Slimm's 2020 Defensive Ends (underclassman) | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Slimm's 2020 Defensive Ends (underclassman)

Yeah I'll be interested as well.

I like the Chandler Jones comparison. Personally I'm reminded a bit of the NFL version of Willie Young, with a few of NC State version of Willie Young's limitations thrown in.

Clearly the top pass rusher in this class and I take him all day as that DE1.

But I'm going to ignore standouts like Tua Tagovailoa or Jake Fromm, or a guy with the sort of Patrick Mahomes-like potential of Jordan Love, in order to take a rich man's Willie Young?
 
ckparrothead said:
Yeah I'll be interested as well.

I like the Chandler Jones comparison. Personally I'm reminded a bit of the NFL version of Willie Young, with a few of NC State version of Willie Young's limitations thrown in.

Clearly the top pass rusher in this class and I take him all day as that DE1.

But I'm going to ignore standouts like Tua Tagovailoa or Jake Fromm, or a guy with the sort of Patrick Mahomes-like potential of Jordan Love, in order to take a rich man's Willie Young?
Click to expand...

Not saying he's the comp, but - to me - Myles Garrett is the talking point. I, like many, said the Browns should take Garrett, because he's just that good. I loved Watson, but he wasn't as sure a thing as Garrett. The problem with that thinking is the gap in payoff. It's like a 1 in 25 chance of winning a thousand bucks vs a 1 in 100 chance of winning a million. The QB is just so much more valuable. Garrett is a star. He's been everything the Browns could have hoped for, and it only matters so much. This is an issue with every position outside of QB. WR, OL, DB, and DL units have big impacts on the game, of course, but it's very hard for any one player on any of these units to have an outsized difference on the game, and in the current NFL, it's very hard to keep high-end units together.

QB's do have outsized impacts, and once you have your QB, you're not going to let him go. People always say you can't copy the Patriots, because they're their own thing, but the one constant - aside from BB and Brady - is that they tend to be good enough everywhere to take advantage of your weaknesses. Rather than saying they want the best DL or WR's, they make do with good players and refuse to accept weaknesses elsewhere so that one unit can be particularly good. OL, DB, and LB are probably their best groups today, but with the exception of Gillmore, they haven't poured extra assets into those groups. They find OL who fit and have the best OL coach in the league; they find DB's who fit and have BB; and they're able to get quality LB's for relatively cheap, because they don't fit as well for most other teams.

In the process of building a complete team, some guys will hit bigger than expected, and NE has their examples, but for a bad team that's trying to right the ship, you only draft a guy like Myles Garrett if you don't like the QB's and if you're fine being bad again for at least another year. There is literally zero chance that Chase Young will turn around your football team. He can be a great piece, but bad teams need a great QB and a lot of pieces - not random great pieces sprinkled in here or there.
 
j-off-her-doll said:
Not saying he's the comp, but - to me - Myles Garrett is the talking point. I, like many, said the Browns should take Garrett, because he's just that good. I loved Watson, but he wasn't as sure a thing as Garrett. The problem with that thinking is the gap in payoff. It's like a 1 in 25 chance of winning a thousand bucks vs a 1 in 100 chance of winning a million. The QB is just so much more valuable. Garrett is a star. He's been everything the Browns could have hoped for, and it only matters so much. This is an issue with every position outside of QB. WR, OL, DB, and DL units have big impacts on the game, of course, but it's very hard for any one player on any of these units to have an outsized difference on the game, and in the current NFL, it's very hard to keep high-end units together.

QB's do have outsized impacts, and once you have your QB, you're not going to let him go. People always say you can't copy the Patriots, because they're their own thing, but the one constant - aside from BB and Brady - is that they tend to be good enough everywhere to take advantage of your weaknesses. Rather than saying they want the best DL or WR's, they make do with good players and refuse to accept weaknesses elsewhere so that one unit can be particularly good. OL, DB, and LB are probably their best groups today, but with the exception of Gillmore, they haven't poured extra assets into those groups. They find OL who fit and have the best OL coach in the league; they find DB's who fit and have BB; and they're able to get quality LB's for relatively cheap, because they don't fit as well for most other teams.

In the process of building a complete team, some guys will hit bigger than expected, and NE has their examples, but for a bad team that's trying to right the ship, you only draft a guy like Myles Garrett if you don't like the QB's and if you're fine being bad again for at least another year. There is literally zero chance that Chase Young will turn around your football team. He can be a great piece, but bad teams need a great QB and a lot of pieces - not random great pieces sprinkled in here or there.
Click to expand...



Such a tremendous post that gets to the point. It's why I just laugh at the posters pointing to the Colts or 49ers or whatever team is scraping by stringing together a few wins with mediocre QB's but good units here or there. These things change every year. You can't keep good units together for very long in the NFL. It was the Jags and their great defense carrying Bortles just 2 years ago. Everyone pointed to that in an attempt to discredit the importance of the QB position.

It's going to change every year which team is scraping by with the mediocre QB and outstanding defense. But the one's competing for the Superbowls are the same ol teams with the same ol franchise QB's.

Sure you can bypass the QB's and draft great players at other positions. But the Jake Longs, Joe Thomas, Myles Garrett, and all the rest can't turn around bad teams. This line of thinking is the fastest way to 7-9 & 8-8 for a few years before the bottom falls out again. You have to do it the right way when you're at the bottom in order to be a great team. You're already bad and have been bad for a long time.

What difference does it make if you miss while trying to be great.... you're going to be a bad team again before too long anyway. It's just the way it works.

Take your shot when you have it. Get the young QB in your holster on a rookie deal and go to work.
 
j-off-her-doll said:
Not saying he's the comp, but - to me - Myles Garrett is the talking point. I, like many, said the Browns should take Garrett, because he's just that good. I loved Watson, but he wasn't as sure a thing as Garrett. The problem with that thinking is the gap in payoff. It's like a 1 in 25 chance of winning a thousand bucks vs a 1 in 100 chance of winning a million. The QB is just so much more valuable. Garrett is a star. He's been everything the Browns could have hoped for, and it only matters so much. This is an issue with every position outside of QB. WR, OL, DB, and DL units have big impacts on the game, of course, but it's very hard for any one player on any of these units to have an outsized difference on the game, and in the current NFL, it's very hard to keep high-end units together.

QB's do have outsized impacts, and once you have your QB, you're not going to let him go. People always say you can't copy the Patriots, because they're their own thing, but the one constant - aside from BB and Brady - is that they tend to be good enough everywhere to take advantage of your weaknesses. Rather than saying they want the best DL or WR's, they make do with good players and refuse to accept weaknesses elsewhere so that one unit can be particularly good. OL, DB, and LB are probably their best groups today, but with the exception of Gillmore, they haven't poured extra assets into those groups. They find OL who fit and have the best OL coach in the league; they find DB's who fit and have BB; and they're able to get quality LB's for relatively cheap, because they don't fit as well for most other teams.

In the process of building a complete team, some guys will hit bigger than expected, and NE has their examples, but for a bad team that's trying to right the ship, you only draft a guy like Myles Garrett if you don't like the QB's and if you're fine being bad again for at least another year. There is literally zero chance that Chase Young will turn around your football team. He can be a great piece, but bad teams need a great QB and a lot of pieces - not random great pieces sprinkled in here or there.
Click to expand...

Can't say it much better than that.
 
For what I'm reading here is QB with our top pick no matter what. I want Tua if we get the top pick but what happens if the picks is 5 and Tua and Fromm are both gone? Take another player and then draft a QB with the Pitt pick or the Houston pick? Is anyone suggesting we reach for a QB top 5? I agree that the QB position needs to be taken care of or else the rest won't matter. Lets just say that our pick is top 8(which should be)but Tua, Fromm and Herbert are all gone, then what?
 
ckparrothead said:
Yeah I'll be interested as well.

I like the Chandler Jones comparison. Personally I'm reminded a bit of the NFL version of Willie Young, with a few of NC State version of Willie Young's limitations thrown in.

Clearly the top pass rusher in this class and I take him all day as that DE1.

But I'm going to ignore standouts like Tua Tagovailoa or Jake Fromm, or a guy with the sort of Patrick Mahomes-like potential of Jordan Love, in order to take a rich man's Willie Young?
Click to expand...

Don’t worry you’ll still be able to get Love with Houston’s pick.
 
ANUFan said:
Kearse was an atheletic freak at UF..Literally nicknamed "The Freak."
I don't see that kind of natural fluidity from Young.
Click to expand...

No, he's nowhere near the specimen or athlete. All of the comparisons to Young have some validity but I don't think any of them are perfect. Maybe Chandler Jones is the best so far in terms of style. But again, Chase Young doesn't figure to test nearly as well as Chandler Jones did.

I'm glad this thread moved into the real world of prioritizing the quarterback first and foremost. This isn't Alabama where they can dominate recruiting year after year and have a steady flow of elite defensive players at every level, to the point they can rightfully assume it will play out that way. When that happens in the pros these days it is mostly a fluke and almost always short term. I have no idea how you can adopt a strategy that relies on flukes and short term.

In contrast, get the quarterback and he stays. Did anyone seriously doubt that Russell Wilson would remain with the Seahawks?

The problem is identifying the quarterback, not keeping him. That's why I'm not reluctant to say I want multiple swings, if it isn't Tua. As much as I liked DeShaun Watson I didn't think he would reach this level. That uncertainty is why you take repeated attempts at the quarterback. Once you have him, the threads are gone. Unlike Tannehill level, once you have the elite guy nobody cares about last week's game. There will be 10+ years of last week's game
 
Awsi Dooger said:
No, he's nowhere near the specimen or athlete. All of the comparisons to Young have some validity but I don't think any of them are perfect. Maybe Chandler Jones is the best so far in terms of style. But again, Chase Young doesn't figure to test nearly as well as Chandler Jones did.

I'm glad this thread moved into the real world of prioritizing the quarterback first and foremost. This isn't Alabama where they can dominate recruiting year after year and have a steady flow of elite defensive players at every level, to the point they can rightfully assume it will play out that way. When that happens in the pros these days it is mostly a fluke and almost always short term. I have no idea how you can adopt a strategy that relies on flukes and short term.

In contrast, get the quarterback and he stays. Did anyone seriously doubt that Russell Wilson would remain with the Seahawks?

The problem is identifying the quarterback, not keeping him. That's why I'm not reluctant to say I want multiple swings, if it isn't Tua. As much as I liked DeShaun Watson I didn't think he would reach this level. That uncertainty is why you take repeated attempts at the quarterback. Once you have him, the threads are gone. Unlike Tannehill level, once you have the elite guy nobody cares about last week's game. There will be 10+ years of last week's game
Click to expand...

I think the fear of not being able to get Tua for whatever reason (He decides to not come out, We win some games or lose based on some SOS scenerio) is starting to make some of us nervous. There seems to be a serious drop off from Tua to the next guy. The next guy reminds me of Tannehill in the sense of having potential and but you almost need to surround them with absolute perfection to succeed.

That way is just too hard in the NFL. For once, I hope it's Miami's turn at bat to get the on paper,all the numbers check the box, type of franchise QB potential.

Hell even @TedSlimmJr will be a fulltime Dolphins fan again...:hclap:
 
ANUFan said:
Kearse was an atheletic freak at UF..Literally nicknamed "The Freak."
I don't see that kind of natural fluidity from Young.
Click to expand...

Not as freakishly athletic, I agree. But he’s certainly no slouch in that regard. Size and body types are similar, as is the knack for making disruptive plays when it matters.

Just ran a quick search on google and it looks like I’m not the only one that’s brought up that comparison, however inexact or off it may be.


 
j-off-her-doll said:
Not saying he's the comp, but - to me - Myles Garrett is the talking point. I, like many, said the Browns should take Garrett, because he's just that good. I loved Watson, but he wasn't as sure a thing as Garrett. The problem with that thinking is the gap in payoff. It's like a 1 in 25 chance of winning a thousand bucks vs a 1 in 100 chance of winning a million. The QB is just so much more valuable. Garrett is a star. He's been everything the Browns could have hoped for, and it only matters so much. This is an issue with every position outside of QB. WR, OL, DB, and DL units have big impacts on the game, of course, but it's very hard for any one player on any of these units to have an outsized difference on the game, and in the current NFL, it's very hard to keep high-end units together.

QB's do have outsized impacts, and once you have your QB, you're not going to let him go. People always say you can't copy the Patriots, because they're their own thing, but the one constant - aside from BB and Brady - is that they tend to be good enough everywhere to take advantage of your weaknesses. Rather than saying they want the best DL or WR's, they make do with good players and refuse to accept weaknesses elsewhere so that one unit can be particularly good. OL, DB, and LB are probably their best groups today, but with the exception of Gillmore, they haven't poured extra assets into those groups. They find OL who fit and have the best OL coach in the league; they find DB's who fit and have BB; and they're able to get quality LB's for relatively cheap, because they don't fit as well for most other teams.

In the process of building a complete team, some guys will hit bigger than expected, and NE has their examples, but for a bad team that's trying to right the ship, you only draft a guy like Myles Garrett if you don't like the QB's and if you're fine being bad again for at least another year. There is literally zero chance that Chase Young will turn around your football team. He can be a great piece, but bad teams need a great QB and a lot of pieces - not random great pieces sprinkled in here or there.
Click to expand...
Great post on the significance of the QB position.
Further illustrates why the Miami 2020 Draft must be Best QB Available as opposed to BPA.
 
Danny said:
For what I'm reading here is QB with our top pick no matter what. I want Tua if we get the top pick but what happens if the picks is 5 and Tua and Fromm are both gone? Take another player and then draft a QB with the Pitt pick or the Houston pick? Is anyone suggesting we reach for a QB top 5? I agree that the QB position needs to be taken care of or else the rest won't matter. Lets just say that our pick is top 8(which should be)but Tua, Fromm and Herbert are all gone, then what?
Click to expand...
The pick won’t be 5 but it will remain Best QB available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom