Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

Could A.J. Epenesa be seen as a three technique DT?

Another question. If we would use our third round pick as draft capital. How far could we move up in the first round? How far could we be able to move up in the second round?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Probably could with a bit more weight but there's so many DTs in that range, wouldn't make sense to pick him if that's a team's need when you can just get a guy who already plays that role.  I think he still sells better as a DE in spite of athleticism concerns.

 

PS:  Our 2nd and 3rd rounder would have the value of moving back to the end of the 1st (similar to McGary move last year).  1st and 3rd gets you from 16 to 12 in value,

Edited by Monolith2001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are making a strong assumption he will be there round 2 just because of his combine. Could he be there at 16 or later round 1, yes, but far from a sure thing he will be there in round 2, especially at 47.

i still like him, though many don’t now due to a 40 time and bench press...he shows up in big games, and had at least one sack in every game vs ranked opponents. May prefer YGM to him though due to his athletic skill set and higher ceiling...more of a true 4-3 end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boise Falcon Fan said:

Every year somebody that is expected to be drafted fairly hall falls like a rock. I predict he will fall. Many were projecting him to us early on. I think he ends up going in the 2nd.

Being you're a Boise fan...Thoughts on Curtis Weaver? His pass rush win rate is insane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of physical ability, if not to-date production, John Cominsky is superior in every way.

We have overemphasized tweeners since Dan Quinn got here, he has been chasing the next Michael Bennett for half a decade.

Give me a pure edge rusher or pure defensive tackle in the first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me he can play a de in a 3-4 scheme. Not enough explosiveness for a de in a 4-3.

I think he can thrive as a de in a 3-4. We run a 4-3 scheme. I like espanza but he wouldnt be a scheme fit here. Unless we run more hybrid 4-3 schemes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RazorWing said:

To me he can play a de in a 3-4 scheme. Not enough explosiveness for a de in a 4-3.

I think he can thrive as a de in a 3-4. We run a 4-3 scheme. I like espanza but he wouldnt be a scheme fit here. Unless we run more hybrid 4-3 schemes.

I've actually read this elsewhere too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HASHBROWN3 said:

He's another guy like Henderson that if picked, I'd have a hard time griping about.

If you look at his film & production it's hard to whine about the combine.

You wouldn't gripe if we took him at 16? At least trade back some and I'd feel better about it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a true edge rusher not a guy who shifts inside on third downs. He’s more of a 3-4 DE. I want the best edge rusher at 16 and I’m not sure if that’s Chaisson he reminds me a lot of Barkevious Mingo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Initially I thought of him as a 3-4 DE anyway, but figured he could pass as a 4-3 with a good enough combine. He could probably still serve as a quality strong side DE, but I'm not looking to take him at 16 with possibly better prospects available. I like him still even after the sub par combine, but his stock overall has certainly fallen.

In terms of trading up with the 3rd, we could move up, but do we need to really? Unless Simmons dropped(highly unlikely), I don't see the need to move up unless it's to get #2 for Young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mister pudding said:

You wouldn't gripe if we took him at 16? At least trade back some and I'd feel better about it 

I can appreciate that but let’s drill down a bit.

There are all kinds of historical examples of teams grabbing guys within 10-20 slots of where the prognosticators have them ranked. 

Why?

Teams value players differently for scheme fit, positional fit, personality, physical features, performance measurements, mental prowess, instincts, etc.

Needs vs who might be available at your pick. The guy you covet for all those reasons above could be gone or he (or another similar player) could be slotted 5-10 picks later.

Could be all the highest rated players available at your pick are already positions of strength for your team.  WR, QB etc..

No willing trade partners available or the asking price of trading is prohibitive. 

The risk a player may not be available at your next slotted pick in the next round.

Injury or behavioral risks

I can go on but as you can see it’s all relative.

When it’s all said & done, it oftentimes reveals just how imperfect the draft actually proves to be. 

Guys at the bottom of round one prove to be better than top 10 picks.  Guys chosen in the latter rounds prove to outperform those taken in earlier rounds.

Sure you do your best war room research from scouting, background. medical & analytics, and yet you may end up looking like a genius or a flunky.  

So let’s say Kinlaw is gone?  No trade partners available... Are we idiots by grabbing Gallimore, Diggs, Murray or Gros-Matos?  Nah.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
  • Create New...