Quote:I hear Pasztor can play multiple positions, and they could switch him inside. I don't know. But I do know that OTs are a hot commodity. And it seems near impossible these days to have a healty line the entire year (that's like 5 injury free seasons at once). If they are really building a deep roster, a "solid" player like Pasztor would be a backup at tackle.
Trading back changes everything. Then Mack is back in play for me. But Mack at 3 to me means this guy is Von Miller. And I'm expecting no less than Von Miller. I don't want to hear "OH, he's doing so much more than the stat line suggests!!" NOPE. I want 30 sacks in the first 2 years. No less.
If we draft Matthews/Robinson then, I expect him to give up 0 sacks for 3 years. No more.
on a scale of 1 to 10. About a 66
Quote:Mack's job won't likely be strictly to get after the passer either, he is going to be an every down player that will never be a liability out there in coverage and provide a very good pass rush.
But you just described a base hit right there. Yawn. This guy can be found anywhere in the 1st round. A linebacker, not a pass rusher. I still can't wrap my mind around it. Why go non premium position when you are at a position to pick premium. Theres 32 teams and you're #3. That's not going to happen very often. I understand BAP plays in, but it just seems so wrong.
Quote:If we draft Matthews/Robinson then, I expect him to give up 0 sacks for 3 years. No more.
Just to clarify. Von Miller actually did have 30 sacks in his first 2 years. Is there another OT that fits your description? If so, yea, I want them to be that good.
Quote:But you just described a base hit right there. Yawn. This guy can be found anywhere in the 1st round. A linebacker, not a pass rusher. I still can't wrap my mind around it. Why go non premium position when you are at a position to pick premium. Theres 32 teams and you're #3. That's not going to happen very often. I understand BAP plays in, but it just seems so wrong.
That's because if you use him strictly as a pass rusher/leo you limit his full capabilities, and that is that he isn't just a one trick pony, he does everything you could ask. Just because he isn't playing LEO every single down doesn't mean his responsibility on every pass rush situation won't be to get after the QB.
Quote:Just to clarify. Von Miller actually did have 30 sacks in his first 2 years. Is there another OT that fits your description? If so, yea, I want them to be that good.
Like I said, Von Miller was a freak of nature that you don't see very often. Mack could too, but I doubt Broncos fans nor any single person in the Broncos FO for him to get that many in a 2 year span.
30 sacks in 2 years is tough as is, to expect that from a guy just coming into the league as one of those 2 years? Yeah, that's ridiculous.
Quote:Like I said, Von Miller was a freak of nature that you don't see very often. Mack could too, but I doubt Broncos fans nor any single person in the Broncos FO for him to get that many in a 2 year span.
30 sacks in 2 years is tough as is, to expect that from a guy just coming into the league as one of those 2 years? Yeah, that's ridiculous.
I gotta be ridiculous then. Because Von Miller is the only LB selected in the top 5 of the modern NFL that was anywhere near worth the selection (especially when you look at all the LBs taken AFTER the top 5).
Quote:Just to clarify. Von Miller actually did have 30 sacks in his first 2 years. Is there another OT that fits your description? If so, yea, I want them to be that good.
Von Miller had a better supporting cast than Mack will have coming in. Even 20 sacks would be incredible.
Quote:I gotta be ridiculous then. Because Von Miller is the only LB selected in the top 5 of the modern NFL that was anywhere near worth the selection (especially when you look at all the LBs taken AFTER the top 5).
And no team in 3 decades has taken tackles in back to back years in the Top 5.
Quote:I gotta be ridiculous then. Because Von Miller is the only LB selected in the top 5 of the modern NFL that was anywhere near worth the selection (especially when you look at all the LBs taken AFTER the top 5).
Luckily, it's YOU that has to be ridiculous, because I can guaruntee you when Mack gets taken that team thats taking him will not expect 30 sacks in a players first 2 seasons. Not one.
Quote:Von Miller had a better supporting cast than Mack will have coming in. Even 20 sacks would be incredible.
Seriously, if they can't score points and get a lead every now and then, the sack game will be rough regardless. But man, top 3 pick?? I gotta have them sacks. or give me a pro bowl, DROY, anything, something. Nobody's trying to hear "oh, no he's better than you think he is. he's underrated. he's unappreciated." YOU PICKED HIM AT 3 OVERALL!!! AND HE'S A LINEBACKER!!!!!
Quote:And no team in 3 decades has taken tackles in back to back years in the Top 5.
Interesting.
Quote:Luckily, it's YOU that has to be ridiculous, because I can guaruntee you when Mack gets taken that team thats taking him will not expect 30 sacks in a players first 2 seasons. Not one.
I will go Freddy Krueger and haunt his dreams if he gets behind my sack quota.
Quote:Seriously, if they can't score points and get a lead every now and then, the sack game will be rough regardless. But man, top 3 pick?? I gotta have them sacks. or give me a pro bowl, DROY, anything, something. Nobody's trying to hear "oh, no he's better than you think he is. he's underrated. he's unappreciated." YOU PICKED HIM AT 3 OVERALL!!! AND HE'S A LINEBACKER!!!!!
Interesting.
How do you know anyone would say that? I'm pretty sure Mack would be a pretty well known commodity and a guy teams talk about as a guy they have to gameplan for. That's why you take him at 3. He brings a great pass rush, good in coverage, and no liabilities anywhere. I find it funny that it seems like if he was strictly a pass rusher, he would hold more value to you, but since he does other things well he is a reach at 3.
Quote:Seriously, if they can't score points and get a lead every now and then, the sack game will be rough regardless. But man, top 3 pick?? I gotta have them sacks. or give me a pro bowl, DROY, anything, something. Nobody's trying to hear "oh, no he's better than you think he is. he's underrated. he's unappreciated." YOU PICKED HIM AT 3 OVERALL!!! AND HE'S A LINEBACKER!!!!!
That's why I'd prefer to trade down, but if you can't -- you can't. I don't think anyone after Clowney will necessarily be Top 3 talent. Maybe Watkins -- but this is a deep draft at WR. But trading down doesn't seem likely to happen.
Two tackles in the Top 5 in back to back years... when we're desperate for a playmaker. He better be the next coming of Tony Boselli, with a much longer career if we take a tackle there. And Pazstor better be a starting-caliber guard.
Quote:I find it funny that it seems like if he was strictly a pass rusher, he would hold more value to you, but since he does other things well he is a reach at 3.
That's not correct. In fact, I think the guy is overqualified for the LEO position if anything. Like I said, I think both LEO and LB could be found later in the round. People's main argument about taking a LB in the top 5, was "no, but he's a LEO. He's a pass rusher." as their argument as to why you would take a LB in the top five, despite the lessons that history tells. One of the whole points of the Seattle defense, unless I'm wrong, is to generate a 4-3 pass rush without having to have a typical monster stud 4-3 DE which would take a top 5 pick and years of waiting to find. (which at 250 Mack isn't even close to) Seattle cracked the code. And Jacksonville is basing their defense off of that. So why spend a top 5 pick on something you shouldn't have to spend it on.
Quote:That's not correct. In fact, I think the guy is overqualified for the LEO position if anything. Like I said, I think both LEO and LB could be found later in the round. People's main argument about taking a LB in the top 5, was "no, but he's a LEO. He's a pass rusher." as their argument as to why you would take a LB in the top five, despite the lessons that history tells. One of the whole points of the Seattle defense, unless I'm wrong, is to generate a 4-3 pass rush without having to have a typical monster stud 4-3 DE which would take a top 5 pick and years of waiting to find. (which at 250 Mack isn't even close to) Seattle cracked the code. And Jacksonville is basing their defense off of that. So why spend a top 5 pick on something you shouldn't have to spend it on.
Even though Gus said Mack would be a LEO canidate I would guess he is more like a Bruce Irvin plus type LEO. The majority of the time hes not gonna have his hand in the ground, but he is still a pass rusher you must game plan for. Having that flexability of him doing many things, while also being a high quality pass rusher, warrants him for a top 5 pick for any team IMO.
I am way more excited than I should be. Intellectually, I know that a random one third of the guys drafted in the first round will be busts or near busts, but I still agonize over things like Sammy Watkins vs Khalil Mack vs Johnny Football. I can't stop. If you look at the history of the draft, all this analysis means nothing. But I still love it.
![[Image: itsover9000.jpg]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/--A1IRTYHQj4/U2GIbP4BkpI/AAAAAAAAAYI/PN0rk_qBoiE/itsover9000.jpg)