Worse than Wimbley

sisky fringo

\ said:
Welcome to the new board, sisky.
\ said:
i foresee them experimenting w/ alex on the right in the very near future.
Hall did play some ROLB in the preseason. However, I think he'll stick on the left side for the rest of the season. With Willie being older & Wimbley struggling, it's probably not the best time to start playing musical chairs with our LB core.
That said, things could be much different next year. If we end up bringing in someone to play LOLB, I could see Hall & Wimbley splitting time on the other side.

Hopefully, Wimbley will turn things around & make this whole discussion moot.

hey thanks.

i thought Wimbley has looked pretty decent on the left in the past.

just saying.

to me it would certainly come down to alex's skills on the right side. in a perfect world we could mix them up, utilizing them both ambidextrous-like, playing to both their strengths. if kept in the cleveland vault until sunday to be unveiled proper--unleashed on an unsuspecting baltimore who have spent a solid week planning for the duck-under........ it just might give extra spark to get it done. who knows? as the broncos coaches begin to scramble>>late night's follow. extra reps forced last minute on jet-lagged players only helps us on a short week. and the cribbs bronco package certainly went in this week too..........

sounds good on paper, huh? fuok it it's only football.

abeit a bit premature to imagine a 7th rd rookie against these LT's on this schedule, for sure, and i don't disagree that this probably won't play out in a game, they have to be seeing what we're seeing.

which means they also see how Kam W often gets sacrificed to clear out the right side for Rogers and Co. i was just jacking you guys off a little about him in the previous post but seriously, i do see him getting managed pretty thoroughly this season. presumably like you all do. i very much prefer to see him perfect his craft further as he begins his memoirs entitled Ripping the Door Open: My Life on LT Island.

to me luring his blocker away from the play is simply brilliant. it solves the speed problem by allowing things to open for others, and when used correctly it's very, very effective. whether by accident or by design it has worked and i hope we see it much more often (consciously).

Flugel

See next post - Flugel not grasping technology of reply using cut and paste.

It not workey workey for the simple minded.

- Tom F.

Flugel

When Wimbely was a rookie - he was ONLY asked to do what Alex Hall is being asked to do. That's rush the passer. This year, I've seen Wimbley dropping into hook zone coverages and recall at least 2 passes he closed on and batted down.

I haven't seen NEARLY as many RBs turning the corner on us which means he's played with great outside leverage and maintained contain. As players progress into 2nd and 3rd seasons - they take on MORE responsibility.

Manny Lawson had 11 sacks as a rokie and I think Marc Anderson had 11 or 12 as well. That said, they weren't asked to drop off into coverage and be complete. They were turned loose into sic em like we're doing with Alex Hall. LOVE that kid - he's Conan at sic em. I don't WANT us halting that anytime soon. Understandign this - did these guys just fall into the SUCK category 1 year later or was more asked of them than 1 dimnesional pass rusher stuff. Folks, when teams haven't NEEDED to throw on us in 2nd and 2 situations - you ought to be happy we're making Wimbley better against the run and/or contain. His outside leverage is WAY better than it was. When you think about it - we're not seeing chubby retreads like Lamont Jordan beating outside contain to the sidelines any more. We're not even seeign BETTER RBs do this and why? Wimbley's become a better fulltime LBer.

Is Wimbley a Superstar? No, BUT he's doing MORE for our defense than just rushing the passer every down. He's STILL hurrying QBs to throw the ball. He's just facing LEFT Tackles while Hall is facing the Right Tackles. Left Tackles are better pass blockers and you won't see Hall finish with more than 11 sacks as a rookie so let's stop acting like Wimbley is killing us on Sundays folks. You don't get 11 sacks as a wide eyed rookie if you DON'T have it. Next time you see a PASS play where Alex hurries the throw get the number of the LBer in the hook zone batting down the ball because it just might be #95.

You want a refreshing change? How often are opposing Offenses in 2nd and 2 situations this year? OC's no longer have our DC by the balls in the Sunday chess match BECAUSE we're better against the run. It's because guys like Wimbley AND Jackson are playing BETTER against the run. No more FAT RBs like Lamont Jordan breaking outside contain to the sidelines. We're better on defense everywhere so why is everyone MORE reluctant to fussd about Wimbley than spend time complimenting Tucker for the job he's doing with the D?

- Tom F.

? Aloysius

\ said:

\ said:
Wimbley isn't going any where. We need a rey M or even brian Cushing in the middle.
I've read that Cushing hasn't looked good playing inside. He's struggled shedding blockers, which is a big concern if you're projecting him to 3-4 ILB.

Just to fill in the details, here's a report from PFW:

Scouts were hoping to see USC SLB Brian Cushing perform better than he did when he moved inside against Arizona State to replace the injured Rey Maualuga, but with action coming at him from both sides, he did not anticipate and react as quickly as he did tilted over the tight end on the strong side and did not play with as much pop, power and punch taking on blockers. He is versatile enough to fill in during a pinch, but his best position will be lining up over the tight end.

? Masters

\ said:
Wimbley isn't going any where. We need a rey M or even brian Cushing in the middle. I don't want laurenitis unless in second round...just not convinced he is real deal.

Cushings, not Rey M. Rey is all hit flash and little substance from what I have seen (and have heard from big USC fans).

And if someone was gonna take one of OSU's LBs, I'd sooner go Marcus Freeman before Laurenitis.

? Aloysius

Wow - Mark Anderson still is without a sack this season.

Which got me thinking: maybe we should compare Wimbley's performance this season to his fellow '06 draft classmates.

Here are all the DE & 3-4 OLB prospects taken between Wimbley and Anderson:

Kamerion Wimbley (1.13) - 3.0 sacks
Bobby Carpenter (1.18) - 0.0 sacks
Tamba Hali (1.20) - 1.0 sack
Manny Lawson (1.22) - 3.0 sacks
Mathias Kiwanuka (1.32) - 6.5 sacks
Darryl Tapp (2.31) - 2.0 sacks
Chris Gocong (3.7) - 2.0 sacks
Clint Ingram (3.16) - 2.0 sacks
Victor Adeyanju (4.16) - 2.0 sacks
Rob Ninkovich (5.2) - 0.0 sacks
Parys Haralson (5.7) - 4.5 sacks
Mark Anderson (5.26) - 0.0 sacks

Not sure if there's any trend there, except that having 2-3 sacks is rather unremarkable for an edge rusher drafted in the 1st Round. After all, most of the middle-round guys have been able to do the same thing.

So while Wimbley may not be a classic "bust", it may be fair to say that he's not living up to his draft position.

DTBH

I'm not worried about Wimbley sack number. It's not that he's not leading the league in sacks. It's that he's poor in run support, poor in pass coverage, and he's not even getting any PRESSURE on the pocket. He's all aorund bad.

damajuki

Damn, Al, you are pouring it on tonight. Nicely done, as always.

Any chance YOU could just become GM? I honestly think you'd do a better job.

DTBH

Aloy is a machine. I'd be suprised if he wasn't either a.) Mel Kiper Jr. b.) Todd McShay c.) Mike Mayock or most likely d.) taking one of those guys jobs on ESPN pretty soon.

JC

Masters said:
Cushings, not Rey M. Rey is all hit flash and little substance from what I have seen (and have heard from big USC fans).
And if someone was gonna take one of OSU's LBs, I'd sooner go Marcus Freeman before Laurenitis.

Freeman over Laurenitis? Seriously? Freeman is fast but has trouble shedding blockers. He's a day two pick come April.

? Aloysius

Ha. Thanks, guys.

I'm just another irrational Browns fan who somehow thinks that my "scouting" will somehow result in our FO drafting better players. I probably should be e-mailing Phil some suggestions...then again, that probably wouldn't work out so well

@jc said:
Freeman over Laurenitis? Seriously? Freeman is fast but has trouble shedding blockers. He's a day two pick come April.

Freeman's speed should give a boost to his draft stock, but he's probably at best a mid-Round 2 guy. And you're right about him having trouble shedding blocks - he's exclusively a 4-3 weakside linebacker.

Laurinaitis, on the other hand, probably could play any of the 4-3 linebacker spots (excepts MLB in a Tampa 2), but he doesn't project well to a 3-4.

So if we're sticking with the 3-4 as our base D, I don't think we'll be drafting either of those guys.

DTBH

Aloysius said:
Freeman's speed should give a boost to his draft stock, but he's probably at best a mid-Round 2 guy. And you're right about him having trouble shedding blocks - he's exclusively a 4-3 weakside linebacker.
Laurinaitis, on the other hand, probably could play any of the 4-3 linebacker spots (excepts MLB in a Tampa 2), but he doesn't project well to a 3-4.

Care to expand on any of that with reasoning?

? Aloysius

Which part?

I don't watch as much OSU football as some of you guys, but the sense I've gotten from watching games & reading reports is that Freeman just isn't the football player Laurinaitis is, especially when it comes to instincts. However, his speed will impress NFL GM's, which should give a boost to his stock.

On the other hand, Laurinaitis is an instinctive, talented football player, but he too has problems shedding blocks. That probably eliminates him from 3-4 consideration, and there's some doubt as to whether he's athletic enough to play MLB in a Tampa 2 (the LB with the biggest coverage responsibilities).

Actually, the anonymous scout I quoted about a week ago didn't think he wouldn't be good at any linebacker spot in a Tampa 2 D.

But I think Laurinaitis will be a decent pro. Though the comparison's not perfect, I could see him being like Chad Greenway in Minnesota - a mid/late Round 1 guy who eventually becomes the leader of his defense.

? Aloysius

I originally posted the stuff here and here, but it's good to look at what two NFL scouts said about Laurinaitis side-by-side:

Scout #1

"Laurinaitis scares me a little. There are times where he looks like he’s thinking too much and he runs stiff. In the right defense he’s got a chance to be real good, but he’s no Tampa 2 guy. I’ll tell you one thing I love about him: James Laurinaitis thrives when challenged. You can’t coach that, you can’t teach that, and it’s that quality that separates the great from the good. Ray Lewis has it, Pat Willis has that. And Laurinaitis has it."

Scout #2

"He's similar to A.J. Hawk and I was a big fan of A.J. Hawk. I probably liked Hawk a little more than I like Laurinaitis. In a 3-4, when that guard is uncovered and he has to deal with an NFL guard coming down on him, he's not getting off that block and he isn't making a lot of plays. In a 4-3 that's closer to what they play in Columbus, he should be the player he has been in college, which is a really instinctive guy."

DTBH

I was just curious as to why you say Freeman is only a 4-3 weakside linebacker and why Laurenitis could play any position in the 4-3 but none in the 3-4. Just trying to understand the differences in resposibilities/necessities between each linebacker position in each type of defense.

You pretty much answered it.

? Aloysius

Yeah, I didn't explain any of that very clearly.

As far as the 4-3 goes, I think the main difference is that Laurinaitis is more physical, which translates into him being able to play inside linebacker (for a non-Tampa 2 team).

My understanding is that 4-3 OLB's are interchangeable for some teams, but others like their strong side linebackers to be a bit more physical, particularly because they have to deal with blocking TE's & big mauling RT's in the run game.

By contrast, the 4-3 weakside guy more often covers RB's coming out of the backfield, so having a little more athleticism can help.

Here's what a scout said about Freeman:

"He's a 4-3 weakside linebacker who does have a lot of value. He's a four-down player, like Laurinaitis - they can play on third down and cover and then play on the punt team or punt return team. He's played banged up so we probably haven't seen the best of him, but I have the tape from a year ago and NFL teams do their homework. I think he'll work out well, so for a 4-3 team he's a second or third (round) type guy."

Vegasdogg

Aloysius said:
Maybe injuries to other players, opposing teams scheming for him, and bad coaching have played a role in Wimbley's decreased production.

IMO, if losing some starters causes you to disappear for 6-7 games at a time, you're not very good to begin with. Scheming to stop him is one thing, but when he does not make a play or two a game, he is a bust as a 1st rounder. The guy simply cannot rush the passer for shit. I should be able to line that kid up anywhere and he should produce for us. Think Shaun Rogers needs other starters to make him play well?

Wimbley is no better than a 3rd or 4th rounder to me.

Mr. T

Wimbley has 3 sacks the team inwhole has 15. Our team defense dosn't blitz very often and the results are evitable, we give up way to much ground inthe air let alone on the ground.

Opposing quarterbacks get approximatley 8 seconds to stand flat footed in the pocket and pick our defense apart. Wimbleys lack of production in the sack department cannot be blamed on diminshing skills, it is the fault of our Defensive coordinater and head coach.

This bend but do not break scheme that they are playing is killing us.

How many 3 and outs has this years defense executed? very few.

Sunday Houston was called for holding on first down, I'm thinking great maybe we can get them to punt. Hell No! 2 plays later they pick up a first down.

I shouldn't of gotten my hopes up.

Our defense was dropping back and playing 4 to 5 yards off of every receiver and we did not one time blitz!!!! to put pressure on the QB. It was all read and re-act BullCrap!

When was the last time you saw one of our DB's Drill a receiver so hard that it dislodged the ball when they were coming down with it? no all we see is terrry cousins trying to catch up and tackle ther ankles.

Why is it that whenever Cousins is in the game opposing QB's look to see who he is covering and that is there primary receiver?

DieselPusher

Aloysius said:
Laurinaitis, on the other hand, probably could play any of the 4-3 linebacker spots (excepts MLB in a Tampa 2), but he doesn't project well to a 3-4.

What is the responsibility of a MLB in a Tampa 2?? why would a MLB in a 4-3 not cut it at a MLB in a Tampa 2.

thanks

? Aloysius

@dieselpusher said:
What is the responsibility of a MLB in a Tampa 2?? why would a MLB in a 4-3 not cut it at a MLB in a Tampa 2.

As I understand it, the key difference is that an MLB in a Tampa 2 is responsible for dropping as deep as 30 yards down field in coverage.

Each safety in a Tampa 2 D is responsible for half the field, providing a second layer of coverage over the CB's, who are expected to jam & disrupt the receiver's routes.

That prevents the receivers from making big plays, but it also leaves the center of the field wide open for a TE to run between the safeties. As a result, the Tampa 2 requires the MLB drop deep into pass coverage, eliminating that hole in the defense.

So the MLB in a Tampa 2 has to be extremely athletic - like Brian Urlacher, who played safety in college. Generally speaking, scouts determine whether a guy can play the position based on their athletic ability, not their downhill tackling abilities.

As Brian Urlacher puts it, "My primary purpose in [the Tampa 2] is to run back to the huddle and congratulate somebody for making a play while I was running down the field with the tight end."

Because Laurinaitis has a rep for "playing stiff" and sometimes overthinking, he's probably not a good fit for a position that requires him to drop back deep almost immediately. While he may be athletic enough for one of the outside spots (which drop into 8-12 yard middle zones), Little Animal probably isn't well-suited to playing the 30 yard deep zone that a Tampa 2 MLB must play.