Pisa not the same as Boulware

*ramhard* · #1 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

I guess I'm in the minority here as I don't like the Pisa move. People have compared him to the Michael Boulware move to safety but there is a BIG difference. Boulware runs a 4.5 while Pisa runs a 4.65 (from the combine). That is a huge difference, especially covering space and guys who run 4.5 and less.

I worry that you've taken your best LB, and made him a mediocre safety who doesn't have the range to cover receivers, a safety who can't cover receivers to free, and have a linebacker core that has NO ONE you can count on. Means now you must draft/FA 3 linebackers, plus a free safety.

Here is Pisa's scouting report from the draft:

Positives: Well-built athlete who reacts quickly in run support … Has a forceful hand punch, using his arms properly to keep blockers off his feet … Decisive diagnostician who accelerates quickly to the run alleys … Shows instinctiveness zeroing in on the ball, displaying loose hips in his stop-and-go motion … Mirrors receivers moves in the short area and refuses to allow any underneath cushion … Settles in nicely dropping off in the zone, handling the switch-off with ease … Springs into his tackles and is very active staying in the receiver's face … Has the range and catch-up speed to quickly recover when beaten on deep routes … Adjusts smoothly to the ball in flight … Aware of receivers in his area and breaks sharply out of his backpedal … Catches with his hands properly extended … Solid collider who has classic wrapup tackling technique.

Negatives: Has good range, but needs to refine his deep coverage technique, as he gets turned around some on receivers' head fakes … Has to show better crispness in his plant and drive, tending to cross his feet at times when switching off in the zone … A little upright in his movements coming out of his backpedal … Gets engulfed by the larger blockers trying to get through trash and needs to use his hands better to defeat low blocks … Limited size and bulk, along with good foot speed could see him shift to strong safety at the pro level.

*Shadesofgrey* · #2 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

I think this is a good move. Pisa is going to destroy people from the SS position. It will allow the D to move him around and let him wreak havock. I think it will also help keep him healthy with is also a bonus. If we can just get Hartwell and a draft pick at LB I think we are set... :ramlogo:

**AvengerRam** · #3 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

He certainly will be an asset in safety blitz packages.

*rampete* · #4 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramhard

I guess I'm in the minority here as I don't like the Pisa move. People have compared him to the Michael Boulware move to safety but there is a BIG difference. Boulware runs a 4.5 while Pisa runs a 4.65 (from the combine). That is a huge difference, especially covering space and guys who run 4.5 and less.

I worry that you've taken your best LB, and made him a mediocre safety who doesn't have the range to cover receivers, a safety who can't cover receivers to free, and have a linebacker core that has NO ONE you can count on. Means now you must draft/FA 3 linebackers, plus a free safety.

your point is well taken if you take those combine numbers at face value as an indicator of a player's prowess on the field in full pads...however, it should be pointed out that pisa pumped up his weight before the combines to satisfy the GMs and scouts of this league as having the ability to carry the additional weight (he played near 220 at hawaii) and still run well...my point being, combine numbers are relative to a point in time and space...

if pisa goes from 235, which he was for the combine, to a more safety-like weight of 215 to 220 he may be just as fast as boulware, since he was the measuring stick you juxtiposed pisa with...

i'm more concerned about the coverage skills of the two guys, pisa and arch, more than their weight and speed...we'll see if this experiment flops during the training camp or if this turns out like roses...for all we know, this may just turn out to be a smoke and mirror tactic to hide their cards for the upcoming draft...

*BigGame* · #5 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

Ramhard, did you not see the final point in your original post? Some one other than the Rams coaching staff sees the move as having potential.

*ramhard* · #6 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

I agree on the combine numbers as I couldn't find anywhere speed before the weight gain. I think speed does matter, especially when you those speedy receivers running post patterns at you.

And I also voiced my concerns over Arch in my original message (see below). I didn't want to emphasize it as I've never been sold on Arch but whenever I criticize him, people here jumped all over me. I once said I would take both Seattle's young safeties over Arch (Boulware and Hamlin) and got skewered. I've always felt Arch is full of effort, but doesn't have the natural body bulk to be a consistent run stopper without getting hurt (as opposed to someone like Rodney Harrison or Roy Williams) and doesn't have the cover skills to play the pass. Too many times he is in the area and can't make the play on the ball.

I've always liked Arch as a backup/nickle player you bring in on special situations and play on special teams. And by the way, this is a repeat of my views BEFORE his injury plagued season this year.

Here is the scouting report on Archuleta, doesn't sound like a great FS.

Negatives…Very slender in the lower body, lacking leg drive to maintain position vs. the larger blockers...While he shows good zone coverage ability, he lacks the sudden burst out of his backpedal you would look for in a safety...Has mediocre jumping ability, making him less effective in deep pass coverage...Hands are also questionable, as he will drop the easy interception.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramhard

I worry that you've taken your best LB, and made him a mediocre safety who doesn't have the range to cover receivers, a safety who can't cover receivers to free [ARCH], and have a linebacker core that has NO ONE you can count on. Means now you must draft/FA 3 linebackers, plus a free safety.

*ramhard* · #7 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

Big Game, reread the post, it said SS not FS which is the move that we are discussing. Different positions, different emphasis, different key skills.

*sbramfan* · #8 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

The D can't get any worse, so mix it up.

If they get Hartwell, and draft one, we'll be fine. If not, this ain't gonna work.

*ZigZagRam* · #9 (**permalink**) -17-02-2005

Quote:

if pisa goes from 235, which he was for the combine, to a more safety-like weight of 215 to 220 he may be just as fast as boulware, since he was the measuring stick you juxtiposed pisa with...

According to Snow-man on KFNS this morning Pisa was down to 218-220 at the end of the season last year.

**HUbison** · #10 (**permalink**) -18-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramhard

Big Game, reread the post, it said SS not FS which is the move that we are discussing. Different positions, different emphasis, different key skills.

Maybe I heard wrong, but isn't the switch supposed to be Pisa to SS and Arch to FS? I don't think there was any talk of Pisa moving to FS, but I could be wrong.

*psycho9985* · #11 (**permalink**) -18-02-2005

We really need some help at MLB. if we can get Hartwell how about this.

*MauiRam* · #12 (**permalink**) -18-02-2005

A player's 40 time is only one piece in the puzzle when judging the player's ability at a given position. Hence the term "game speed" vs track speed. If a guy starts off going in the wrong direction, it doesn't matter what his 40 time is. If a DB is out of position he will likely get beat--sure there are a few guys who ( Deion S. comes to mind ) who have extremely rare speed and the instincts to exploit that speed by appearing to be out of position, baiting the QB to throw in their direction. That said, I will take instincts over timed 40 speed 9 times out of 10. Tinoisamoa has the needed instincts and I would guess his speed is more than adequate to play the SS position.

Obviously the Rams need help at the LB position--lots of it! Pisa was our best LB last year. As has been mentioned earlier in this thread -- the whole switcheroo could be a smoke screen, however if it isn't, I for one would love to see Pisa have the opportunity to make the switch. As for moving Arch to free safety--that is kind of scary...

GO RAMMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :ramlogo:

*ramhard* · #13 (**permalink**) -18-02-2005

Sorry the references got mixed. My biggest concern was about Arch's switch to FS, I don't think he's a good fit. My concern about Pisa's switch is the transition and learning without good LB alternatives unless the Rams are very active in FA. The Rams have not been that good at evaluating LB FA's in the past (Davis, Fields).