Why all the hate?

[KBoum]

10 hours ago, Darhk_Raven said:

We're a 3-4 Hybrid team, so we would play some 4-3 at times. That's how the team operates. Kaufusi was actually a  3-4 DE last year, where he finished second in run stoppage percentage and first in pass-rush productivity according to PFF. So he isn't being forced into a new scheme. 

if you take a look at Kaufusi game tape, he looks a lot better when he plays outside shade of the tackle and he can rush from the outside and bends very well. he's plays a bit tall on the inside so if he faces the G/T he won'T be a very great run stuffer at first. his body doenst look like 3-4 DE to be honest right now. I'd prefer to play him 5-6 tech in a 4 men front (4-3 Under and Nickle)

 

Look at 4:25 the move looks weird but you see how he could grow a lot

http://draftbreakdown.com/video/bronson-kaufusi-vs-cincinnati-2015/

 

the way he plays could translate to a Chris Long/Michael Bennett role imo.

 

Look at 10:27 and enjoy the next 3-4 plays 

Edited May 9, 2016 by KBoum

[Italian Raven]

1 hour ago, KBoum said:

if you take a look at Kaufusi game tape, he looks a lot better when he plays outside shade of the tackle and he can rush from the outside and bends very well. he's plays a bit tall on the inside so if he faces the G/T he won'T be a very great run stuffer at first. his body doenst look like 3-4 DE to be honest right now. I'd prefer to play him 5-6 tech in a 4 men front (4-3 Under and Nickle)

 

Look at 4:25 the move looks weird but you see how he could grow a lot

http://draftbreakdown.com/video/bronson-kaufusi-vs-cincinnati-2015/

I couldn't have said it any better. 

As I wrote in another post: tall pads, tends to dive with his body into his opponents frame to generate push or simply swims into gaps (but doesn't have the functional strength/punch to play 3-4 DE, hence two gapper), that's not the recipe for a successfull inside lineman.

With his position being quite clear, my biggest wonder is Correa. I don't see any specific trait that has me thinking 'he'll be great if asked to keep doing this on a consistent basis'. He was often dropped in zone coverage but has never been seriously challenged in man-duties. His pass-rush lacks of an identity: no specific plan, no moves; just a good getoff, a decent shoulder dip and lot of effort. He's more of a project than Kaufusi or than any other Ravens second rounder I can remember in this moment.

[Darhk_Raven]

I guess we just won't agree. 

[KBoum]

16 hours ago, Darhk_Raven said:

I guess we just won't agree. 

Thats alright my friend. Some people think the same thing you do.

http://russellstreetreport.com/2016/05/09/tale-of-the-tape/bronson-kaufusi-ideal-3-4-defensive-end/

 

What I find funny in this article is he said Kaufusi is the ideal 3-4 D-End but in the article he says Kaufasi was better rushing from the edge (like I said) and we don't know how he'll project since he didnt have lots of interior pass rush situations. I agree with that and the few times I've seen him rush from the inside he was pretty much just lowering his head and pushing without seeing whats going on unlike when he rush from the edges he keep good leverage and countain.

 

I also agree with the writer when he says its akward sometimes I've said it earlier but he doenst bend akward its more about his pass rush moves to be honest he's really not refine. He needs to work on his moves but I think he bends quite well I've paused a few of his outside pass rush and he bends surprisely well. He's one of the prospect I've studied the more since the draft and the more I watch him, the more its evident to me he's a 4-3 DE. I'm not saying he's a speed rusher but a Chris Long type of guy who could take the Right Tackle to provide a clear path to the RB/TE for the blitzing SAM

 

Edited May 11, 2016 by KBoum

[Darhk_Raven]

4 hours ago, KBoum said:

Thats alright my friend. Some people think the same thing you do.

http://russellstreetreport.com/2016/05/09/tale-of-the-tape/bronson-kaufusi-ideal-3-4-defensive-end/

 

What I find funny in this article is he said Kaufusi is the ideal 3-4 D-End but in the article he says Kaufasi was better rushing from the edge (like I said) and we don't know how he'll project since he didnt have lots of interior pass rush situations. I agree with that and the few times I've seen him rush from the inside he was pretty much just lowering his head and pushing without seeing whats going on unlike when he rush from the edges he keep good leverage and countain.

 

I also agree with the writer when he says its akward sometimes I've said it earlier but he doenst bend akward its more about his pass rush moves to be honest he's really not refine. He needs to work on his moves but I think he bends quite well I've paused a few of his outside pass rush and he bends surprisely well. He's one of the prospect I've studied the more since the draft and the more I watch him, the more its evident to me he's a 4-3 DE. I'm not saying he's a speed rusher but a Chris Long type of guy who could take the Right Tackle to provide a clear path to the RB/TE for the blitzing SAM

 

Well at a 3-4 DE he is still a 5tech (which is a DE in a 4-3 base set) the only difference is he has a OLB on the side of him.

[Italian Raven]

56 minutes ago, Darhk_Raven said:

Well at a 3-4 DE he is still a 5tech (which is a DE in a 4-3 base set) the only difference is he has a OLB on the side of him.

3-4 DE is also supposed to be a two gapper and to be strong enough to hold on his stance against an eventual G (while when playing on a 4men front you're helped by two interior linemen and are more likely to take on a T). Imho, he doesn't have the functional strength to face such a block and being able to contribute against the run.

[Darhk_Raven]

He can improve his functional strength which would help him go against the G. Sometimes him taking on that block and occupying the blocker allows the ILB to do his job better. 

[ravensnj]

My only hate is that we couldn't land Wr Sterling Sheppard. Since, digesting our draft, I kinda like all the picks. I was never a Spence guy anyway, and soooooo glad we didn't take Henry or Ragland.

[BmoreBird22]

5 hours ago, Italian Raven said:

3-4 DE is also supposed to be a two gapper and to be strong enough to hold on his stance against an eventual G (while when playing on a 4men front you're helped by two interior linemen and are more likely to take on a T). Imho, he doesn't have the functional strength to face such a block and being able to contribute against the run.

It wouldn't surprise me much if the Ravens are gearing up for one gap responsibilities. Lots of good penetrators.

[Italian Raven]

4 hours ago, ravensnj said:

My only hate is that we couldn't land Wr Sterling Sheppard. Since, digesting our draft, I kinda like all the picks. I was never a Spence guy anyway, and soooooo glad we didn't take Henry or Ragland.

The only realistic way we could've selected him was spending a high second round pick.. that's a little too much on a position we're pretty stack anyway (injuries aside), imo. But I definitely understand the love for the guy.. good new is that we don't have to face him twice a year

Same goes for the other two.. Ragland main liability is coverage, which is what we also needed to address. He would have been a crazy addition to plug in next to CJ on clear run situations, but not much valuable.

[Italian Raven]

1 hour ago, BmoreBird22 said:

It wouldn't surprise me much if the Ravens are gearing up for one gap responsibilities. Lots of good penetrators.

Absolutely. This draft selections really seem to indicate so.

What do you think about his and KC roles in our D?

[Winchester]

50 minutes ago, Italian Raven said:

Absolutely. This draft selections really seem to indicate so.

What do you think about his and KC roles in our D?

In my opinion Correa is an olb in a 4-3 that Will learn to cover and game changing blitzer. Similar to an intelligent physical version of Bruce irvin. Kufusi should lean out add a little muscle and He Will be a very good rush olb in a 3-4 or defensive end in a 4-3. Will Henry is a rare talent. Runs about 4.8 with explosive burst and bend!! He is fast enough to play lb yet holds up against 2 gaps/blockers. His best fit is penetrating DT or penetrating 3-4 defensive end. He is going to make fans forget about not drafting Buckner.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Winchester

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, Italian Raven said:

Absolutely. This draft selections really seem to indicate so.

What do you think about his and KC roles in our D?

I can honestly say I haven't watched a ton of him and from everything I'm hearing about Boise State, watching him may not be the most useful thing I can do since they use their players in so many roles. 

With that said, I am extremely excited by his combine numbers because I wanna say he was top 4 in 40, three cone, and short shuttle for DE/ILB/OLB. He was definitely in the 90th percentile for each. That type of athleticism combined with a relentless motor has me extremely excited. The way I think of him is a lighter, more athletic Paul Kruger. Someone who may take some time to really develop and take the next step as he learns to develop as a pass rusher, but someone who has relentless effort that will win him more battles than it will lose him. I really do think he'll be good in a year when he's got a chance to learn behind Suggs and Dumervil.

[Italian Raven]

I wish I could be as excited as you guys about KC

[JoeyFlex5]

2 hours ago, Italian Raven said:

I wish I could be as excited as you guys about KC

Just look at how explosive he is off the line and remember he's a 20 year old Polynesian coming from a team that is horrible at coaching defensive players. 

 

Then think of the potential and how badly we needed explosiveness in the edge rush... 

[Italian Raven]

53 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Just look at how explosive he is off the line and remember he's a 20 year old Polynesian coming from a team that is horrible at coaching defensive players. 

 

Then think of the potential and how badly we needed explosiveness in the edge rush... 

Sure I understand the need.. the feeling I get watching the 4 tapes available is that he's still a little too much of a project, tho.
He has the athletic ability and, as you guys say, explosiveness. However, he's far from being a good technician and that will drastically limit his effectiveness as a pass-rusher.
As always, I definitely trust our FO knowledge and keen eye for prospects but I can't fall in love with him just yet, and that's absolutely not because I had other preferences at #42. Hope my eyes will finally convince my brain once KC hits the field.
 

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, Italian Raven said:

Sure I understand the need.. the feeling I get watching the 4 tapes available is that he's still a little too much of a project, tho.
He has the athletic ability and, as you guys say, explosiveness. However, he's far from being a good technician and that will drastically limit his effectiveness as a pass-rusher.
As always, I definitely trust our FO knowledge and keen eye for prospects but I can't fall in love with him just yet, and that's absolutely not because I had other preferences at #42. Hope my eyes will finally convince my brain once KC hits the field.
 

A vast majority of players aren't good technicians at the college level. A rusher as clean and refined as bosa is very rare, even the more refined college rushers don't hit that level of technical expertise until year 2 or 3 in the NFL. Correa is no more raw than a Kevin dodd or a ziggy ansah who is a guy who was very raw and exploded onto the scene recently. 

 

Correas explosiveness can't be coached, and no amount of training and conditioning can get an average explosion type of player as explosive as Correa. You also can't teach his motor. All of his weaknesses like size and hand usage, are things that are very much able to improve. NFL conditioning could very well add 10 lbs to his frame without him losing burst, and NFL coaches can improve his hands dramatically. 

 

I look at it like this.. We got a guy with mid first round measurables in the late 2nd, his technique isn't great but the total package makes him an easy 2nd rounder. Its up to him and our coaches to turn him from a raw explosive rusher into an NFL edge rusher. And until he fails to grow then I will believe he can make the leap.

[trevorsteadman]

23 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

A vast majority of players aren't good technicians at the college level. A rusher as clean and refined as bosa is very rare, even the more refined college rushers don't hit that level of technical expertise until year 2 or 3 in the NFL. Correa is no more raw than a Kevin dodd or a ziggy ansah who is a guy who was very raw and exploded onto the scene recently. 

 

Correas explosiveness can't be coached, and no amount of training and conditioning can get an average explosion type of player as explosive as Correa. You also can't teach his motor. All of his weaknesses like size and hand usage, are things that are very much able to improve. NFL conditioning could very well add 10 lbs to his frame without him losing burst, and NFL coaches can improve his hands dramatically. 

 

I look at it like this.. We got a guy with mid first round measurables in the late 2nd, his technique isn't great but the total package makes him an easy 2nd rounder. Its up to him and our coaches to turn him from a raw explosive rusher into an NFL edge rusher. And until he fails to grow then I will believe he can make the leap.

To me it seems like in the Ravens organization if a player really wants it and works hard they make the leap... At least when it comes to the defensive players.. Paul Kruger comes to mind. Players coming into our defense are put in a good situation. You can say that we needed the talent on defense, but I do not think we needed talent, we needed youth. Everyone is aging and all these old defensive players are there to help these young guys improve. If they put enough hard work into it they can make the leap. I think that for most of our draft picks. It may be 1, 2, or 4 years down the line but they all can be starters in the NFL.

[Edgar]

3 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

To me it seems like in the Ravens organization if a player really wants it and works hard they make the leap... At least when it comes to the defensive players.. Paul Kruger comes to mind. Players coming into our defense are put in a good situation. You can say that we needed the talent on defense, but I do not think we needed talent, we needed youth. Everyone is aging and all these old defensive players are there to help these young guys improve. If they put enough hard work into it they can make the leap. I think that for most of our draft picks. It may be 1, 2, or 4 years down the line but they all can be starters in the NFL.

The problem with Paul Kruger as an example is that it took him two and a half years to BEGIN making an impact.

I'm really hoping that isn't the case with Correa.

[Willbacker]

1 hour ago, Edgar said:

The problem with Paul Kruger as an example is that it took him two and a half years to BEGIN making an impact.

I'm really hoping that isn't the case with Correa.

A lot of that was the silly move of trying to bulk up Kruger and play him as a 3-4 end in yr 2.

[Winchester]

18 minutes ago, Willbacker said:

A lot of that was the silly move of trying to bulk up Kruger and play him as a 3-4 end in yr 2.

Yep it was ridiculous. However when he dropped the weight to play rush lb again the power helped him a lot. He was by far the best edge rusher at the superbowl run. Harbs bulked him up to play 3-4 dline to keep the controversy in check. Many believed he should of been the guy over johnson. But Johnson was a Harbs favorite and he did jot want everybody saying Kruger should be the guy. So he changed his position to keep Johnson there unchallenged. Coaching fed everybody the b.s. that Kruger couldn't play the run. But once he played he was actually fine playing the run. I went to a game and Johnson/Suggs couldn't get pressure at all. Kruger came in hit the qb as he threw and sacked him the next play. He should of been the guy before the superbowl.

[JoeyFlex5]

3 hours ago, Edgar said:

The problem with Paul Kruger as an example is that it took him two and a half years to BEGIN making an impact.

I'm really hoping that isn't the case with Correa.

The ravens put Kruger in a really bad position. It really wasn't Krugers fault. 

 

He was a hand in the dirt 43DE in college, they had no position for him as a rookie, made him bulk up for 2 years to play 34DE, then told him to lose weight to play 34OLB and he finally made an impact.

[Edgar]

15 hours ago, Willbacker said:

A lot of that was the silly move of trying to bulk up Kruger and play him as a 3-4 end in yr 2.

Wow. I didn't even remember that was in the works with Kruger.  I remember hearing how he wasn't able to play teams in year one.

I think more than ever, you take a guy and have him do what he's good at right away. Particularly if that is getting after the QB. The idea that a guy can't dress if he can't play teams right away might need reworking.

Getting draft picks on the field in short order and suiting their natural skill set has not been a strength generally.

No way Z.Smith sees time at all last year without injury for example. Might not have seen time this year.

 

 

 

[Jacquouille]

On 12/5/2016 at 3:45 PM, Italian Raven said:

Sure I understand the need.. the feeling I get watching the 4 tapes available is that he's still a little too much of a project, tho.
He has the athletic ability and, as you guys say, explosiveness. However, he's far from being a good technician and that will drastically limit his effectiveness as a pass-rusher.
As always, I definitely trust our FO knowledge and keen eye for prospects but I can't fall in love with him just yet, and that's absolutely not because I had other preferences at #42. Hope my eyes will finally convince my brain once KC hits the field.
 

Apart from Bosa and Lawson, no Edge rusher in this draft had NFL caliber technic. And that's not necessarily a problem, because even in the NFL, some sacks come from pure athleticism or motor (aka coverage sacks). I suggest you look at Bruce Irvin highlight, and all his sacks as a rookie came from speed and explosiveness, nearly untouched. Winchester was accurate when he compared Correa to Irvin. I'm not sure Correa can cover well, but what you see on Irvin's highlight looks a lot like Correa, except Correa may have more motor.

[Geving]

On 12. mai 2016 at 4:37 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

Just look at how explosive he is off the line and remember he's a 20 year old Polynesian coming from a team that is horrible at coaching defensive players. 

 

Then think of the potential and how badly we needed explosiveness in the edge rush... 

You keep bringing up Polynesian. As if that is supposed to matter. Weird.

[rmw10]

5 minutes ago, Geving said:

You keep bringing up Polynesian. As if that is supposed to matter. Weird.

I chuckled a little bit.

[JoeyFlex5]

8 hours ago, Geving said:

You keep bringing up Polynesian. As if that is supposed to matter. Weird.

People always talk about correa being small, but polynesians typically don't have trouble bulking up. Its just in their genetics, Polynesian athletes tend to be on a different level in terms of physical growth. 

 

Obviously it's not a 100% thing as I'm sure there are Polynesian players who are undersized and stay that way, but it's part of a reason to think He can bulk up.

[Geving]

46 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

People always talk about correa being small, but polynesians typically don't have trouble bulking up. Its just in their genetics, Polynesian athletes tend to be on a different level in terms of physical growth. 

 

Obviously it's not a 100% thing as I'm sure there are Polynesian players who are undersized and stay that way, but it's part of a reason to think He can bulk up.

If it's so easy for polynesians to bulk up or they are on a different level in terms of physical growth, why isn't Correa bigger already? It would've helped him immensely to be stronger.

Genetics have nothing to do with it. Lift like you mean it and eat a lot of clean food, get bigger. Nothing with being polynesian, chinese, french or american.

Correa is soft and week, and he needs to put the work in. Only time will tell if he does.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Geving

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, Geving said:

If it's so easy for polynesians to bulk up or they are on a different level in terms of physical growth, why isn't Correa bigger already? It would've helped him immensely to be stronger.

Genetics have nothing to do with it. Lift like you mean it and eat a lot of clean food, get bigger. Nothing with being polynesian, chinese, french or american.

Correa is soft and week, and he needs to put the work in. Only time will tell if he does.

He isnt soft, not even a little bit. He is undersized and his strength is pretty proportional to his size, and he plays with a high motor and a hard nose. Undersized =/= soft.

 

Also, genetics absolutely play a factor, to say otherwise is just plain ignorance. 

 

And lastly, cut him some slack, he's a 20 year old student athlete and he played for a team that does a horrible job prepping players for the next level. He needs guidance and coaching, like 99.9% of 20 year old rookies do, he hasn't had much of it yet and I'd say he's doing alright considering the fact. 

[Geving]

2 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

He isnt soft, not even a little bit. He is undersized and his strength is pretty proportional to his size, and he plays with a high motor and a hard nose. Undersized =/= soft.

 

Also, genetics absolutely play a factor, to say otherwise is just plain ignorance. 

 

And lastly, cut him some slack, he's a 20 year old student athlete and he played for a team that does a horrible job prepping players for the next level. He needs guidance and coaching, like 99.9% of 20 year old rookies do, he hasn't had much of it yet and I'd say he's doing alright considering the fact. 

Sigh... This isn't worth my time.