How do you really determine the fit of a player for the Dolphin system?

Lee2000

FinHeaven VIP
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,788
Reaction score
24
Age
56
How do you really determine the fit of a player for the Dolphin system? In my zeal to have Miami sign the best available players from the undrafted rookie pool, I forgot about the natural fit of a player.

You know the DL have to take space and keep blockers off the LBs.
You know the LBs need some speed and sideline to sideline ability.
You know the DBs need to be able to play mulitple positions and that the safeties can play both free and strong positions.
You know the linemen need are desired to be big on the inside, even though Perry and Dixon appear to contridict that.

Alot of fans on the message boards just speak about available talent as though they have no clue of the type of player Miami might look for.

Here is another provoking question.

WHAT KIND OF PLAYER FITS THE DOLPHIN SYSTEM AT EACH POSITION? SOME OF YOU WILL ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THIS FOR EACH POSITION, BUT TAKE A STAB AT ONE OR TWO IF YOU LIKE. RESPONSES APPRECAITED.

Lee2000
 

codename47

Rookie
Joined
Apr 28, 2002
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Well, if I really knew the answer of that one, I would be a coach in the NFL and would have a few rings. But I'll take a stab at it, anyway, and hopefully make my point clear. :D

I don't believe that much on a particular "system"; to me, the key is how a coach modifies his "system" to fit the players he has to enhance execution.



During the draft, you always hear that teams either drafted "for need", drafted "the best athlete available" or the "the best player availabe" (which although not mutually exclusive, are two different approaches).

The "Draft for Need" Argument.
I know I need, say, a safety. I would look at a prospective draftee and ask myself how can I utilize the evident talents of this prospect with the players I have in my team, and during pre-draft workouts, try to establish how difficult it would be to said prospective draftee to adapt himself to the players in my team.


The "Take The Best Athlete Available" Argument.
Let's take for example Michael Vick. You look at the kid and you see he is athletically gifted; was he the "best athlete availabe"? I say yes, he was. Now, the Chargers (and I agreed with their decision not to draft him) passed on him not only because they needed some extra picks, but because they weren't going to run the option and needed a QB who can actually read defenses. So Norv goes out and gets Drew Brees, who is a more complete QB, not the best athlete of the 2, not even close, but the best QB, since Brees didn't make it through College on raw physical ability like Vick did. Did the Falcons really need a QB that bad? I don't think so. Chris Chandler is a much better QB than Vick. So in this scenario, the "take the best available athlete" argument doesn't hold water.

The "Take The Best Player Available" Argument.
You are on the clock, and you desperately need a LB, yet that "stud" WR is on the board, who is the best player at his position, and the top 2 LB's are gone. What do you do?
Say you are the Rams in the 2001 draft, and say (for the sake of argument) Stallworth is the WR there. Well, you can take the "best player availabe", the WR, but is he going to help the Rams? Not really. Is the 3rd best LB availabe going to help your team more than the best WR? I say most likely.

So it is a hard decision, who'd you take and why. I think is more of a vision thing.

But what do I know... man... I hope I made sense :D
 

grooves12

Seasoned Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2002
Messages
850
Reaction score
1
Originally posted by codename47
The "Take The Best Player Available" Argument.
You are on the clock, and you desperately need a LB, yet that "stud" WR is on the board, who is the best player at his position, and the top 2 LB's are gone. What do you do?
Say you are the Rams in the 2001 draft, and say (for the sake of argument) Stallworth is the WR there. Well, you can take the "best player availabe", the WR, but is he going to help the Rams? Not really. Is the 3rd best LB availabe going to help your team more than the best WR? I say most likely.

So it is a hard decision, who'd you take and why. I think is more of a vision thing.
Well, I think the Best Player available method is usually the best choice. Especially if that player is a stud. In fact, you almost gave me the perfect scenario to make my point. The Rams have probably THE best RB in the league in Marshall Faulk. Yet, 2 years ago they took Trung Candidate in the first round. This at the time when they had many other needs on defense. Now, WHY?? They already have the best RB in the league... and I think that was a perfect reason for taking another capable one. My reasoning?? Well, because Marshall Faulk is so good, the team has evolved to rely on him. So, if he were to go down, the Rams would be screwed. He did go down... and you know what?? The Rams continued to win because they were smart in their drafting vision.

I think this is EXACTLY the reason why Wannstedt spent a first round pick on Jamar Fletcher. Even though CB is out strength. Our defense is in the same position the Rams offense is. Our whole philosiphy revolves around the outstanding play of our conerbacks, so if we were to lose one for an extended period of time and not have another "stud" to step in... our defense would fall apart. So, having a capable backup is the best thing possible for the team. Now, if that "stud" wasn't there... I seriously doubt they would have still reached for another corner... they would of went with our other needs. But, when you feel a player is a stud... and fits into the scheme perfectly, even if you already have outstanding starters at the same position, it is not smart to pass them up.
 

codename47

Rookie
Joined
Apr 28, 2002
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by grooves12


Well, I think the Best Player available method is usually the best choice. Especially if that player is a stud. In fact, you almost gave me the perfect scenario to make my point. The Rams have probably THE best RB in the league in Marshall Faulk. Yet, 2 years ago they took Trung Candidate in the first round. This at the time when they had many other needs on defense. Now, WHY?? They already have the best RB in the league... and I think that was a perfect reason for taking another capable one. My reasoning?? Well, because Marshall Faulk is so good, the team has evolved to rely on him. So, if he were to go down, the Rams would be screwed. He did go down... and you know what?? The Rams continued to win because they were smart in their drafting vision.

Well, being actually a Saints fan and having to endure the Lambs, especially for the last 3 years, I can tell you the main reason why Martz didn't go defense on that draft:
the offense was so explosive and made opposing teams abandon the run early in the game, making teams go to the pass trying to catch up, therefore making it much easier for the defense. Because of this, no one, not even Martz, knew that the Rams defense was so awful.

And by citing this example, you also made a great argument against drafting the best available player: the Rams did just that, and the very next season the team with the most explosive offense ever in the NFL ended up 10-6, getting kicked out of the playoffs in a wildcard game by the Saints, because they didn't draft for need.
 

Chauncey

GOD si smailliW ykciR
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
347
Reaction score
0
Thanks...I like to watch the young plants grow.
 

dolphan39

Maria & LauRen Aha!
Joined
Sep 4, 2001
Messages
13,973
Reaction score
2
Age
57
Location
CT
they also need to have played for the Bears on D or Norv on O :rolleyes:

on O:
Intelligent QB who can spread it around
Workhorse HB
FB and TE who can block and catch
not sure if we have mold for OLmen

on D:
like you said, run stuffing, immovable DTs
great speed rushers who have motor ag. the run as well at DE
LB who can run and tackle and 1 LB/MLB who can stay in cover middle on passing downs
CB who can stick to WR man-man
S that can cover as well as sure tacklers
 
Top Bottom