The Average Elite Pass Rusher

[Smeefers]

I have nothing to add, but I repped the initial post. A lot of good work and food for thought.

[Zool]

McClellin is about as unsexy as a first round pick can be IMO and there will be better OLB candidates chosen after him.

Thus is the crux of the inaccuracy of the draft. You can poke, prod, scratch whatever to these guys and many of them will outright suck while the unsexy guy who looks to be average at best will have a 12 year career.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Serious question: If this was the regular season, I would know how to parse the hype, but the draft still discombobulates me.

Is Shea McClellin really climbing up team boards or just draftniks boards (I am guessing its the latter)? Because the draftniks have just about convinced themselves he will not be available at 28. But McGinn has him the fourth OLB, in rounds 1-2.

And his name still sounds like he is in a Highlander movie.

The way he's moving up reminds me of Mike Mamula back in the day. He was all the rage due to his combine and was hyped, hyped and hyped and the Iggles took him and he was a bust.

Funny how those who rip on Hawk love McClellin and the best things that can be said for him is the same things that are said of Hawk.

[Upnorth]

Great thread. There has been a couple of really good ones lately, well done all.

So where are they expecting Curry to go? I think he would be a great fit. Also getting Burris with one of our 4's would be a steal.

[pbmax]

The way he's moving up reminds me of Mike Mamula back in the day. He was all the rage due to his combine and was hyped, hyped and hyped and the Iggles took him and he was a bust.

Funny how those who rip on Hawk love McClellin and the best things that can be said for him is the same things that are said of Hawk.

Not a bad comparison, though Mamula wasn't exactly a bust. He was a very good player in the ACC at Boston College (I think that's right) and he excelled at chasing the QB. Back then it was a legit football conference.

His combine shot him from 2nd round to the first round. He had a reasonable career (though not top of first round quality) until he was injured.

McClellin has some parallels there, but he would look better at pick 28 than Mamula did at 10 or wherever.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Weird mix of OLBs this year. It's the only position I've looked at. (Well, that and a little DE.) It's hard to get totally on board with any of these guys. Ingram will be long gone. Upshaw had a terrible combine performance. Mercilus only had one good year in college. McClellin looks safe, but his ceiling might be lower than some others. I kind of like him though. I'm not that high on Jones. A lot of people are down on Perry. I think I read he only had 3 of his 9.5 sacks last year in one-on-one pass situations, and on 2 of them it took him longer than 3 seconds to record the sack. Lewis is mildly intriguing, but not as a 1st round pick to me. Branch and Curry are intriguing, but I'm wary of Clemson players and Curry might be a better fit as a 4-3 DE. Kendricks, Johnson, and Irvin are some others.

The one good thing going is that there seems to be a lot of 3-4 OLB types in this draft, so Thompson will probably have a 3-4 OLB available that he likes.

[Smidgeon]

The way he's moving up reminds me of Mike Mamula back in the day. He was all the rage due to his combine and was hyped, hyped and hyped and the Iggles took him and he was a bust.

Funny how those who rip on Hawk love McClellin and the best things that can be said for him is the same things that are said of Hawk.

A lot of good things could have been said about Hawk in college and about his combine performance--AKA his natural ability. The problem with Hawk is that it didn't translate to the pros like it should have. Will Shea have the same limits? I don't know. That's what the professional evaluators are for, and even they're guessing.

[Smeefers]

A lot of good things could have been said about Hawk in college and about his combine performance--AKA his natural ability. The problem with Hawk is that it didn't translate to the pros like it should have. Will Shea have the same limits? I don't know. That's what the professional evaluators are for, and even they're guessing.

Everyone said Hawk was a safe pick, he'd be a solid starter. They were right. He's solid. No super star, just a slightly above average ILB.

[Smidgeon]

Everyone said Hawk was a safe pick, he'd be a solid starter. They were right. He's solid. No super star, just a slightly above average ILB.

"Just" solid starters aren't drafted in the Top 10. They were expecting Clay Matthews impact. And his measurables said he should have been able to deliver.

[RashanGary]

Burris is giving me that going-to-be-a-packer feeling. He's a prototypical fit for our position of biggest need, his workout numbers are elite, he racked up 8 sacks and 19.5 TFL's last season as a Linebacker, and he's a well spoken pretty boy with eyes like two pools of ice water--so I'm guessing he interviewed well too. Most of all he should go towards the end of round 4... where we have 3 picks.

Amazing find!

Nice work.

[woodbuck27]

I see in McGinn's rating of linebackers, he lists this Burris guy, and says some nice things. Has him pegged for about round four. This might be one of those dudes, if Thompson likes him, that gets picked by TT in round three - another TT surprise.

I've got him well down as maybe a possibility in Round Seven.

Somewhere around Rank 250. That doesn't mean that some Scout doesn't see some much more value.

Fritz.I failed to note it and somehow lost the reference.You posted the name of A PACKER SCOUT THAT GAVE YOU OR A FRIEND THE SKINNY ON SOME HIGH PROSPECTS.

THE REAL 'TRUTH' ON THE WAYS OF SOME OF THE TOP PROSPECTS IN HIS EXPERIENCE MEETING THEM. I FORGOT TO NOTE HIS NAME. SORRY FOR THE CAP LOCKS.

MAY I ENQUIRE INTO HIS NAME?

[3irty1]

Thing to remember about McClellin, he played DE in an unconventional style defense. Also, teams they played played some "unconventional" style offenses such as spread and pistol, which usually allows the QB to get rid of ball faster.

The most unconventional thing about McClellin's defense is that it was loaded and playing against a ton of smaller, slower offenses who were usually behind by 20+ points and yet managed 7 sacks. If I'm going to settle on a guy who will be physically limited in the NFL I'd rather have Upshaw who managed 9 sacks against the SEC.

[Fritz]

I would agree with you, 3irty1. My thinking is this: as fans we want the hole plugged at ROLB, so a "good" guy like McClellin fits the bill, and fans seem anxious to get him in the first round. But he doesn't sound great, really - just like he might be an uggrade over what the Pack had there last year.

Yet when I hear people stinking about AJ Hawk, I think, well, isn't this about the same? Hawk's good. He's not a great player by any means, but he's solid. Yet the fans are unhappy - they want a playmaker for a guy drafted so high.

So right now people are all down with McClellin, but when he turns out to be a slightly above average ROLB in two or three years, people will bitch at Ted for that pick.

Now, it's a different story if people think this guy is going to be a real big deal - it's just that from what I've read, he looks like a guy who will be good, but limited in some respects.

Will Upshaw even be around, though? I'd guess no. I'm curious about Perry. I don't know if Capers wants those really big, mostly pass-rushing dudes, or if that's more Pittsburgh's style. I guess I'm not really sure what Capers et al are looking for in an outside linebacker. That's partly cuz I really didn't know what the skinny was on Matthews when they picked him. I don't recall reading any scouting reports on him - so of course I was shocked and disappointed that TT gave up so much to get a guy who was "unknown."

[3irty1]

I would agree with you, 3irty1. My thinking is this: as fans we want the hole plugged at ROLB, so a "good" guy like McClellin fits the bill, and fans seem anxious to get him in the first round. But he doesn't sound great, really - just like he might be an uggrade over what the Pack had there last year.

Yet when I hear people stinking about AJ Hawk, I think, well, isn't this about the same? Hawk's good. He's not a great player by any means, but he's solid. Yet the fans are unhappy - they want a playmaker for a guy drafted so high.

So right now people are all down with McClellin, but when he turns out to be a slightly above average ROLB in two or three years, people will bitch at Ted for that pick.

Now, it's a different story if people think this guy is going to be a real big deal - it's just that from what I've read, he looks like a guy who will be good, but limited in some respects.

Will Upshaw even be around, though? I'd guess no. I'm curious about Perry. I don't know if Capers wants those really big, mostly pass-rushing dudes, or if that's more Pittsburgh's style. I guess I'm not really sure what Capers et al are looking for in an outside linebacker. That's partly cuz I really didn't know what the skinny was on Matthews when they picked him. I don't recall reading any scouting reports on him - so of course I was shocked and disappointed that TT gave up so much to get a guy who was "unknown."

Pittsburgh and us both have zone-blitz heavy schemes that would like their OLBers to do everything well. Perry could probably be ok at OLB in a system more of a Wade Phillips style 3-4. The only thing he really does well is rush the passer so you'd love to put him in a position to just do that all the time. If we got him I'm sure Dom would find a way to use him.

[Fritz]

But if he had to use Perry primarily to rush, then you'd be limiting Matthews, right?