He came back, got healthy, and returned to his dominant form, showing no ill effects from the injury. Looking at them going forward, his injury prospects are no worse than Wilfork's. Maybe even better, when you consider that he's less prone to small injuries while playing his real position, and reportedly sustained his major injury while run-blocking (which he doesn't do anymore).

One major injury doesn't make a guy injury-prone. It makes him unlucky. Case in point: are we going to start calling Brady injury-prone now? Was Drew Bledsoe injury-prone because Mo Lewis almost killed him that one time?

FWIW, I agree with BradyManny. While Vince Wilforks don't grow on trees, at the end of the day you could replace a lot of his value with a guy like Ron Brace. You'd definitely lose quite a bit, talent-wise, but considering the money saved (versus what Wilfork is asking for), I wouldn't be surprised if the front office goes that route. With Seymour, you flat-out can't replace his versatility. He's a monster against the run and against the pass, and there is literally NO other 3-4 DE that can claim that to nearly the extent that he can.

As for the original question, no way Brace is a DE.

Do we know for a fact that Brace can't become the player that wilfork is, wilfork wasn't always this good. Granted he did come into the league with more expectation, but Ron Brace is a high second round pick, so he has some skills.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Completely disagree. Wilfork can't be replaced by Brace for exactly the same reason: hes great against both the run and the pass. He collapses the middle of the pocket on passing plays, and thats something Brace will never be quick enough to do. I think replacing either one of Wilfork or Seymour leads to a big downgrade in the defense. They're both unique talents.

Wilfork comes off the field on third down, which pretty much precludes him from having a strong and consistent impact against the pass. For the latter point, though, I do agree. Brace will not replace Wilfork, because Wilfork has some impressive and rare talents. I just think that Seymour's are rarer and more important to the team's success. For example, there are at least a few NTs in the league who can do what Wilfork does. Are there any other 2-gap DEs who can shut down their side of the line against the run, and then go out and get 8+ sacks.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Do we know for a fact that Brace can't become the player that wilfork is, wilfork wasn't always this good. Granted he did come into the league with more expectation, but Ron Brace is a high second round pick, so he has some skills.

Brace is significantly slower than Wilfork, and less athletic all-around, so his upside is definitely lower. IMO, I feel pretty safe saying that Brace will never be the player that Wilfork is right now. Then again, he doesn't have to be; if he can replace 75% of Wilfork's value, then that might be good enough if it's rookie salary vs. whatever Wilfork is asking for.

 

[BradyManny]

Completely disagree. Wilfork can't be replaced by Brace for exactly the same reason: hes great against both the run and the pass. He collapses the middle of the pocket on passing plays, and thats something Brace will never be quick enough to do. I think replacing either one of Wilfork or Seymour leads to a big downgrade in the defense. They're both unique talents.

I like Wilfork as a pass rusher as well - but they don't use him in that role often enough to justify considering that when evaluating his value. The team clearly prefers putting Mike Wright in to rush up the middle on passing downs, whether they think his production is better or if its just to spell Wilfork, I don't know.

But the reality is that Seymour simply is going to be in on more packages. Some games, Wilfork isn't in on any package other than the base D, Seymour is likely to be rotated in for any nickel package, whether it's a package with 2 DL or 3 DL.

If they started plugging Wilfork in the middle in their dime and nickel packages and have him get some pressure or collapse the pocket (more often than they do now), I will change my argument. Until then, I think Seymour has more value.

I agree with your overall point that replacing either of these guys is not a fun task. I just think replacing Wilfork is the lesser of two evils.

 

[RayClay]

Do we know for a fact that Brace can't become the player that wilfork is, wilfork wasn't always this good.

If we don't know for a fact it's false, it's true?

Wilfork was known as an athletic phenom for his size. He was considered top 5 in his junior year. There was a question, as there always is, whether he could make the transition and take on the burden of the position. He has.

There is still that question with Brace, plus he isn't near as athletic as Vince.

 

[Synovia]

Wilfork comes off the field on third down, which pretty much precludes him from having a strong and consistent impact against the pass.

Teams don't pass on first and second down? Thats news to me.