Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   2014 NFL Draft Forum (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Can Anthony Barr Play in a 4-3 Defense? (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57892)

holt_bruce81 12-07-2013 12:49 PM

Can Anthony Barr Play in a 4-3 Defense?
 
I know he's projected as a top 10 pick, but can he play in a 4-3 defense? I think he can, but what are your guys' thoughts? I think if Rams fans are talking Clowney (most are Clowney, Bridgewater, Matthews) then you have to put Barr in the discussion, no?

YotoJets007 12-07-2013 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holt_bruce81 (Post 3512956)
I know he's projected as a top 10 pick, but can he play in a 4-3 defense? I think he can, but what are your guys' thoughts? I think if Rams fans are talking Clowney (most are Clowney, Bridgewater, Matthews) then you have to put Barr in the discussion, no?


Yup, Fisher is no stranger to rushing LB in 4-3.

Babylon 12-07-2013 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YotoJets007 (Post 3512962)
Yup, Fisher is no stranger to rushing LB in 4-3.

Agree. My guess is he would love to recreate the mid-80s Bears defense. Ogeltree and Barr could play the part of Wilson and Marshall.

Matthew Jones 12-07-2013 01:03 PM

I think he could, although I'm not sure it's the best use of his talents.

fredder 12-07-2013 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Jones (Post 3512969)
I think he could, although I'm not sure it's the best use of his talents.

This. There's a difference between could and should.

SickwithIt1010 12-07-2013 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babylon (Post 3512966)
Agree. My guess is he would love to recreate the mid-80s Bears defense. Ogeltree and Barr could play the part of Wilson and Marshall.

You likely just play Barr like the Broncos play Miller in Denver.

Why in the world would the Rams draft Clowney with Long and Quinn??

Babylon 12-07-2013 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SickwithIt1010 (Post 3512993)
You likely just play Barr like the Broncos play Miller in Denver.

Why in the world would the Rams draft Clowney with Long and Quinn??

Von miller would be a good one to emulate.

The reference to Marshall and Wilson of the Bears was to play OLB not DE.

RaiderNation 12-07-2013 01:43 PM

I like Barr in a Von Miller type of role in a defense, and that will involve some OLB play. He's easily a top 5 talent in this draft and is a game changer on defense

Scott Wright 12-07-2013 07:19 PM

Absolutely.

DeadEagle 12-08-2013 08:47 AM

If Barr has to put his hand in the dirt, as a RDE in a 4-3, he's gonna struggle.


First off, while Barr seems to have mastered speed pass rush moves, he has yet to figure out effective counters to the OL's run blocking. He has trouble disengaging aggressive blocks..... but he seems to destroy passive blocks well with speed. He could, but has not yet. Gonna need coaching up there.

Second, against OT's with good footwork, Barr could very well get manhandled for long stretches. Since his positions change, he has not fared well against top competition at OT. Not that he's seen many either, really, outside of what Stanford has fielded. That's a concern, as he'll get a heavy dose of far superior, and far more technically sound OT's than he's ever played against in the NFL.



As a rushing OLB, that's his niche. He can be put in better position to succeed in that role, and that's what it should be. Not as a 4-3 RDE.

bigbuc 12-08-2013 09:01 PM

If the Rams drafted Barr... WOW. That would be really amazing to see. Ogeltree and Barr with Long and Quinn right in front of them would make QB's stay up at night.

Babylon 01-02-2014 04:38 PM

Maybe it's just me but Barr takes an awful lot of plays off. Something there doesn't seem right but no doubt someone will pull the trigger early.

princefielder28 01-02-2014 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babylon (Post 3533727)
Maybe it's just me but Barr takes an awful lot of plays off. Something there doesn't seem right but no doubt someone will pull the trigger early.

I get an Aaron Maybin type vibe when I watch him.

Unbiased 01-02-2014 07:45 PM

Yes, especially the Gus Bradley 4-3 as a LEO.

RCAChainGang 01-02-2014 09:54 PM

He definitely could but I don't know if you can justify a top ten pick on that position. I think the reason he would go so high is because some 3-4 team needs the edge rush.

Robcards 01-03-2014 11:25 AM

I think he'd be a better fit in a 4-3 than Dion Jordan was, for what that's worth.

bigbluedefense 01-03-2014 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SickwithIt1010 (Post 3512993)
You likely just play Barr like the Broncos play Miller in Denver.

Why in the world would the Rams draft Clowney with Long and Quinn??

Why not? Long will come off contract by the time Clowney is due for a new contract.

In the meantime, having 3 stud pass rushers was never a bad thing. Plus Long can easily kick inside in the nickel, as can Clowney.

I liken this scenario to the Lions with Calvin Johnson. At the time they had 2 WRs so why take Calvin? Bc you don't pass on elite once in a generation talent just bc you have a player who already plays his position. And it wound up being the right call.

DE is a position that rotates anyway. There's no reason to pass on Clowney just bc you have Quinn and Long. The more rushers you have the better.

If I'm St. Louis, I absolutely take Clowney over Barr. Why would you take Barr anyway? They're essentially playing the same position of rusher for you. They both will be used in a similar way. Why not get the better player?

If I'm the Rams, I either stay home and draft Clowney, which I think they should, or move out of the pick and draft Samy Watkins, even though I'm not sold yet on Watkins. They need a WR.

Or get a qb bc I'm not a believer in Bradford anymore.

Nastradamus 01-03-2014 11:58 AM

Same for Khalil Mack

Nastradamus 01-03-2014 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 3534362)
Why not? Long will come off contract by the time Clowney is due for a new contract.

In the meantime, having 3 stud pass rushers was never a bad thing. Plus Long can easily kick inside in the nickel, as can Clowney.

I liken this scenario to the Lions with Calvin Johnson. At the time they had 2 WRs so why take Calvin? Bc you don't pass on elite once in a generation talent just bc you have a player who already plays his position. And it wound up being the right call.

DE is a position that rotates anyway. There's no reason to pass on Clowney just bc you have Quinn and Long. The more rushers you have the better.

If I'm St. Louis, I absolutely take Clowney over Barr. Why would you take Barr anyway? They're essentially playing the same position of rusher for you. They both will be used in a similar way. Why not get the better player?

If I'm the Rams, I either stay home and draft Clowney, which I think they should, or move out of the pick and draft Samy Watkins, even though I'm not sold yet on Watkins. They need a WR.

Or get a qb bc I'm not a believer in Bradford anymore.

A lot of this depends on how closely you have Matthews and Clowney rated I think. Long just tore up his knee and Saffold is a free agent. You have to protect Bradford if you are going to roll with him.

Iamcanadian 01-03-2014 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 3534362)
Why not? Long will come off contract by the time Clowney is due for a new contract.

In the meantime, having 3 stud pass rushers was never a bad thing. Plus Long can easily kick inside in the nickel, as can Clowney.

I liken this scenario to the Lions with Calvin Johnson. At the time they had 2 WRs so why take Calvin? Bc you don't pass on elite once in a generation talent just bc you have a player who already plays his position. And it wound up being the right call.

DE is a position that rotates anyway. There's no reason to pass on Clowney just bc you have Quinn and Long. The more rushers you have the better.

If I'm St. Louis, I absolutely take Clowney over Barr. Why would you take Barr anyway? They're essentially playing the same position of rusher for you. They both will be used in a similar way. Why not get the better player?

If I'm the Rams, I either stay home and draft Clowney, which I think they should, or move out of the pick and draft Samy Watkins, even though I'm not sold yet on Watkins. They need a WR.

Or get a qb bc I'm not a believer in Bradford anymore.

I got to admit that it is certainly the Giant's philosophy at the draft table but I strongly suspect, they'll draft Matthews to fill the LT position and protect their injury prone QB. All the defense in the world won't mean squat if they cannot keep Bradford healthy.

bigbluedefense 01-03-2014 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iamcanadian (Post 3534375)
I got to admit that it is certainly the Giant's philosophy at the draft table but I strongly suspect, they'll draft Matthews to fill the LT position and protect their injury prone QB. All the defense in the world won't mean squat if they cannot keep Bradford healthy.

I just hate the idea of passing on an elite talent to take the safe OT. I absolutely hate it.

Personal preference of mine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nastradamus (Post 3534371)
A lot of this depends on how closely you have Matthews and Clowney rated I think. Long just tore up his knee and Saffold is a free agent. You have to protect Bradford if you are going to roll with him.

I like Matthews quite a bit, but OT for the most part is an overrated position. If you re-sign Saffold and you have money committed to Long, you don't bring in Jake.

Hell, even if you don't bring Saffold back, you're seriously going to take a RT #2 overall over a once in a generation DE prospect?

Bradford can have all the protection in the world and he'll still suck. I rather upgrade my pass rush honestly.

I can take an OT in the 2nd round if I need to.

gpngc 01-03-2014 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 3534362)
Why not? Long will come off contract by the time Clowney is due for a new contract.

In the meantime, having 3 stud pass rushers was never a bad thing. Plus Long can easily kick inside in the nickel, as can Clowney.

I liken this scenario to the Lions with Calvin Johnson. At the time they had 2 WRs so why take Calvin? Bc you don't pass on elite once in a generation talent just bc you have a player who already plays his position. And it wound up being the right call.

DE is a position that rotates anyway. There's no reason to pass on Clowney just bc you have Quinn and Long. The more rushers you have the better.

If I'm St. Louis, I absolutely take Clowney over Barr. Why would you take Barr anyway? They're essentially playing the same position of rusher for you. They both will be used in a similar way. Why not get the better player?

If I'm the Rams, I either stay home and draft Clowney, which I think they should, or move out of the pick and draft Samy Watkins, even though I'm not sold yet on Watkins. They need a WR.

Or get a qb bc I'm not a believer in Bradford anymore.

I don't have a stance yet on this idea, but just to play devil's advocate for the sake of the discussion.

You can't really compare it to the Lions at all. The Lions had Roy Williams and Bryant Johnson as their starting WRs. Calvin was an obvious upgrade who would start as a rookie. Big Mike Williams was traded on draft day and Charles Rogers was long gone.

A better comparison would be the Giants with JPP. They had two DEs and knew he wouldn't start.

Obviously the differences are big though:

1) This is the 2nd overall pick as opposed to 16 and the player is pro ready, not raw like JPP.
2) The two DEs are all-pro caliber players in their primes and play every snap - the Giants pass rushers were older/not as good.

No one batted an eye when the Giants used the very raw JPP's rookie season to develop him. They didn't need him to start right away or even contribute and there was no pressure to play him or see immediate dividends because he WAS raw and he was only the 16th pick. Not the 2nd and a huge name ready right now to not only start, but be one of the best at his position.

So what's the plan for Clowney then? It's tough. All three can't be on the field at the same time besides sub packages (unless you change Long's position or something). And even in sub packages, you may not be using whoever's inside in their best spot, not maximizing their abilities.

But it is a good problem to have, I guess. And in the NFL, quality depth is paramount. Plus, long term, with injuries, contracts, etc., you never know what can happen to your roster. Not to mention, Clowney might just be an upgrade over Long. Unpopular, but it might be true. Maybe they can trade Long. Then there's the idea that Clowney won't be playing RE because Quinn is one of the best players in football. It's a complex situation.

I'm usually in favor of drafting the highest rated player regardless of position. I also agree with the idea that you can never have too many pass rushers.

But I see the other side of the argument too.

And all of this is predicated on Clowney passing the character/entourage/intangibles test, obviously. If he doesn't convince me without a doubt that he truly loves football after what's transpired, there's no way I'm taking him at No. 2.

mightytitan9 01-03-2014 01:49 PM

I could go back and forth on this all day. For one, I think Jake Matthews could be the best LT in the NFL in 5 years, I have him as one of my highest rated LTs ever.

Jake Long is injured, and I have a hard time seeing him being able to play until October.

That leaves the Rams a few options in my eyes.
1) needing to address the contract situation of Rodger Saffold. I don't see them forking over the $6m+/yr to retain his services.
2) Drafting an OT that can start at either LT or RT as a rookie.

The Rams currently hold the #2 pick, along with the #13 selection. To me, the most practical thing would be to select DE Jadaveon Clowney and an OT like Cameron Erving, Taylor Lewan, or Cyrus Kouandjio at the 13th selection.

From a financial perspective last years #2 selection received a 4 year 21.2m contract. By comparison, the Rams current #3 DE gets paid 3.4m a year. To get a DE the caliber of what I think Clowney is in right now would cost over the 5m he's due on average. In the next few years he'd be a steal in his rookie deal. It's quite a savings to get Clowney at 5m yr.

In addition, I know many aren't thinking this way, but Chris Long has already agreed to a contract thru 2016. Robert Quinn on the other hand, is entering his last year in his rookie contract. If the Rams select Jadaveon Clowney, they can use the 2014 as an audition on if Clowney can handle the load himself. If he can, the Rams can franchise and trade Quinn, likely resulting in a Jared Allen-type trade (1first rounder, 2 3rd rounders).

The Rams likely can't afford to retain Quinn with the contract already given to Long on the opposite side, drafting Clowney and getting him at 5m a year and trading Quinn would be the best case scenario for the Rams.

There is no pass rusher that is going to be available later in the draft that are even close to Clowney.

gpngc 01-03-2014 02:52 PM

Or they could shop Long. It's a long shot, but it might be the best move. But even with that, Clowney's playing LE - not RE. Might be fine but you have to check with him.

If Jake Long doesn't come back until October, that means you spend a No. 2 pick on a guy for a couple games at LT and the rest at RT. The Chiefs and Jags did that last year, but that was in a draft class without premier talents at the top. Given this class, I don't think that would be the wisest move. Unless they are down on Long's ability to recover and can void his contract without a negative financial impact.

It's a very interesting situation especially considering how many teams would want to move up to No. 2 and the fact that they have another pick in the top 15.

mightytitan9 01-03-2014 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc (Post 3534529)
Or they could shop Long. It's a long shot, but it might be the best move. But even with that, Clowney's playing LE - not RE. Might be fine but you have to check with him.

If Jake Long doesn't come back until October, that means you spend a No. 2 pick on a guy for a couple games at LT and the rest at RT. The Chiefs and Jags did that last year, but that was in a draft class without premier talents at the top. Given this class, I don't think that would be the wisest move. Unless they are down on Long's ability to recover and can void his contract without a negative financial impact.

It's a very interesting situation especially considering how many teams would want to move up to No. 2 and the fact that they have another pick in the top 15.

I don't think Long warrants the trade ability that Quinn does. They can't really trade him until after the 2014 season (which again I think would be best because they see what Clowney can do for a year). After that if I am reading the numbers right he'd account for only $3m in dead money, BUT he'll be turning 30. So Idk how to predict the value of him.

As for the tackle situation, the good would be that you have a guy to cover LT if Long takes longer than expected, or if injuries continue for him. It'd be nice to have a guy there because I think Long is due to miss games every year, it's just what he is IMO.

Still, with that being said, I couldn't pass on Clowney. I'd take Clowney, then go grab the best tackle available.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.