Who will benefit the most?

[Waldo]

Waldo,

why are defensive lineman so famously the source for draft busts? It seems to be the hardest position to predict after QB.

DE's (or OLB's) that can run a 4.8 40 and 1.65 10, have 32"+ arms, can do 20+ reps, can run a sub 4.45 shuttle (sub 4.25 for OLB's), are at least 6'2", and can jump at an solid level for their weight (~35-36" for a 265-270 lb guy and/or 9'6") and can do the 3 cone in 4.25 or less, rarely ever bust for non-health reasons.

Four classes that regularly bust are wimpy leapers (high jumpers that can't bench much), low rise gym rats (guys that can bench a ton but can't jump), slow pokes (the Monty's, they can't run), and stubbies (short armed and/or short guys). These guys are drafted at all levels, from the top of the draft to the bottom, and are riddled with failure, a very high bust rate. They can become servicable starters, but elite players rarely ever come from one of these classes, yet ever year there is at least 1 first round pick (and several 2nd rounders) that belongs in these groups that turns out mediocre, teams take them on their college production because they are "good football players" and they rarely ever work out as hoped.

Jeremy is a little low in the leaping department (the vertical) but last year they changed the vert test at the combine and #'s were pitiful across the board at all positions (nobody jumped 40", there are regularly 1-2 dozen 40"+ jumpers, either last years class has a serious problem with gravity or the change to the test had a massive effect). Generally that is one test that guys improve on at their pro day (usually an inch or two), last year guys were improving 5"+ at their pro days. Most scouts threw out the combine vert from last year and went on the pro day #'s. Jeremy's pro day #'s are unknown (no public scouts bothered to show up at Wake last year or wrote down most of his testing #'s), but his 9'9" broad jump generally translates to a 36-37" vert, as the two tests are closely related. He was in right around #5-6 for the DE position at the combine at the vert, that too typically translates to about a 36-37" vert.

Jeremy has elite arm lenth (34"+) and height (6'5"), ran a blazing 10 yd split (1.53, faster than almost all DE's/OLB's in the NFL), ran a 4.75 40 (fast enough), put up a solid 25 reps on the bench, did an elite shuttle (4.23), ran an incredible 3 cone (6.97), jumped an elite 9'9" broad jump for his weight (267).

That and in pads he looks exactly like a certain future HOFer that was drafted in the 3rd round on measurables (too bad there is no record of them to compare) that Capers made a DMVP when he coached him.

[Joemailman]

Thompson is very intriguing. He was used some in pass coverage in college and had an 86 yard INT reception for a TD. He wasn't a dynamic pass rusher, but he does have the long arms necessary to avoid getting tied up by OT's. The Packers felt he was underrated as a pass rusher when they drafted him.

[SMACKTALKIE]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

[Pacopete4]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

[Waldo]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

I don't see how replacing the SLB with a 3rd DT is going to make our run D worse.

The whole point to a 3-4 from the very beginning was that it was a schematically superior run defense than a 4-3.

[Pacopete4]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

I don't see how replacing the SLB with a 3rd DT is going to make our run D worse.

The whole point to a 3-4 from the very beginning was that it was a schematically superior run defense than a 4-3.

Check out what AP and the Vikings did against 3-4 defenses and get backto me

[Joemailman]

I would agree. The biggest questions the Packers will face in the 3-4 will be whether they can rush the passer, and whether the OLB's can cover.

[Fritz]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

I don't see how replacing the SLB with a 3rd DT is going to make our run D worse.

The whole point to a 3-4 from the very beginning was that it was a schematically superior run defense than a 4-3.

Check out what AP and the Vikings did against 3-4 defenses and get backto me

PP versus Waldo???

Alex, I'll take $100,000 on Waldo.

[SMACKTALKIE]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

I don't see how replacing the SLB with a 3rd DT is going to make our run D worse.

The whole point to a 3-4 from the very beginning was that it was a schematically superior run defense than a 4-3.

Check out what AP and the Vikings did against 3-4 defenses and get backto me

296 yards on thirty carries and three touchdowns against the San Diego Chargers.........I mean, thats pretty good...........right?

[bobblehead]

Re: Who will benefit the most?

I'm voting for Hunter. Hunter seems like he could immediately become a pass rushing force at OLB.

Harvey?

i was on this even before harvey, but I'm reconsidering. Not sure Hunter has the overall skills.

[Fritz]

I'm sorry, but that's a lame and inadequate answer. To get a sense of how effective the 3-4 might be against AP, you'd at least have to first look at his performance against more than one team that runs a 3-4. To just dig his performance out against one team is slanting things. If the Vikes had played, say, the Steelers three times, and I posted AP's numbers against only Pittsburgh, and the numbers sucked, would that "prove" the 3-4 is better? No.

The second item you need is to also look at AP's numbers against a similar number of 4-3 teams. Then you could get a sense of comparison.

So: if you go back, chalk up AP's numbers against a top 3-4 team, a middling one, and a poor one, then chalk up his numbers against a top 4-3 team, a middling one, and a poor one, then compared them and could conclude his numbers were similar or even better against the 3-4, then I'd believe you.

But throwing a few numbers against a wall doesn't prove a thing.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm sorry, but that's a lame and inadequate answer. To get a sense of how effective the 3-4 might be against AP, you'd at least have to first look at his performance against more than one team that runs a 3-4. To just dig his performance out against one team is slanting things. If the Vikes had played, say, the Steelers three times, and I posted AP's numbers against only Pittsburgh, and the numbers sucked, would that "prove" the 3-4 is better? No.

The second item you need is to also look at AP's numbers against a similar number of 4-3 teams. Then you could get a sense of comparison.

So: if you go back, chalk up AP's numbers against a top 3-4 team, a middling one, and a poor one, then chalk up his numbers against a top 4-3 team, a middling one, and a poor one, then compared them and could conclude his numbers were similar or even better against the 3-4, then I'd believe you.

But throwing a few numbers against a wall doesn't prove a thing.

Correct.

2007
Dallas - 12 carries for 63 yards
San Diego - 30 carries for 296 yards
San Francisco - 14 carries for 3 yards

That's all we have to go off of. That's one great game, one terrible game, and one average game without a lot of carries.

[Waldo]

I did'nt see Adrian Peterson's name on that list. My vote is for him.

Haha damn you.. That was a good one.. And most likely so true

I don't see how replacing the SLB with a 3rd DT is going to make our run D worse.

The whole point to a 3-4 from the very beginning was that it was a schematically superior run defense than a 4-3.

Check out what AP and the Vikings did against 3-4 defenses and get backto me

Ah yes the old Packer fan method of using a single data point to project results

He has faced 3 3-4 defenses in his career:
vs. Dallas - 12 for 67 yds (T Jax only threw 6/19 for 72 )
vs. SD - 30 for 296 (T Jax only threw 6/12 for 63 )
vs. SF - 9 for 13 (T Jax was 16/25 for 163)

8 of the 9 3-4 defenses in the NFL finished in the top half of the league in run defense by YPC (Cleveland didn't).
8 of the 9 3-4 defenses in the NFL finished in the top half of the league in run defense by YPG (Cleveland didn't).
8 of the 9 3-4 defenses in the NFL finished in the top half of the league in run defense by TD's (Cleveland didn't).

The data indicates that the 3-4 defense is superior to the 4-3 for run defense, that AD is not some special 3-4 killer, but had one great statistical outlier of a game, and Tarvaris Jackson absolutely sucks against 3-4 defenses.

[Pacopete4]

He has faced 3 3-4 defenses in his career:
vs. Dallas - 12 for 67 yds (T Jax only threw 6/19 for 72 ) over 5yrds a carry, hmm..
vs. SD - 30 for 296 (T Jax only threw 6/12 for 63 ) simply amazing..
vs. SF - 9 for 13 (T Jax was 16/25 for 163) and this one, well terrible but probably not all his fault if he only got 9 carries

AP will eat us up in at least one game this next season if not both... if we are worried about Tjack, we have other problems then...

[Waldo]

He has faced 3 3-4 defenses in his career:
vs. Dallas - 12 for 67 yds (T Jax only threw 6/19 for 72 ) over 5yrds a carry, hmm..
vs. SD - 30 for 296 (T Jax only threw 6/12 for 63 ) simply amazing..
vs. SF - 9 for 13 (T Jax was 16/25 for 163) and this one, well terrible but probably not all his fault if he only got 9 carries

AP will eat us up in at least one game this next season if not both... if we are worried about Tjack, we have other problems then...

The game against Dallas was below his season average. Believe what you want that AD is this special 3-4 killing weapon, but is simply not true.

I fail to see how replacing a LB with a DT make a run defense worse? The league wide averages bear it out, 3-4 defenses on average are better at stopping the run than 4-3 defenses.