KFFL Mock Draft

[smizzhfx]

KFFL - Article - 2008 NFL Mock Draft: Rounds 1-2

Rams mock:

Rd 1: #2 Glenn Dorsey - DT - LSU
Rd 2: #33 James Hardy - WR - Indiana


Not how I would have envisioned the 1st round..

Allows DT Adam Carriker back to DE; shores up interior and run defense; may consider OT Jake Long

Why move Carriker inside for his rookie season, then right back out again as a sophmore? Make the learning curve a little steeper?

I don't like this draft at all.. we come out of day 1 without really addressing the DE spot and no OL depth.

[Nick]

The people who justify the Dorsey pick by talking about moving Carriker out to defensive end really make me scratch my head.

[TekeRam]

When we drafted him, it made sense to move him to UT because he was a beast of a 3-4 DE and could get some good interior pass rush. Then they said he'd play the nose. He was willing and seemed to do a good job there. Now people want to move him out to a position he never really played? That's the thing. He was never a pass rushing, speed end in college. He played in a one gap 3-4 at Nebraska, and so he got the numbers needed to be a top pick, much like Long did in his first three years, but he never played in a 4-3 full time so I'm not sure how well he'll do out there. He won't be a solution to our pass rush, that's for sure.

[Mooselini]

Nick, I'm sorry for my prior post.

But I do agree that who ever thinks we should move Carriker back out side, probably thinks he'll be productive. I seriously doubt it.

He's been a great DT, and I know he'll only get better.

[Bar-bq]

I don't like this at all.

Why move Carriker?

Dorsey is one of the few "blue chip" players I just don't think you can justify a strong case for at pick number two.

[Bald_81]

Why move Carriker inside for his rookie season, then right back out again as a sophmore? Make the learning curve a little steeper?

I'm not justifying the pick by using this as an example (although I'd be happy with Dorsey) but the Giants used Kiwanuka at DE (his natural position) as a rookie and then in his second year player they tried to convert him to LB. He did not make it through the entire season but the end result wasn't as bad as what people thought going into the season. I would have no problem watching Carriker going back to DE even though he has excelled as a UT if Dorsey was the pick.

[Nick]

I'm not justifying the pick by using this as an example

Okay, but then why bring it up? Moving a DE to LB is vastly different from moving a DT to DE. If the example isn't applicable to our situation, what purpose does it serve in the discussion?

I would have no problem watching Carriker going back to DE even though he has excelled as a UT if Dorsey was the pick.

I would, because we'd still have to find someone to help our pass rush from out there. Carriker isn't going to challenge the edge like we need our new DE to. Additionally, we just asked Carriker to bulk up to over 300 pounds last season. Now we're going to ask him to drop the weight and move outside?

There are a number of problems with this idea, IMO.

[smizzhfx]

There are a number of problems with this idea, IMO.

The main one being we did nothing to address our lack of pass rush..

Carriker and Dorsey are both big-body run-stopping types - sure they can collapse the pocket every now and then - but in terms of an edge rush we're back to square 1.

[Bald_81]

Okay, but then why bring it up? Moving a DE to LB is vastly different from moving a DT to DE. If the example isn't applicable to our situation, what purpose does it serve in the discussion?

Then would it not be easier for Carriker to make the transition back to the position he played in throughout college? That is what I was getting at. Kiwanuka had to go to a new position he never played at, which is a harder transition, and did surprisingly well. So, if we move Carriker back to his old position at DE, would it not be easier for him to do? That is probably how the front office views it if our pick is indeed Dorsey.

Carriker and Dorsey are both big-body run-stopping types - sure they can collapse the pocket every now and then - but in terms of an edge rush we're back to square 1.

Was Warren Sapp a big-body run-stopping type? Of course not. He got to the QB multiple times in his career (96.5 to be exact) and yet was still a force against the run as well. Dorsey is often compared to Sapp because of the same type of first step and explosion off the ball. He would hardly just be a run-stopping DT, if that were the case, the Rams wouldn't even waste their time with him.

For the past three seasons, our starting DE opposite Little has been been drafted 3rd round or lower. We have done nothing up until this point through the draft to get that type of help for him. Obviously this draft could be it, but something tells me that the Rams are going to go with a safe pick like Dorsey and J. Long (as much as I hate to say it) instead of risky players with more potential like Gholston. Again, if Chris is there, he is obviously going to be the pick in my mind, but if he isn't, I can't help but see the Rams selecting the player with the most passion, heart, and great work ethic because they can't afford to miss that high. Call me crazy if you want, but that is what I think.

[Nick]

Then would it not be easier for Carriker to make the transition back to the position he played in throughout college?

It probably is easier for Carriker to make a move from DT to DE than it would be for a player to move from 4-3 DE to 4-3 LB, but the level of ease isn't the point, nor does Mathias Kiwanuka's ability to transition have anything to do with whether or not we should consider moving Carriker. The point is what you chose not to quote, the part that briefly detailed two reasons why moving Carriker outside isn't a good idea. It's not that he can't do it, but that he shouldn't do it because his size and skills make him a much better fit inside in the 4-3.

Carriker's size, strength, and lack of explosion make him a great fit inside in a 4-3 but only an adequate fit outside as a 4-3 end. He simply does not have enough quickness in his first step to challenge the edge of the pocket. He's much more of a bull rusher, using his strength and leg drive to collapse and push back his opposition, which is again another reason why he fits better as a tackle in the 4-3. From the day the Rams drafted him, they said he was a defensive tackle. Haslett is on record as saying his best position will likely be the three-technique. After drafting him, they had Carriker put on weight to help him play inside. He spent all camp working inside and spent most of the season there, shifting outside only because injuries and depth forced the move.

I simply do not see any reason to shift him outside. When people bring it up, the thing that is most typically referred to is the "That's where he played in college" line of thinking. The problem is, as I understand it, Nebraska showed a number of defensive looks and shifted Carriker around quite a bit. But regardless, the important thing to consider isn't what position is listed on his college résumé but rather where his best fit would be given the attributes he has. And given those attributes, that spot is not a 4-3 DE.

[Bald_81]

Carriker's size, strength, and lack of explosion make him a great fit inside in a 4-3 but only an adequate fit outside as a 4-3 end.

You do make good points, but then again there is the fact that Carriker ran a 4.72 at his pro day last year, which is an eeriely similar time to the one that Chris Long ran at the combine this year. So if Chris Long has good explosion and a good first step, then why doesn't Carriker again? They're both high motor guys who collapse the pocket and force the QB into tight situations before pursing them. I don't get the fact how Long is a great 4-3 DE, but Carriker isn't yet he ran close to the same times as Long did.

I'm also one of those 'show you can't before you say you can't' type of guys as well. I want to see that Carriker can't cut it as a 4-3 DE before we are quick to harp on him as say that he shouldn't play there, because had another team selected him he could've very well been playing 4-3 DE instead of DT like we have him.

[Nick]

You do make good points, but then again there is the fact that Carriker ran a 4.72 at his pro day last year, which is an eeriely similar time to the one that Chris Long ran at the combine this year. So if Chris Long has good explosion and a good first step, then why doesn't Carriker again?

Except the set-up of your information is flawed from the get go.

First of all, you're comparing Carriker's pro day time to Long's combine time. Inherently those are two different situations because they take place at two different locations. Why not compare what they did on the same field of play - the combine? At the combine, Carriker ran a 4.9 forty. Long's was .15 seconds faster.

But even then, using the forty time in a discussion about explosion off the line of scrimmage is inaccurate to begin with, simply because the forty time is representative of how long it takes a player to run 40 yards. When talking about a first step, logically that's not the stat you want to look at. The 10-yard split would be a better measurement to examine in that regard. At the combine, Long's ten-yard split (1.53 sec) was nearly a full tenth of a second faster than Carriker's (1.6 sec), illustrating better initial explosion off the line. Their time over twenty yards illustrated the same trend.

But even then, the measurements only give you one aspect. You also have to look at the game tape and the skills you see on film. Neither of them have elite quickness off the edge, but I'd rate Long's as being better than Carriker's. From what I've seen of both players, Long challenges the edge more and has a quicker first step. Not elite explosion in the mold of some of the speed rushers out there, but certainly a good first step and quickness off the line. I also think he has a wider variety of pass rush moves than Carriker does, and shows the ability to avoid blockers when he doesn't have to initiate contact.

Again, Carriker strikes me as a bull rusher who takes on his guy and pushes him back with strength and leverage. That's more of a DT skill, or a 3-4 end skill if you like. A guy like Long might not always beat a guy off the line with quickness - though again I think he has a better shot of doing this than Carriker - but can cut back inside when he sees a crease or an opening. He's more than comfortable avoiding the blocker by taking an angle, which serves him well outside.

So again, these are some of the reasons why I think Long would be an excellent strong side (left) defensive end at the next level, whereas Carriker is better suited to remain inside at the three-technique.

I'm also one of those 'show you can't before you say you can't' type of guys as well.

They drafted him to play DT. Haslett says his best position is likely going to be the three-technique. Why spend time trying him outside when you drafted him to specifically play inside and think that's his best spot? Sorry, that makes no sense at all to me. If you picked him to be a DT (which we did) and think his best position is going to be a DT (which they do), then keep him at DT.

[eric2810]

the reason why i would be satisfied with the dorsey pick is that with him, little, glover/ryan, and carriker back at end, this would make a stable d-line that can stop the run, and yeah we need a pass rush, but we dont want to allow week in and week out 100+rushers.

[TekeRam]

And last year we only allowed one in 16 games, despite the defense spending way too much time of the field and teams running to kill the clock! Our defensive line did just fine against the run considering the situations they were put in. It was the pass that killed us.

[txramsfan]

I wouldn't put much emphasis on how many 100+ rushers we allowed last year and Teke is right, it's because QB's could throw all day on the Rams so why beat up your body running the ball. However, I wouldn't say it was just the pass rush, we were banged up in the secondary also.

I don't know if Carriker can play DE in the pros or not and no amount of 40 times is going to convince me either way until he shows if he can or can't.