Skip to main content

Thought it would be kind of cool just to see where we our ILBs stack up in relation to the other teams who chose the Top 5 ILBs in May's draft ahead of our pick of Jake Ryan.

 

  1. Stephone Anthony (R1 pick 30 NO) Comb 10, Total 5, Assists 5, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0
  2. Benardrick McKinney (R2 pick 43 HOU) Comb 9, Total 6, Assists 3, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0
  3. Eric Kendricks (R2 pick 45 MIN) Comb 10, Total 8, Assists 2, Sacks 1, Fumbles 0, INT 0
  4. Denzel Perryman (R2 pick 48 SD) Comb 5, Total 2, Assists 3, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0
  5. Paul Dawson (R3 pick 99 CIN) Comb 6, Total 6, Assists 0, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0

--------

 

  6. Carl Bradford (R4 2014 pick 121 GB) Comb 7, Total 4, Assists 3, Sacks 1, Fumbles 0, INT 0

 

  7. Jake Ryan (R4 pick 129 GB) Comb 7, Total 3, Assists 4, Sacks 1, Fumbles 0, INT 0

 

  8. Sam Barrington (R7 2013 pick 232 GB) Comb 4, Total 2, Assists 2, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0

 

  9. Nate Palmer (R6 2013 pick 193 GB) Comb 4, Total 2, Assists 2, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0

 

 10. Joe Thomas (UDFA 2014 GB) Comb 2, Total 2, Assists 0, Sacks 0, Fumbles 0, INT 0

 

Man, I don't know about the rest of you, but I wanted Ted to pick at least one of those top 5 ILBs in this last draft. Thought it was essential, so much so that I admittedly blew a freaking gasket after each of our 1st 3 picks... Should be interesting to see how the competition plays out the rest of the way. Stats don't tell the whole story, but interesting to get an idea of where they all are to this point.

Last edited by Trophies
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Would be good to compare # of snaps so far for each of the top 4 plus Ryan from this years draft. Just off those stats Ryan seems to be holding his own from a comparable perspective. But, you'd think the top 4 (1st and 2nd round picks) would be getting more snaps based on draft position and team needs.

 

 

 

Like the idea of tracking those guys against our own but yeah, hard to make real comparison based on raw stats in preseason.  I really thought one of those five guys would be a Packer.  Definitely something to track in the regular season. 

Well, I was just curious to see if any of them were lighting it up with quick, simple stats. Seems we are doing OK there, especially when all we really need is one capable starter next to Matthews. I like the depth there. These next two games might show us a little more, depending on who gets the starts, and for how long.

Don't have it in me to look up all the other team's players, but yesterday for GB:

 

Barrington 33

Palmer 24

Dantzler 22

Bradford 21

Ryan 17

Thomas 6

Francis 6

 

Also, cannot find a source for first preseason game against NE. I initially thought Palmer played a lot more than Bradford, but I was wrong on that.

Last edited by Trophies

Sure hope they're able to land an ILB early in the draft next year. None of these guys are more than marginal talents but this is what they'll have to make do with for this season. Clay will give them some help inside so that will alleviate some problems....after that you mix and match and hope for something to stick

Originally Posted by Hungry5:

Would be good to compare # of snaps so far for each of the top 4 plus Ryan from this years draft. Just off those stats Ryan seems to be holding his own from a comparable perspective. But, you'd think the top 4 (1st and 2nd round picks) would be getting more snaps based on draft position and team needs.

 

 

 

 

Jake Ryan - 62

 

Eric Kendricks - 77

 

Denzel Perryman - 25

 

Stephone Anthony - 62

 

Benardrick McKinney - 41

 

Paul Dawson - 21

 

 

after re-watching the game, a few things jumped out:

- palmer needs to get rid of the club or not start

- ryan is assignment sure when he covers the flat, but he gets absorbed way too easily

- i think the ilb is much less important than we (I) think, esp. since we played alot of db's and fat boy rushes,

- we have a lot of speed and recognition on the db's - they will be the strength of this team.

- i think they are trying out schemes where ilb is not going to bury the defense.

Originally Posted by pkr_north:

after re-watching the game, a few things jumped out

- i think the ilb is much less important than we (I) think, esp. since we played a lot of db's and fat boy rushes

Thx for the write-up pkr north, good stuff dude

Relatively speaking, ILB isn't very important in the Capers defense, but they do need competent/consistent play there

This is also why its absurd to have Clay there any more than absolutely neccessary

Too many fans clamor for the security blanket of Clay playing inside

(Thumbsuckers and sitzpinklers)

 

 

 
Originally Posted by Satori:
Relatively speaking, ILB isn't very important in the Capers defense, but they do need competent/consistent play there

 

Why Hawk was kept around as long as he was. Never spectacular and never a liability, until 2014.

Yeah, thx Pkr north.

Personally, I think Matthews is far more effective at ILB and want him to stay there. His instincts are incredible, which I believe is more of an asset to him there than on the edge. Plus, I think his pass rush from outside was becoming less effective when full-time OLB. Using him as a mix of both at will within scheme is incredibly good.  Should be pretty damn fun to watch.

Watched Hawk for a few plays last night against Tampa. He played quite a bit. Over the last two years he's developed this bizarre habit of hopping around and planting his feet with psychotic emphasis like he sniffed things out and knows exactly where he's going only he doesn't really go anywhere. He ended up with 1 assist last night. Probably 7 yards downfield on 3rd and 6. 

Here's some notes on Vaughters from JSO

 

James Vaughters, a rookie free-agent linebacker from Stanford, was told to attend meetings with the inside linebackers Tuesday after having played nothing but outside linebacker since May.

In Pittsburgh, Vaughters was tossed in at inside linebacker for the final six plays (three snaps, three kneel-downs) after getting a quick heads-up from coaches. One scout said he had been impressive in 16 snaps outside against the Patriots.

Then Vaughters didn't take a snap in the team portion of practice Wednesday and Thursday before the Steelers game.

"He had a big rush and made a nice play on a screen," Capers said, referring to New England. "Those two plays stood out from a positive standpoint. There weren't any really poor ones."

Vaughters started four games inside in 2012 and 14 outside in 2013-'14. At 6-foot-2, he was the shortest of eight outside linebackers in camp.

"He could be versatile enough where he could fit both," said Scott McCurley, assistant linebackers coach.

Seems they are wanting players that can play any LB position, able to switch inside or outside at any given time. Interesting move with Vaughters. I think they switched Mulumba inside and Barrington outside for one play v. PIT. I'm a big fan of Vaughters, and think he will become a great player for us with some development.

CIN fan after watching the Bengals...

 

 

 

I think he's CIN version of Nagler.

 

Last edited by H5
Originally Posted by Trophies:

Seems they are wanting players that can play any LB position, able to switch inside or outside at any given time.

This does a couple of things.

Big picture, it helps overcome injuries and gives flexibility

On game day it helps when teams run up-tempo on the Packers to keep them from subbing. If the LBs are all cross-trained, then the Packers can move dudes around and run different defenses without needing to substitute.

 

MM says: Less volume, more creativity

Originally Posted by Trophies:

       

Seems they are wanting players that can play any LB position, able to switch inside or outside at any given time. Interesting move with Vaughters. I think they switched Mulumba inside and Barrington outside for one play v. PIT. I'm a big fan of Vaughters, and think he will become a great player for us with some development.


       
According to you any player that makes a tackle or catches a football is gonna become a great player...I'm really beginning to see what Henry is talking about now
Originally Posted by Satori:
Originally Posted by pkr_north:

after re-watching the game, a few things jumped out

- i think the ilb is much less important than we (I) think, esp. since we played a lot of db's and fat boy rushes

Thx for the write-up pkr north, good stuff dude

Relatively speaking, ILB isn't very important in the Capers defense, but they do need competent/consistent play there

This is also why its absurd to have Clay there any more than absolutely neccessary

Too many fans clamor for the security blanket of Clay playing inside

(Thumbsuckers and sitzpinklers)

 

 

Hey!

Originally Posted by YooperPackfan:
Originally Posted by Trophies:

       

Seems they are wanting players that can play any LB position, able to switch inside or outside at any given time. Interesting move with Vaughters. I think they switched Mulumba inside and Barrington outside for one play v. PIT. I'm a big fan of Vaughters, and think he will become a great player for us with some development.


       
According to you any player that makes a tackle or catches a football is gonna become a great player...I'm really beginning to see what Henry is talking about now

I think everyone throws the word "great" around a little too much. Even though he said "great" I didn't take his sentence to mean "Hall of Fame type player" but rather a "better player than Jones and/or Hawk that won't cost us victories."

 

Just my nickels worth

Last edited by Boris

Security blanket?  It changed the whole defense!   We started going from bottom half in the league to ending up like top 12 as soon as soon as the switch was made.   That's not security, it's game-changing.

 

Plus Matthews got almost all his sacks there.  He wasn't getting them outside last year before the switch.  None of his moves were working outside anymore.    It didn't compromise Clay, it did the opposite: it moved him to a spot where he became productive again. It rejuvenated him. 

 

Coaches aren't messing with success for a good reason.  Too many fans clamoring for them to screw up a good thing and move Clay back outside.

 

(Long way of saying I disagree. )

Last edited by Pistol GB

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×