Leighton Vander Esch vs. Brian Urlacher vs. Karlos Dansby.

[Dantés]

Here's why Roquan Smith is the perfect linebacker for today's NFL:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/ne...ocial&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=nfl

Great article. Thanks for posting.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

Great article. Thanks for posting.

They need to work on fact-checking their own work. "His overall PFF grade was 90.8 and critically his coverage grade was 90.6. There are three other linebackers with a chance to go in the first round in April (Leighton Vander Esch, Tremaine Edmunds and Rashaan Evans), and neither of those three can better 85.2 in PFF coverage grade this past year." In the article I posted about LVE he's graded with a 85.7 in coverage. It's not a huge deal, but for a stats site, they should research their own articles lol

 

[Dantés]

I continue to be really torn on what I would do if asked to pick between Roquan Smith and Harold Landry (which is silly, because I have no control but c'est la football).

Landry has a big advantage in positional value. The Packers need to find a future replacement for Matthews, should not count on Biegel being it. Edge rushers are premium players to begin with, and Landry is the best pure edge rusher in this class. Had it not been for an ankle injury, he would likely not be in play for the Packers at #14. Smart teams invest premium picks in premium positions (QB, ED, OT, CB). Landry's athletic profile makes him a really low risk player.

Smith has a big advantage in how much I want the Packers to draft him. If Jones is replacing Burnett at the SS, they need a WILL linebacker. They also lack a leader in the middle of the defense. Smith, by all accounts, has the ability, intelligence, and drive to be a tone-setter and leader on defense. He's also a missile with coverage skills. Positional value aside, he's a better and safer prospect than Landry. Pettine has also traditionally used the heck out of his off-ball linebackers in a variety of roles.

For example, here are David Harris' four seasons under Pettine:

2009: 127 tackles, 5.5 sacks, 3 PBU, 2 INT
2010: 99 tackles, 3 sacks, 3 PBU, 0 INT
2011: 86 tackles, 5 sacks, 8 PBU, 4 INT
2012: 123 tackles, 3 sacks, 3 PBU, 0 INT

Pettine was also Kiko Alonso's DC his rookie year when he exploded onto the scene with 159 tackles, 2 sacks, 4 PBU, and 4 INT.

Karlos Dansby had a pretty nice late career surge under Pettine as well.

Pettine's pattern suggests that he likes to feature a linebacker and asks a lot of that player as a run defender, pass rusher, and coverage player. If that's what he wants to make the whole thing go, it would be hard to find a better option than Smith.

 

[jetfixer]

I believe Evans from Bama will go before LVE , but I like all these guys and would be happy if the Pack got one of these guys in the 1st or second.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I believe Evans from Bama will go before LVE , but I like all these guys and would be happy if the Pack got one of these guys in the 1st or second.

Evans needs to improve in coverage and therefore isn't a perfect fit for the Packers.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

I continue to be really torn on what I would do if asked to pick between Roquan Smith and Harold Landry (which is silly, because I have no control but c'est la football).

Landry has a big advantage in positional value. The Packers need to find a future replacement for Matthews, should not count on Biegel being it. Edge rushers are premium players to begin with, and Landry is the best pure edge rusher in this class. Had it not been for an ankle injury, he would likely not be in play for the Packers at #14. Smart teams invest premium picks in premium positions (QB, ED, OT, CB). Landry's athletic profile makes him a really low risk player.

Smith has a big advantage in how much I want the Packers to draft him. If Jones is replacing Burnett at the SS, they need a WILL linebacker. They also lack a leader in the middle of the defense. Smith, by all accounts, has the ability, intelligence, and drive to be a tone-setter and leader on defense. He's also a missile with coverage skills. Positional value aside, he's a better and safer prospect than Landry. Pettine has also traditionally used the heck out of his off-ball linebackers in a variety of roles.

For example, here are David Harris' four seasons under Pettine:

2009: 127 tackles, 5.5 sacks, 3 PBU, 2 INT
2010: 99 tackles, 3 sacks, 3 PBU, 0 INT
2011: 86 tackles, 5 sacks, 8 PBU, 4 INT
2012: 123 tackles, 3 sacks, 3 PBU, 0 INT

Pettine was also Kiko Alonso's DC his rookie year when he exploded onto the scene with 159 tackles, 2 sacks, 4 PBU, and 4 INT.

Karlos Dansby had a pretty nice late career surge under Pettine as well.

Pettine's pattern suggests that he likes to feature a linebacker and asks a lot of that player as a run defender, pass rusher, and coverage player. If that's what he wants to make the whole thing go, it would be hard to find a better option than Smith.

That's what I noticed in regard to Pettine's defense, he focuses on a strong defensive line and a quarterback in the middle. The more I look at the depth at linebacker, there's not a ton of WLB talent and you made an excellent point in regards to losing Burnett. I would have to assume if Roquan is there at #14, there's no way we pass him up after losing Burnett, unless maybe Derwin falls to us. I know I need to get over it, but I still can't believe we passed on Lawson. If we grabbed him last year, we wouldn't really be having this conversation.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I know I need to get over it, but I still can't believe we passed on Lawson. If we grabbed him last year, we wouldn't really be having this conversation.

Lawson is an edge rusher though.

 

[Dantés]

Lawson is an edge rusher though.

I think he means that if we drafted Lawson we wouldn't need to debate over drafting an edge instead of Smith.

 

[Dantés]

If we do take Landry at #14, give me Fred Warner later.

 

[GleefulGary]

If we do take Landry at #14, give me Fred Warner later.

Our brains are one.

 

[Dantés]

Our brains are one.

You told me to like Warner. I simply obeyed.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

I think he means that if we drafted Lawson we wouldn't need to debate over drafting an edge instead of Smith.

Exactly, sorry I wasn't clear.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

If we do take Landry at #14, give me Fred Warner later.

Warner would be an pretty good add if we went with an edge. How do you feel about Jerome Baker?

 

[Dantés]

Warner would be an pretty good add if we went with an edge. How do you feel about Jerome Baker?

Also hyper athletic for the position. Seems to be more of a finesse player than Warner.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

Also hyper athletic for the position. Seems to be more of a finesse player than Warner.

Ya, I didn't watch too many Ohio State games, but from the draft profile I just read, it seems you're right. People are saying he lacks toughness and that's not exactly a trait you want to lack as a linebacker lol. I'll have to put on some tape of his and see what's up.

 

[OldSchool101]

Here's why Roquan Smith is the perfect linebacker for today's NFL:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/ne...ocial&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=nfl

Good article thanks. I’m also high on a faster version at LB. Clay brought that speed to the middle mid-season a fewvyears ago and it allowed us to get the best available talent on the field, with Perry and Peppers manning the perimeter our D instantly got better.
The article mentions Roquon running a 4.51 at 6’1” 236lbs being impressive (and it is)
How about a 4.53 sec 40yrd at 6’5 253lbs!
Tremaine Edmunds is another physical monster.

For the record I’d be happy with either Roquon or Tremaine or at least a S who can play some slot Corner. I still think there is a legit shot at trading up into early round 2 and that would be more Vander-esch-ish.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Good article. I’m also high on a faster version. Clay brought that speed to the middle mid-season and it allowed us to get the best available talent on the field, with Perry and Peppers manning the perimeter our D instantly got better.
I will add that though that the article mentions a 4.51 at 6’1” 236lbs being impressive (and it is)
How about a 4.53 sec 40yrd at 6’5 253lbs!
Tremaine Edmunds would give us both size and speed.

While it's possible Edmunds ends up being the better player down the road he's very raw at this point with Smith being more ready to contribute immediately at the pro level.

 

[OldSchool101]

While it's possible Edmunds ends up being the better player down the road he's very raw at this point with Smith being more ready to contribute immediately at the pro level.

I agree. But we both know that from all accounts of Edmunds, he has a higher ceiling during the next 5 years. They’re both gonna be factors early in their careers.

 

[brandon2348]

No. LVE isnt gonna be the next Urlacher. Not nearly as instinctive. Give me Smith all day long. As long as we could keep Smith somewhat clean he is gonna be a beast. Plus Smith can stay on the field all 3 downs which is huge.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

No. LVE isnt gonna be the next Urlacher. Not nearly as instinctive. Give me Smith all day long. As long as we could keep Smith somewhat clean he is gonna be a beast. Plus Smith can stay on the field all 3 downs which is huge.

You know what's funny, when people speak in absolutes. He might not be the next Urlacher, but he hasn't even played a down in the NFL. For all we know, after his career is done, he could be the greatest linebacker to play the game. And no, I'm not saying he will, but I hate when people speak in absolutes. Also, LVE can stay on the field all three downs as well.

 

[jetfixer]

You know what's funny, when people speak in absolutes. He might not be the next Urlacher, but he hasn't even played a down in the NFL. For all we know, after his career is done, he could be the greatest linebacker to play the game. And no, I'm not saying he will, but I hate when people speak in absolutes. Also, LVE can stay on the field all three downs as well.

I like him too, but we can’t even say he can play all three down at this point either.
I like Edmunds but saw a breakdown on him showing how he commits way too early on many plays.
Smith appears to me to be the most ready next year. I like them all.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree. But we both know that from all accounts of Edmunds, he has a higher ceiling during the next 5 years. They’re both gonna be factors early in their careers.

I agree that Edmunds has a higher ceiling but there aren't any guarantees he will perform up to his potential during his career.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

I like him too, but we can’t even say he can play all three down at this point either.
I like Edmunds but saw a breakdown on him showing how he commits way too early on many plays.
Smith appears to me to be the most ready next year. I like them all.

He was on the field in coverage while at Boise. He had an 85.7 coverage grade by pff. I’ve watched tape(more than just the Oregon game) he can definitely cover and did so fairly well. His 40 and 3-cone are great and he gets compared to Dansby a lot. I think we can say he can be on the field all three downs. However, you usually work rookies into that role anyway.

 

[gopkrs]

Well assuming the first two inside linebackers will be gone; how come the monster from Alabama doesn't get any recognition. Sounds like he could be an enforcer.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well assuming the first two inside linebackers will be gone; how come the monster from Alabama doesn't get any recognition. Sounds like he could be an enforcer.

Evans most likely doesn't get a lot of attention as he isn't considered to be a first round talent. In addition he's not a perfect fit for the Packers as he needs improvement in coverage entering the draft.