McNair: "In the draft, we’ll be looking at linebackers"

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Keith

Would it kill anyone at Reliant Park to just mention that maybe the team could use a situational RDE?

I'm still of the opinion that the Texans could go first round on such a player, though unlikely to be at 15. I sure dunno, but Kollar may think Schobel when he sees Barwin or Maybin and say he's gotta have the guy to make his defense really effective ? And we know Antonio Smith isn't that guy, as reports are he won't even be on the edge in passing situations.
Lack of mention by the Texans of still needing such a player is starting to get obvious ?

[Bigtinylittle]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I'm still of the opinion that the Texans could go first round on such a player, though unlikely to be at 15. I sure dunno, but Kollar may think Schobel when he sees Barwin or Maybin and say he's gotta have the guy to make his defense really effective ? And we know Antonio Smith isn't that guy, as reports are he won't even be on the edge in passing situations.
Lack of mention by the Texans of still needing such a player is starting to get obvious ?

Well I'm pretty sure they won't spend a first rounder on a situational player. Probably not a second either. And I just don't think they gave Smith big bucks just to sit him on the bench.

What I CAN see them doing, though, is getting a first round linebacker to use at DE in passing situations and use him at linebacker the rest of the time. What worries me is I'm doubting there's a linebacker in the middle or late first round who is a sure bet to excell at that combination. Actually, the farther back the Texans can trade in the first round, the more comfortable I will be with this draft. I wouldn't even mind seeing them give up their first round altogether for some lower picks.

[painekiller]

Like bigtinylittle, I do not see the team going for a part time guy on day one. And the items that McNair mentioned are pretty obvious to the league and the lay man.

This team has not had an above average LB group since they switched to the 4-3. One LB does not make a group. So in a year with plenty of LB to draft, go draft a couple.

To the guys who say well we have Adibi and Diles. I say Adibi is undersized and could not stay healthy, as for Diles he is coming off injury.

And with the pounding the LBs take having extra talent available is a always a good idea. Plus this team sucks against the run, look at the teams solid against the run and they have solid LBs corps.


To the RDE, I would have moved Mario to LDE and found a specialist, like Keith and nunusguy suggested, but this staff went out and found another LDE, leaving Mario out of position still. So now you are spending the big bucks on two LDE, imagine what kind of year would Mario would have at LDE?

[Keith]

1. Misdirection. I'm not asking for a lot, but with the DEs that could be available in the first round, even if the Texans aren't interested, why can't they at least 'admire' them?

2. Yes, I know they spent millions signing Smith this offseason, but I see him moving inside on passing downs with Mario shifting to LDE. Leaves open a big need for a situational pass rusher.

While a situational RDE is not a full-time starter, I think the right player added there could have a huge impact, and "impact" is the key word being tossed around here by McNair and Kubiak.

Generally speaking, sack artists are more desirable in the first round than outside LBs, where even really good ones somehow seem to slip to the second and third rounds.

[jppaul]

Here's the thing Keith, it just might be misdirection in a sense. We probably are going after a LB, but we could also be looking at some of the other higher rated players that likely won't be available at 15.

Now if teams traded in front of us to take Cushing and Matthews, this forces to prospects down that wouldn't be there if the LBs weren't taken. For instance, lets suppose that a team in front of us was looking at Jenkins and a team behind us jumped up the other teams spot to grab Cushing or Matthews because they know we will take one of those.

Then as a result, Jenkins is still on the board then we would take Jenkins. It is in essence a ploy for forcing a player down the board who likely wouldn't have been there for our pick. Its a numbers game. Below is an illustrative example:

Taken from ESPN Player Rankings (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft)

1 Aaron Curry
2 Michael Crabtree
3 Jason Smith
4 Eugene Monroe
5 Brian Orakpo
6 B.J. Raji
7 Matthew Stafford
8 Mark Sanchez
9 Jeremy Maclin
10 Aaron Maybin
11 Andre Smith
12 Brandon Pettigrew
13 Malcolm Jenkins
14 Knowshon Moreno
15 Tyson Jackson

Now suppose that Cushing and Matthews are both drafted ahead of us ahead of the 13 spot. This would essentially force Jenkins down to us. Then the draft would look like this.

1 Aaron Curry
2 Michael Crabtree
3 Jason Smith
4 Eugene Monroe
5 Brian Orakpo
6 B.J. Raji
7 Matthew Stafford
8 Mark Sanchez
9 Jeremy Maclin
10 Aaron Maybin
11 Andre Smith
12 Brandon Pettigrew
13 Clay Matthews
14.Brian Cushing
15. Malcolm Jenkins

So either way it is almost like playing with house money. They could either take the LB they are high on, or they could force a higher rated player down, but they lose nothing from admitting they are after a LB.

From McNair's comments its clear that they want a LB, but it is also clear that they are not sure they are worth the # 15 pick.

Hope that makes some sort of sense.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by jppaul

Here's the thing Keith, it just might be misdirection in a sense. We probably are going after a LB, but we could also be looking at some of the other higher rated players that likely won't be available at 15.

Now if teams traded in front of us to take Cushing and Matthews, this forces to prospects down that wouldn't be there if the LBs weren't taken. For instance, lets suppose that a team in front of us was looking at Jenkins and a team behind us jumped up the other teams spot to grab Cushing or Matthews because they know we will take one of those.

Then as a result, Jenkins is still on the board then we would take Jenkins. It is in essence a ploy for forcing a player down the board who likely wouldn't have been there for our pick.

I understand your speculated ploy, I just don't believe it. If this is how we end up drafting Jenkins though, I'll take it.

Megan Manfull of the chron was on an ESPN mock a few days ago and predictably selected Clay for the Texans. Jenkins was off the board, but she brought his name up as someone the team would be very interested in should he fall to 15. fwiw, she also mentioned Raji and Jerry, too, so whatevs.

[jppaul]

Originally Posted by Keith

I understand your speculated ploy, I just don't believe it. If this is how we end up drafting Jenkins though, I'll take it.

Megan Manfull of the chron was on an ESPN mock a few days ago and predictably selected Clay for the Texans. Jenkins was off the board, but she brought his name up as someone the team would be very interested in should he fall to 15. fwiw, she also mentioned Raji and Jerry, too, so whatevs.

I am not saying its a ploy, I am just saying that there is no harm it admitting it because it is a likely win-win either way.

[Blitzwood]

Originally Posted by Keith

1. Misdirection. I'm not asking for a lot, but with the DEs that could be available in the first round, even if the Texans aren't interested, why can't they at least 'admire' them?

2. Yes, I know they spent millions signing Smith this offseason, but I see him moving inside on passing downs with Mario shifting to LDE. Leaves open a big need for a situational pass rusher.

While a situational RDE is not a full-time starter, I think the right player added there could have a huge impact, and "impact" is the key word being tossed around here by McNair and Kubiak.

Generally speaking, sack artists are more desirable in the first round than outside LBs, where even really good ones somehow seem to slip to the second and third rounds.

What if you could get a sack artist/LB who is capable of lining up on passing downs? A player that would give your defense tremendous versatility on your D-line and the backfield, a player that can step in and play from day one and play every down. A player that will likely be there if we trade down to the early twenties.

If stopping the run is priority #1, then IMO, Connor Barwin makes alot of sense for our team. He can play either end, which would be useful when Smith moves inside, and is also fast enough to play either OLB in the pros. He can also play TE in case O. Daniels goes down. And since everyone assumes we're trading down, there is a real chance Matthews will be off the board, so I've had him stuck in my head for a few days, he seems to solve some major needs in one pick.

Granted, we should and probably will take at least another OLB to shore up the spot in a draft that is deep at the position, but most importantly, he would give us a real boost in run defense and also provide depth at the DE position. IMO, Connor Barwin could play either OLB positions but is probably best suited at the SAM. He had 8 PBU last year, to go along with 53 TT, 16 TFL and 11 SK and runs a 4.5 forty. He has a knack for getting up field and does a good job shedding blockers. I honestly feel he's a better value than Matthews in the mid-late first round simply because of his stats last year, his versitility on either side of the ball, and being slightly bigger and faster.

Here's a clip from youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u79CJdrxZbo