It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:24 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:21 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26011
Location: North Carolina
My preliminary scouting report of both, and I need to really break down Mack's film, but have already watched 4 games from this past year with Barr and 1 from last year, and he's not worth the #6 overall pick.

Barr has tools to work with. His first step and burst off the line are very good, and because of that his potential to be a good pass rusher is high. But he has no clue how to use his hands to disengage from blocks and has zero pass rush moves. Instead of dipping his inside shoulder and ripping to turn the edge on a speed rush, he tries to swim with his outside hand. I saw him try to use an inside spin move as a coutner rush against quality tackles, and he was stone-walled 100% of the time. Whenever decent tackles got their hands on him, He got stone-walled. The 4 games from this year I watched from him, he was facing NFL-level talent, and the two that had the potential to be Day 1 or Day 2 picks this year or next year basically shut him down as a pass rusher.

Barr IMO is a better fit as a WILL linebacker in a 4-3 than as a Rush OLB in a 3-4. Let's say he's closer to Sean Weatherspoon in his NFL potential than DeMarcus Ware. Could Barr develop into the latter? Perhaps, but he's soooooooo far away from it based off his limited pass rushing ability in college, why are you going to draft him at #6, and have to wait 3 years before he comes close to being a double-digit sack guy? If you're taking an OLB that high, he better relatively polished and can come in right away and be that sort of player by Year 2 at the latest.

Mack on the other hand has pass rush moves. He also possesses good burst and a first step. He's physical and has the same sort of build as Von Miller. IMO, he'll likely play a similar role as Miller, playing a SAM linebacker, but on 3rd downs can put his hand in the dirt (I saw only 1 snap where Barr put his hand in the dirt in 5 games) and rush the QB. I watched him vs. Ohio State, and he really had an outstanding performance in that game. Also saw him vs. San Diego State, and he looked solid in that game too. The thing that is going to be the knock against him is that he didn't see a ton of NFL talent playing in the MAC, but when he did, he looked like the far superior player. I don't think Mack is as good as Miller, but think of him as a middle class man's version of him.

If the Falcons don't get Clowney in Rd 1, IMO, Khalil Mack might be the 2nd best option. I need to scout Jake Matthews also to determine if he's a better overall prospect.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 2:57 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4298
I'm still thinking that if Clowney's not there, we need to trade down. I just don't see any, "game changing players," at our pick. It seems like the level of talent at the positions that we are in need of (DL, OL) is about the same from picks 6 to 20. As such, we'd be better off trading down, and picking up some additional 1st and 2nd round picks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:48 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:02 pm
Posts: 6598
Location: Indianapolis IN
Good info Pudge. Miss your scouting reports. I'd be interested in your view of G Robinson,Mathews and now this def tackle from Pitt Donald. Trading down looks better and better especially if some of these Qbs start to do well in their stock.

_________________
Sometimes running the Mularkey offense makes me feel like I'm in a prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:44 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:59 pm
Posts: 1158
Location: San Diego, CA
RobertAP wrote:
I'm still thinking that if Clowney's not there, we need to trade down. I just don't see any, "game changing players," at our pick. It seems like the level of talent at the positions that we are in need of (DL, OL) is about the same from picks 6 to 20. As such, we'd be better off trading down, and picking up some additional 1st and 2nd round picks.


Clowney will be there if you trade up lol........Just saying.

_________________
The Young Gunner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:23 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4298
The Mattural wrote:
RobertAP wrote:
I'm still thinking that if Clowney's not there, we need to trade down. I just don't see any, "game changing players," at our pick. It seems like the level of talent at the positions that we are in need of (DL, OL) is about the same from picks 6 to 20. As such, we'd be better off trading down, and picking up some additional 1st and 2nd round picks.


Clowney will be there if you trade up lol........Just saying.

Trading up hasn't worked out very well for this franchise. I believe that the Pats have proven that multiple first and second rounds picks > one really high pick, provided your picks don't suck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:48 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:59 pm
Posts: 1158
Location: San Diego, CA
RobertAP wrote:
The Mattural wrote:
RobertAP wrote:
I'm still thinking that if Clowney's not there, we need to trade down. I just don't see any, "game changing players," at our pick. It seems like the level of talent at the positions that we are in need of (DL, OL) is about the same from picks 6 to 20. As such, we'd be better off trading down, and picking up some additional 1st and 2nd round picks.


Clowney will be there if you trade up lol........Just saying.

Trading up hasn't worked out very well for this franchise. I believe that the Pats have proven that multiple first and second rounds picks > one really high pick, provided your picks don't suck.


Hasnt worked out for us lately last two time we traded up in the first round we landed Julio and Trufant. Sure Julio got hurt for the majority of the season and we crashed and burned on offense but proir to his injury his was the best reciever in the league. I look at it like this if you trade up to get Clowney who wont cost a lot to get because of the rookie pay scale you solve a problem that has plagued the Falcons since 2008, getting to the QB.

_________________
The Young Gunner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:43 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4298
Though it has been rehashed several times, I believe that the trade up for Julio, the trade up for Baker, and the trade for Vick were all significant failures on the part of our front office.

I realize that when healthy, Julio is a beast. However, he's almost never healthy. He's a race horse with bad legs. You could sing a song about all of the leg problems that Julio's had. He's an accident waiting to happen, and he was drafted as a complementary piece. (Shiny hood ornament) I know that not many agree, but I maintain that the trade that we made to get Julio was one step forward, and two steps back for this franchise.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:49 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2408
Location: Albany NY
Trading up is a big reason we have no depth, treating down is how the Pats are right their every year. You need to think long term, not shot term, but you know the Falcons brass is trying to save them selves, thus I wouldn't be surprised at all if we trade up to the Rams spot, giving away our first next year to get Clowney. It makes since for them too as they can pick up the receiver they want in our 6th position. I wouldn't do it, but I bet TD would.

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:12 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26011
Location: North Carolina
DaveWaz wrote:
Trading up is a big reason we have no depth, treating down is how the Pats are right their every year.

I don't disagree that trading down helps the Pats improve their depth and is a big reason why they draft better than most teams. But last week it was the Patriots great OL that was the #1 reason behind their success. This week it's trading back in the draft. What will it be next week?

In theory, trading back is the superior strategy. But it doesn't always work in reality. It really just depends on the teams drafting and that particular draft class whether or not it works out.

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/20 ... ading.html

RobertAP wrote:
I realize that when healthy, Julio is a beast. However, he's almost never healthy.

Does Julio have durability concerns? Sure, but so do a lot of really good players. Clay Matthews, Percy Harvin, Frank Gore, John Abraham, Sean Lee, Jason Peters, and Ben Roethlisberger. But if you had the opportunity to add one of those players to your team, I'd bet you'd do it.

The issue wasn't trading up for Jones, or Baker, it was not improving the team's depth at WR or signing Baker to a long-term deal with a bunch of guaranteed money when he had done little to earn that deal.

Trading for Vick? Wow, you're diving deep with that one. Again, drafting/trading for Vick wasn't the issue. It was giving him a $130 million contract that became the issue. Just like drafting Aaron Hernandez wasn't the Patriots problem, it was giving him $40 million that became the problem.

I wouldn't do the Julio trade if I could travel back in time, but Julio has done everything necessary to try and make that trade a wash. Again, the issue wasn't trading up for Julio JOnes, it was missing on all those players in 2009 and 2010 and 2011 and 2012. If Peter Konz had turned into Alex Mack Jr., we wouldn't be looking at the Jones trade as so disastrous. If the Falcons had re-signed Dahl instead of Blalock, and made a lot of good moves since that Julio trade as opposed to the plethora of bad moves made since then, then your venom over that trade would be significantly less. The Julio trade didn't cause the Falcons to whiff on Ray Edwards, re-signing Abraham or Grimes, or keeping Jerry instead of Vance Walker. It didn't cause them to reach on Lamar Holmes or Akeem Dent. The Julio trade killed our depth, but it isn't lack of depth that is the sole problem that faces this team currently. It's not having a pass rush, subpar coaching, lacking an offensive identity, lack of defensive playmakers, bad OL, all of which are problems that are independent of the Jones trade.

Dave and Robert, you two aren't wrong in terms of the core of your idea, but your application is off.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:23 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2408
Location: Albany NY
I don't disagree that trading down helps the Pats improve their depth and is a big reason why they draft better than most teams. But last week it was the Patriots great OL that was the #1 reason behind their success. This week it's trading back in the draft. What will it be next week?

The two things that make them good go hand in hand, the reason their O-line is good is because they have so many draft picks. I'd love to see us trade back, but I know we won't.

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:19 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:02 pm
Posts: 6598
Location: Indianapolis IN
I hate to keep bringing this up but it comes back to talent evaluation. Making the right pick at the right time. If we trade back and still make bad picks it won't matter how many picks we have. You only trade down if you feel you can get your man or the players available at 6 are roughly the same talent level as in the teens. A good GM can find talent throughout the draft. Having Pioli as TD's right hand man should help finding a few gems and most of all lets get rid of this damn Falcon filter. You can't win with just choir boys and you must take chances on players.

Coaching and the right system obviously matter but by now TD should get his part done first and that is finding the right players for the team. Someone should send TD a note telling him most of Seattle's def backfield are late rounders proving gems can be found you just have to know how to evaluate.

_________________
Sometimes running the Mularkey offense makes me feel like I'm in a prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:36 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26011
Location: North Carolina
I agree with thescout, it's about hitting on the picks you do make, not whether you traded back or traded up. The Patriots OL is good because when they pull the trigger on a high-round OL, he usually turns into a good player. Under Belichick, Patriots have used 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks on the following OL:

1 - Logan Mankins (2005) - 130 starts in 9 seasons (6 Pro Bowls)
1 - Nate Solder (2011) - 44 starts in 3 seasons
2 - Adrian Klemm (2000) - 10 starts in 4 seasons
2 - Matt LIght (2001) - 153 starts in 11 seasons (3 Pro Bowls)
2 - Sebastian Vollmer (2009) - 52 starts in 5 seasons
3 - Nick Kaczur (2005) - 62 starts in 5 seasons

Compare that to the Falcons over the same span:

1 - Sam Baker (2008) - 61 starts in 6 seasons
2 - Travis Claridge (2000) - 49 starts in 4 seasons
2 - Justin Blalock (2007) - 110 starts in 7 seasons
2 - Peter Konz (2012) - 25 starts in 2 seasons
3 - Mike Johnson (2010) - 1 start in 3 seasons
3 - Lamar Holmes (2012) - 15 starts in 2 seasons

The Patrtiots have drafted 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 other guys (Vollmer & Solder) that are two of the better players at their respective position. The only O-lineman you could say the Falcons have drafted over the past 13 years that is above average is Blalock.

The Patriots basically drafted 4 guys out of 6 that deserved a 2nd contract with the team, while the Falcons only drafted 1 out of 6.

The bottom line is just to draft well, regardless of whether you trade up or down. If you trade up and lose picks, but still manage to find quality players, then it's only a minor issue. If you trade down and add picks but don't draft quality players, then the large number of picks doesn't matter.

In fact there is strong evidence that suggests having 10 or more picks in a particular draft doesn't give you a significant advantage in terms of finding quality than a team that just picks 6 or 7 times.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:10 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
Pudge wrote:
Does Julio have durability concerns? Sure, but so do a lot of really good players. Clay Matthews, Percy Harvin, Frank Gore, John Abraham, Sean Lee, Jason Peters, and Ben Roethlisberger. But if you had the opportunity to add one of those players to your team, I'd bet you'd do it.


You could add Megatron to that list as well. He hasn't missed a significant stretch but he gets banged up every year.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:20 am 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:23 pm
Posts: 278
I think you guys are forgetting that it takes two to tango. There has to be a team that wants to trade up before you can trade back. Hopefully a QB needy team (Minn) wants to move up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khalil Mack > Anthony Barr
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2014 3:16 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26011
Location: North Carolina
The value of all the picks in the Top 10 or so will be determined by the QBs. They're the only reason to trade up, besides Clowney. But it's no secret that Clowney is a revered prospect, and thus that isn't going to really affect things over the next 3 months. It's really about whether teams fall in love with guys like Bridgewater, Manziel, and Bortles and teams like Cleveland, Oakland, Minnesota feel like they gotta have one of them.

Because of that, teams like St. Louis and Jacksonville are sitting pretty at 2 and 3 because it's likely that one of those QBs and/or Clowney will be there for the taking.

IMO, the chances of the Falcons being able to trade back is based on one of those QBs being there, and someone trying to jump ahead of TB at 7 or MIN at 8 to take him. But who that is, I have no clue because once you get past MIN, who else is gonna take a QB?

Maybe there's an off-chance that someone really falls in love with Sammy Watkins and if he's there, but I doubt it. It's a deep WR group, and thus I doubt teams will be giving up picks to get a guy that high when they can get a pretty good player at the end of Round 1 or in Round 2 more than likely.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to: