Understanding the Neal Pick

[rbaloha1]

Sorry -- I trust TT's board more than Kiper's.

[Gunakor]

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

Clefty read this and wonders: Has the medication started working yet or did I take too much?

Carrington graded out at 7.3. Neal graded in the low 6's. That's from NFL.com, and that's the one I remember.

I wondered if maybe those grades are a bit different than the norm. So I browsed the interwebs to find other evaluations.

CBSSports.com has Carrington ranked as the 6th best DE, while Neal ranks as the 16th best DT.

WalterFootball.com has similar rankings, Carrington 6th at DE and Neal 15th at DT.

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

[Lurker64]

Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

Media types had Jimmy Clausen and Taylor Mays in the first round. Media types had Tyson Alualu in the second or third. Media types all thought the Chiefs were going to take Bulaga. These guys are wrong all the time.

[Gunakor]

Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

Media types had Jimmy Clausen and Taylor Mays in the first round. Media types had Tyson Alualu in the second or third. Media types all thought the Chiefs were going to take Bulaga. These guys are wrong all the time.

Hey now, that doesn't mean they were wrong. You think Tebow is going to be a better player than Claussen? You think Alualu was worth the 10th overall pick? I don't think the media got these wrong, I think the Jags and Broncos did.

[Patler]

Carrington graded out at 7.3. Neal graded in the low 6's. That's from NFL.com, and that's the one I remember.

I wondered if maybe those grades are a bit different than the norm. So I browsed the interwebs to find other evaluations.

CBSSports.com has Carrington ranked as the 6th best DE, while Neal ranks as the 16th best DT.

WalterFootball.com has similar rankings, Carrington 6th at DE and Neal 15th at DT.

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

Haven't looked at the ones you mentioned specifically before writing this, so I could be all wrong; but, normally the ratings are based on performance in and suitability for the "standard" 4-3 defenses.

Maybe Carrington was the 6th ranked DE in a 4-3; but does he have the power and strength needed for DE in a 3-4? If you intend to play him at linebacker, is he too big; maybe another Aaron Kampman type? Perhaps Neal is the 15th or 16th DT, but more highly thought of by TT for playing end in a 3-4? I don't know, but those are the questions TT has to answer when making his selections.

If TT really liked Neal for a 3-4, the other thing he needs to consider is that several more teams are switching this year. Perhaps they too saw Neal as TT did, and would have jumped ahead of TT's trade down position.

[Gunakor]

Carrington graded out at 7.3. Neal graded in the low 6's. That's from NFL.com, and that's the one I remember.

I wondered if maybe those grades are a bit different than the norm. So I browsed the interwebs to find other evaluations.

CBSSports.com has Carrington ranked as the 6th best DE, while Neal ranks as the 16th best DT.

WalterFootball.com has similar rankings, Carrington 6th at DE and Neal 15th at DT.

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

Haven't looked at the ones you mentioned specifically before writing this, so I could be all wrong; but, normally the ratings are based on performance in and suitability for the "standard" 4-3 defenses.

Maybe Carrington was the 6th ranked DE in a 4-3; but does he have the power and strength needed for DE in a 3-4? If you intend to play him at linebacker, is he too big; maybe another Aaron Kampman type? Perhaps Neal is the 15th or 16th DT, but more highly thought of by TT for playing end in a 3-4? I don't know, but those are the questions TT has to answer when making his selections.

If TT really liked Neal for a 3-4, the other thing he needs to consider is that several more teams are switching this year. Perhaps they too saw Neal as TT did, and would have jumped ahead of TT's trade down position.

From NFL.com:

A fifth-year senior, Carrington put two excellent seasons together to cap his career with the Arkansas State defense. He has a good combination of size, strength and speed for an interior defensive lineman. He doesn't have great lateral quickness or agility to come off the edge as a 4-3 end but is well suited for a five-technique in 3-4 scheme. He is best at the point of attack, anchoring versus the run, and is effective pushing the pocket as a bull rusher. He has a decent feel for blocking schemes and restricting running lanes when using proper pad level and hand use. Carrington is inconsistent to shed blockers and get to the pile but has the natural arm strength and power to improve in this area. He is a good tackler in a restricted area but lacks great burst and range out of the tackle box. Carrington has the measurables and raw talent to vie for a starting position after his second or third season in the league.

[Lurker64]

Lets look at why Green Bay scouts may have preferred Neal over Carrington.

Neal is stronger (31 reps vs. 26).

Neal has more initial quickness (1.60 10-yard split vs. 1.65)

Neal has better change of direction (4.53 short shuttle vs. 4.81; 7.53 3-cone vs. 7.64)

Neal has experience with zone drops, something I believe Arkansas State does not do (though I'm not sure about this, I've watched more Purdue than Ark st.)

Neal was a team captain as a senior, Carrington was not.

Neal played a ridiculous number of snaps in the more physically demanding DT position, but occasionally played end. Carrington was pretty much exclusively a DE in college. Trgovac says that their DEs play 3-technique roughly half of the time, so Neal's extensive experience at 3-tech gives him an edge over Carrington. Plus, Neal had 12 sacks playing inside while Carrington only had 9 more while playing outside.

Mike Neal played against a significantly higher level of talent in the Big Ten vs. the Sun Belt)

Neal could have quite possibly interviewed better. Being a guy who was a fan of two players currently on the Packers could have convinced scouts that Neal was a better fit.

They also could have thought that Neal could improve considerably once they teach him a counter or two for his bull rush. Carrington was only moderately more productive with a better set of moves.

So don't be disappointed in our scouts if they liked Neal better (they did).

[Gunakor]

So don't be disappointed in our scouts if they liked Neal better (they did).

LOL, no, you misunderstood. I'd be disappointed in our scouts if they gave Carrington a 4th round grade. Like I said, they are about equal IMO. If they preferred Neal, I have no problem with that. But there isn't a 2 round difference between the two. They're the same player. Which is why if Neal fell off the board I'd be perfectly content with Carrington. That's what I meant.

[Cleft Crusty]

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

Clefty read this and wonders: Has the medication started working yet or did I take too much?

Carrington graded out at 7.3. Neal graded in the low 6's. That's from NFL.com, and that's the one I remember.

I wondered if maybe those grades are a bit different than the norm. So I browsed the interwebs to find other evaluations.

CBSSports.com has Carrington ranked as the 6th best DE, while Neal ranks as the 16th best DT.

WalterFootball.com has similar rankings, Carrington 6th at DE and Neal 15th at DT.

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

That's a nice post, and the drugs may be clouding my perception, but what does any of it have to do with your seemingly illogical argument that Carrington (a projected second rounder) slipped to 72 because the Packers selected Neal (a projected third rounder) at 56?

[swede]

Lets look at why Green Bay scouts may have preferred Neal over Carrington.

Neal is stronger (31 reps vs. 26).

Neal has more initial quickness (1.60 10-yard split vs. 1.65)

Neal has better change of direction (4.53 short shuttle vs. 4.81; 7.53 3-cone vs. 7.64)

Neal has experience with zone drops, something I believe Arkansas State does not do (though I'm not sure about this, I've watched more Purdue than Ark st.)

Neal was a team captain as a senior, Carrington was not.

Neal played a ridiculous number of snaps in the more physically demanding DT position, but occasionally played end. Carrington was pretty much exclusively a DE in college. Trgovac says that their DEs play 3-technique roughly half of the time, so Neal's extensive experience at 3-tech gives him an edge over Carrington. Plus, Neal had 12 sacks playing inside while Carrington only had 9 more while playing outside.

Mike Neal played against a significantly higher level of talent in the Big Ten vs. the Sun Belt)

Neal could have quite possibly interviewed better. Being a guy who was a fan of two players currently on the Packers could have convinced scouts that Neal was a better fit.

They also could have thought that Neal could improve considerably once they teach him a counter or two for his bull rush. Carrington was only moderately more productive with a better set of moves.

So don't be disappointed in our scouts if they liked Neal better (they did).

Lurk, that was downright Patler-esque.

Thanks for the good post.

I might add that identifying a 4th round sleeper in the draft does you no good if someone else drafts him in the middle of the third round.

[Gunakor]

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

Clefty read this and wonders: Has the medication started working yet or did I take too much?

Carrington graded out at 7.3. Neal graded in the low 6's. That's from NFL.com, and that's the one I remember.

I wondered if maybe those grades are a bit different than the norm. So I browsed the interwebs to find other evaluations.

CBSSports.com has Carrington ranked as the 6th best DE, while Neal ranks as the 16th best DT.

WalterFootball.com has similar rankings, Carrington 6th at DE and Neal 15th at DT.

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

That's a nice post, and the drugs may be clouding my perception, but what does any of it have to do with your seemingly illogical argument that Carrington (a projected second rounder) slipped to 73 because the Packers selected Neal (a projected third rounder) at 56?

I just swapped where the two were picked, assuming that everyone in between would have been content to draft their OT's and LB's that they drafted anyway. It's just an assumption, but if we take Carrington at #56 I don't know if any other team in the 2nd would have touched Neal.

[Guiness]

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

If all your friends were jumping off a bridge...

[Gunakor]

This is what I keep finding. Carrington had the consensus better grade entering the draft. Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

If all your friends were jumping off a bridge...

Well, they must have a reason!

[Guiness]

I find the high number of snaps Neale played very intriguing. The number of sacks he got inside makes me fondly remember what a game changer Corey Williams was when he sliced through to get the QB from the DT position. Of course, that rarely if ever happens from the NT position in the 3-4.

Is he projected at DE or DT?

[Lurker64]

I find the high number of snaps Neale played very intriguing. The number of sacks he got inside makes me fondly remember what a game changer Corey Williams was when he sliced through to get the QB from the DT position. Of course, that rarely if ever happens from the NT position in the 3-4.

Is he projected at DE or DT?

Neal? He'll play the 5-technique (outside shoulder of OT) in the base defense, and 3-technique (outside shoulder of the OG) in the nickel. If a freak injury sidelines both Pickett and Raji, I imagine he could manage the nose for a few snaps, as he has both burst and power in spades, but he would wear down quickly there. He gives up quite a bit of girth and natural leverage compared to what you look for in a dedicated NT. Wouldn't want to give him more than one series at NT, that's a tough position.

Wouldn't be surprised at all if, this year, the base DL were: Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly and the nickel DL were Neal and Raji (with Jenkins probably returning as the sole DL in the psycho package, though depending on how many snaps we go in base vs. nickel, Neal could do that too).