Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rank the DTs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rank the DTs

    I'm working on a mock draft and have the first 31 picks pretty much set, and I'm thinking that a defensive tackle could be good value for us at 32. If you had to rank the top 5-7 DTs in this draft, who would they be?

  • #2
    Re: Rank the DTs

    1. Fletcher Cox

    2. Michael Brockers

    3. Kendell Reyes

    4. Devon Still

    5. Dontari Poe

    6.Jerel Worthy

    7. Alameda Ta'amu

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Rank the DTs

      too lazy right now to watch youtube tape (You like that?, I think I just coined a new phrase) on all these guys, but here's how alot of the "professionals" see them:

      Mayock- Cox, Worthy, Brockers, Poe, Reyes(t), still (t)

      Kiper- Poe, Cox, Brockers, Wolfe, Reyes

      CBS- Cox, Brockers, Poe, Worthy, Still

      Walterfootball- Cox, Poe, Brockers, Reyes, Still, Thompson, worthy

      Sidelinescouting- Cox, Brockers, Poe, Still, Worthy, Reyes, Thompson

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Rank the DTs

        Are we looking for a 0 tech, 1 tech, 3 tech, or 5 tech?

        Different players suit different systems and some dont have the versatility to play in all of them

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Rank the DTs

          [quote user="juice33s"]too lazy right now to watch youtube tape (You like that?, I think I just coined a new phrase) on all these guys, but here's how alot of the "professionals" see them:

          Mayock- Cox, Worthy, Brockers, Poe, Reyes(t), still (t)

          Kiper- Poe, Cox, Brockers, Wolfe, Reyes

          CBS- Cox, Brockers, Poe, Worthy, Still

          Walterfootball- Cox, Poe, Brockers, Reyes, Still, Thompson, worthy

          Sidelinescouting- Cox, Brockers, Poe, Still, Worthy, Reyes, Thompson
          [/quote]


          I'll go with Mayocks order!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Rank the DTs

            [quote user="slipknottin"]Are we looking for a 0 tech, 1 tech, 3 tech, or 5 tech?

            Different players suit different systems and some dont have the versatility to play in all of them[/quote]
            For the most part I'd say 3's can play 5's and vice versa and 0's can play 1's (So basically any dtackle can play in any system). Also no reason why you can't play two nose tackle type guys in a 4/3 scheme for running downs. 2000 Ravens did so with alot of success with Sam Adams and Tony Siragusa.

            I'm of the belief that good football players are good football players. For example just because Canty played the 5 for the cowboys didn't mean he couldn't come here and play the 1 and the 3.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Rank the DTs

              [quote user="juice33s"]For the most part I'd say 3's can play 5's and vice versa and 0's can play 1's (So basically any dtackle can play in any system)[/quote]

              Completely disagree with that. Players like Geno Atkins would be horrible as a 5 tech.

              0 tech DTs generally need to be much bulkier than 1 techs. Also depends if you want to run a 2 gap or 1 gap system.


              Also no reason why you can't play two nose tackle type guys in a 4/3 scheme for running downs.
              Most teams run two 1 tech, or 2 tech players at times.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Rank the DTs

                [quote user="slipknottin"][quote user="juice33s"]For the most part I'd say 3's can play 5's and vice versa and 0's can play 1's (So basically any dtackle can play in any system)[/quote]

                Completely disagree with that. Players like Geno Atkins would be horrible as a 5 tech.

                0 tech DTs generally need to be much bulkier than 1 techs. Also depends if you want to run a 2 gap or 1 gap system.


                Also no reason why you can't play two nose tackle type guys in a 4/3 scheme for running downs.
                Most teams run two 1 tech, or 2 tech players at times.[/quote]LOL just order them in the way u like them. Mayock isnt spliting them up by 0,1,3,5 Tech

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Rank the DTs

                  [quote user="Redeyejedi"]LOL just order them in the way u like them. Mayock isnt spliting them up by 0,1,3,5 Tech[/quote]

                  It depends if you are ordering them for the giants, in the order you think they will be drafted, which DT will be the best at the position you think they will play best, etc.

                  Mayock generally orders guys for his hypothetical team.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Rank the DTs

                    [quote user="slipknottin"][quote user="juice33s"]For the most part I'd say 3's can play 5's and vice versa and 0's can play 1's (So basically any dtackle can play in any system)[/quote]

                    Completely disagree with that. Players like Geno Atkins would be horrible as a 5 tech.

                    0 tech DTs generally need to be much bulkier than 1 techs. Also depends if you want to run a 2 gap or 1 gap system.


                    Also no reason why you can't play two nose tackle type guys in a 4/3 scheme for running downs.

                    Most teams run two 1 tech, or 2 tech players at times
                    .[/quote]
                    By nose tackle, I meant 3/4 nose tackle (0 tech). Adams was 350 and the goose was 340.

                    As for Atkins I don't follow why you would think that. Do you think he's less athletic then say Mike devito of the Jets?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Rank the DTs

                      I'm just going to rank Still, Worthy and Reyes because we presumably have no shot at Cox, Brockers and Poe.

                      1.) Still- By far the most productive of the three (55 tackles, 17.5 for loss), with very good length (6'5) to get in the passing lanes He's also very disruptive in the opponents backfield shooting the gaps with a quick burst off the snap.

                      2.) Worthy- His production doesn't show it, but Worthy also has a great burst off the snap enabling him to either shoot the gap or bull rush his man in to the backfield. Has a very wide build and low center of gravity giving him the ability to hold his position at the point of attack while facing double teams making him an optimal run stuffer and because of that I think he would be the best fit for the Giants. Him and Joseph would be an excellent combination as 2-down run stoppers.

                      3.) Reyes- Despite great combine numbers, I don't see the same type of quick burst off the line as the other two possess therefore getting him stone walled at the line of scrimmage far too often. IMO not worthy of a 1st round pick and personally I wouldn't even consider him till the 3rd.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Rank the DTs

                        [quote user="juice33s"]By nose tackle, I meant 3/4 nose tackle (0 tech).Adams was 350 and the goose was 340.[/quote]

                        Right, I wasnt talking about player types but where guys can line up. There is nothing wrong with having multiple NT types on the field on running downs.

                        As for Atkins I don't follow why you would think that. Do you think he's less athletic then say Mike devito of the Jets?
                        I think Atkins is far more athletic, but he cant play the role of a NT, he just doesnt have the length or the anchor.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Rank the DTs

                          [quote user="slipknottin"][quote user="juice33s"]By nose tackle, I meant 3/4 nose tackle (0 tech).Adams was 350 and the goose was 340.[/quote]

                          Right, I wasnt talking about player types but where guys can line up. There is nothing wrong with having multiple NT types on the field on running downs.

                          As for Atkins I don't follow why you would think that. Do you think he's less athletic then say Mike devito of the Jets?
                          I think Atkins is far more athletic, but he cant play the role of a NT, he just doesnt have the length or the anchor.[/quote]
                          I think he could play the 5. Though he might not be prototype I really don't see a whole lot of difference physically between him and say guys like Corey liuget and Glen dorsey.

                          Also Sapp (one of the greatest 3techs of all time) played the 5 for the Raiders late in his career. He too had a similar build to Atkins.

                          Side note: I made the comparison to Devito, because he plays the 5 for the Jets. Pouha was the NT for them

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Rank the DTs

                            Just look at the guys we're talking about, virtually all of them could play multiple positions in the 3/4 or 4/3.

                            Cox- 3,5
                            Brockers- 1,3,5
                            Poe- 0,1,3
                            Still- 1,3,5
                            Worthy- Best fit would be the 1,3, but imo could also play the 0 (not much difference physically between him and cofield) and the 5 (Might not have the length, but like Devito, Liuget and Dorsey could hold his position at the line of scrimmage because of a strong base.)
                            Reyes- 1,3,5

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Rank the DTs

                              Raiders after attempting to run a 3-4 with Sapp decided it was not working and went back to a 4-3 for the most part.

                              And its not a matter as much of if a guy when forced into it can play alright there, its a matter of finding a guy that best fits the system and is most effective there.

                              As for Chargers and KC. Different systems completely. Chargers run more of a 50 front, 1 gap 3-4. Size isnt as critical to their 5 techs. All of their DEs are on the smaller size height wise.

                              KC on the other hand doesnt really even use 5 techs, they use two 4 techs and a 0 tech. Traditional 2 gap 3-4. Dorsey was drafted by the previous regime, when they were running the 4-3. While Dorsey has played 4 tech probably better than anyone expected, its far from an ideal position for him. Just watching him play you can see the disadvantages he has with a lack of height trying to 2 gap. He is fortunate he has 33"+ long arms.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X