Who Helps Who More?

*VegasRam* · #1 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

Lots of debate (duh!) between DE abnd DT for our draft pick. Forgetting about OT for now, I'm wondering if pressure up the middle helps the DEs more, given the QB can't slide up into the pocket, or does DE pressure give the DTs more opportunity to get to the QB.

Me, I think Dorsey will make our DEs "look" better, rather than vice-versa.

*tomahawk247* · #2 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

i just think its more of a case that we have two decent young players that can start at DT (Ryan and Carriker), while at DE we have no real talented pass rushing youth. the only decent pass rushing DE we have is Little who is just getting old.

I dont think adding Dorsey would add more sacks for our DEs, simply because i doubt whoever is playing at RE isnt going to be able to beat their blocker one on one

*moloch41* · #3 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

The only reason I think Dorsey would really help is that would probably move Carriker out to DE, which I think he's better suited for.

*mde8352gorams* · #4 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

I think the decision of who makes more sense revolves around the type of defense we'll be playing. In a 4-3 we may need more of a DE to augment the pass rush. And then is AC the best option if we draft Dorsey? I've read so many different viewpoints on that, I'm no sure if he's best suited for the outside. Plus then we have to make sure his injury won't restrict his skills.

In a 3-4 we need Dorsey to plug the middle against the run and rush the passer. In that scenario we'll need to draft a "Gholston-type" guy who can play upright and rush the passer at the OLB spot. IMHO it's not Pisa.

Regardless I think the best option is to focus on the DL either Long or Dorsey. I hope Orlando can play at least another year or 2 at his Pro-Bowl level.

We'll know more in 26 days. This is a good thread.

Go Rams!:r

*Goldenfleece* · #5 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

Both and neither. When any player on the defensive line is getting double-teamed, that's one less player blocking other guys on the field. Here's the thing, though: Dorsey might make our defensive ends look better, which would make them just look really bad instead of god-awful. On the other hand, getting a defensive end like Long or Gholston might not make Carriker or Ryan look that much better...but those guys don't necessarily need someone else making them look better because even as rookies, they performed so much better than our defensive ends did last year.

*Mooselini* · #6 (**permalink**) -31-03-2008

Well I was expecting more answers from the boys on this one.

Looking at our point of view, we need a DE to play on the otherside of Little. Moving Carriker is an option, but he's performed so well at DT. Ryan as well, I don't think we should be risking ourselves and just get a DE in the first round.

*VegasRam* · #7 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldenfleece

Both and neither. When any player on the defensive line is getting double-teamed, that's one less player blocking other guys on the field. Here's the thing, though: Dorsey might make our defensive ends look better, which would make them just look really bad instead of god-awful. On the other hand, getting a defensive end like Long or Gholston might not make Carriker or Ryan look that much better...but those guys don't necessarily need someone else making them look better because even as rookies, they performed so much better than our defensive ends did last year.

Good points. (esp, "really bad instead of god awful"

) I've probably changed my mind, because as good as Dorsey may end up being, I doubt he'll be better next year as a rookie than Carriker or even Ryan.

Long or Gholsten it is. (UNLESS... Dorsey IS selected, and IS the next Sapp, and IS rookie of the year, and takes the double team off of Little)

*39thebeast* · #8 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Its not all about the sacks at DT guys. If Dorsey can consistently draw the double like he did in college and get 5-8 sacks i'll be extremely happy. Heres why when a DT draws the double DE's are getting one on one match ups that makes it easier for them to get to the QB. I think this would make up for a guy like Adam Carriker's lack of speed of the edge.

Just look how Dorsey affected guys around him like AL Woods, Kirsten Pittman and Tyson Jackson (who has been compared to and is verry comparable to Carriker) Just watch LSU this year all of them won't be as good and they are going to wish they came out with Dorsey especially Jackson. I would be ecstatic to get a high impact player and put him in our line up and make the guys around him better

A better comparison than Warren Sapp for Dorsey is Tommy Harris. Look at the defensive decrease of all the players in Chicago especially in sacks when Harris was out. I would expect Dorsey to have a similar or better stat progression throughout his career than Tommie Harris if he stays healthy

*Bar-bq* · #9 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Should this be in the "draft" forum?

I'm of the belief that there needs only be one strategy heading into the NFL draft. If it's not broke...why fix it?

And I think that's what we're seeing happening here. A lot of people want to plug Dorsey into our DT rotation, which already consists of Ryan and occasionally Carriker on the Nose, and Carriker, Glover and Clifton Ryan at Under Tackle. The DT unit was one of our most consistent units last season. And it seems like people are all too keen to add another player, who they consider BPA, to the rotation when there are so many needs elsewhere.

But here's the catch; Dorsey is not the clear-cut BPA, and it seems like we're not in an age where you simply take the best player available, regardless of how that player fits in your system (with the obvious exceptions, of course, of Reggie Bush and Calvin Johnson). It's about marrying need with your ability to take the player who best fits your scheme. And right now, Dorsey is not the clear-cut BPA.

How do I know? Just about every fan oon here has a "4 man" draft board, and would claim to be happy with each. So, in my opinion, there is not one consensus BPA but 4 or 5 contenders for the title, with none head and shoulders above the rest. There isn't a Calvin Johnson in this year's class.

So why plug a BPA condender into a scheme which is already packed and increasingly productive? It negates a) your ability to get production out of the players you already have by limiting their snaps b) the ability of your number 2 draft pick to be on the field as much as possible because he's competing with fur other guys in the rotation. One is last year's #1, another is one of the most promising late round picks we've seen in a while, another is an 8 time pro bowler, and the other is rumoured to have renewed his dedication to football (Whether that will last or not- I'll really believe it when I see it).

Moreover, from a fiscal standpoint, it doesn't make sense to pay two top 15 draft picks to do the same job, and see the field only half of the time. Even the best Two-Headed RB monsters in the league aren't both highly paid first rounders. (With the exception of Bush/McAllister)

That's why I'd be more than happy to select a defensive end, or Jake Long. You are still getting a BPA candidate. You're just getting one who fills a more immediate need and can contribute more often to your team.

*itsguud* · #10 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by mde8352gorams

I think the decision of who makes more sense revolves around the type of defense we'll be playing. In a 4-3 we may need more of a DE to augment the pass rush. And then is AC the best option if we draft Dorsey? I've read so many different viewpoints on that, I'm no sure if he's best suited for the outside. Plus then we have to make sure his injury won't restrict his skills.

In a 3-4 we need Dorsey to plug the middle against the run and rush the passer. In that scenario we'll need to draft a "Gholston-type" guy who can play upright and rush the passer at the OLB spot. IMHO it's not Pisa.

I don't know exact size, but judging from Dorsey's play I have seen in highlights and game film... he is not big enough to be an NFL 3-4 NT. IMO

*blood85* · #11 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Let's get Chris Long, making that defense younger, better and faster.

**txramsfan** · #12 (**permalink**) -01-04-2008

Actually, Jeff Gordon made a great point about Carriker. He really wasn't technically drafted to play DT. He played there out of necessity. He was an either DE or DT draft pick, so he can play outside.

With Dorsey adding pressure up the middle, you can't double team both DE's. Put a double team on Dorsey and Little, that frees up Carriker to go up against a TE possibly.