Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Free Safety. Ball hawk or tactician?

ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:13 pm
Ok, so the Adams thread got me thinking. Adams was rarely ever picked on during the 2016 season. PFF loves him and considering QBs rarely threw his way one has to think the guy was generally in the right place at the right time on most days. Obviously, he didn't have much flash and didn't come away with many picks or anything.

So what say you? Would you rather have a technically sound FS as your last line of defense or would you rather have a ball hawk that takes chances and can maybe turn a game around?

Personally, I think you can make a case for either.
Why is it one or the other?  
robbieballs2003 : 7/8/2017 8:20 pm : link
And the answer is pretty obvious to me. Didn't Stevie Brown have a lot of interceptions? How many blown plays did he account for? He was a human highlight reel for all the wrong reasons.
yeah .... I like to think of the perfect FS  
short lease : 7/8/2017 8:24 pm : link
as a tactical ball hawk.
Andrew Adams benefited from strong personnel around him much like  
SGMen : 7/8/2017 8:29 pm : link
Dak Prescott benefited from strong personnel around him.

If healthy, D. Thompson is both a ballhawk and tactician. Now, Andrew is going to get his snaps in various nickel/dime formations and such but D. Thompson is the starter.
Ok. Obviously the ideal guy is  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:30 pm : link
both. lol. Those guys are also likely called pro bowlers. Generally, a guy that seeks out interceptions though will leave himself out of position on plays. It's great when they make a play and sucks when they don't. My point is... would you rather have a guy that gambles or a guy content to be in the correct position, make the tackle, ect. ?
RE: Andrew Adams benefited from strong personnel around him much like  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:30 pm : link
In comment 13523398 SGMen said:
Quote:
Dak Prescott benefited from strong personnel around him.

If healthy, D. Thompson is both a ballhawk and tactician. Now, Andrew is going to get his snaps in various nickel/dime formations and such but D. Thompson is the starter.


Ok. Thanks for that. Wasn't really my question though.
If you ask me...  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:31 pm : link
Adams was better last year than people are giving him credit for and it's going to be a tight race this pre-season.
Thompson is no doubt a ball hawk...  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:36 pm : link
Still, out of college, negatives on his report was:

NEGATIVES

Short-armed (30 ⅜”) on a tall frame, Thompson doesn’t wow you with testing numbers. He’s an average athlete with limited hip pop when turning to run deep and would be best in a two-deep safety set where he’s not asked to cover the entire field.

Undisciplined plays on Thompson’s watch will be discussed when scouts gather to view the film. His deep coverage—especially over the top—was susceptible to double moves. Thompson bites hard on play action and will jump at the first break in the route. That style allowed him to grab those 19 interceptions in college, but you worry if he has the recovery speed to be a gambler in the NFL. His college tape didn’t show it.

When you look at Thompson’s flaws, you see some freelancing and tight hips that hold him back when he’s breaking out of his pedal. Those issues can be limiting and may be enough to drive one of the most productive safeties in the draft down the board behind less-established athletes.
You cannot have the last line of defense be gamblers.  
robbieballs2003 : 7/8/2017 8:39 pm : link
It is that simple. You have to play it safe and know when to take your shots. If you are an in the box safety you can be much more of a risk taker. Think Polamolu. When there are people backing you up it is the difference of a few yards or so. When you have nobody backing you up it is a TD. You have to understand that most of the timd the risk is not worth the reward as a deep safety.
And don't get me wrong.  
robbieballs2003 : 7/8/2017 8:41 pm : link
There is a clear difference between getting interceptions and taking risks. Just because you got and interception doesn't mean you took a risk.
Tactician  
adamg : 7/8/2017 8:43 pm : link
as per the OP's dichotomy.

I think Thompson should prove to be both based on the coaches' assessment. I like Adams though. I liked him all last year and will continue to do so. I like our safety depth and hope Jadar Johnson can knock off Berhe and the others en route to safety spot number 4.
RE: You cannot have the last line of defense be gamblers.  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:43 pm : link
In comment 13523410 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
It is that simple. You have to play it safe and know when to take your shots. If you are an in the box safety you can be much more of a risk taker. Think Polamolu. When there are people backing you up it is the difference of a few yards or so. When you have nobody backing you up it is a TD. You have to understand that most of the timd the risk is not worth the reward as a deep safety.


I tend to agree but think the biggest and best ball hawks will still leave the team exposed and it doesn't always work out obviously. The upside is that a turnover can be game changing and is worth a ton more than a tackle and being in the right position. ect. Again, I can see a case made for either and I probably wouldn't disagree with anyone's preference really
RE: And don't get me wrong.  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 8:44 pm : link
In comment 13523411 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
There is a clear difference between getting interceptions and taking risks. Just because you got and interception doesn't mean you took a risk.


Read the report I just posted. Thompson had a reputation for being undisciplined at times in college which shouldn't be all that surprising.
RE: Thompson is no doubt a ball hawk...  
SGMen : 7/8/2017 9:32 pm : link
In comment 13523406 ZGiants98 said:
Quote:
Still, out of college, negatives on his report was:

NEGATIVES

Short-armed (30 ⅜”) on a tall frame, Thompson doesn’t wow you with testing numbers. He’s an average athlete with limited hip pop when turning to run deep and would be best in a two-deep safety set where he’s not asked to cover the entire field.

Undisciplined plays on Thompson’s watch will be discussed when scouts gather to view the film. His deep coverage—especially over the top—was susceptible to double moves. Thompson bites hard on play action and will jump at the first break in the route. That style allowed him to grab those 19 interceptions in college, but you worry if he has the recovery speed to be a gambler in the NFL. His college tape didn’t show it.

When you look at Thompson’s flaws, you see some freelancing and tight hips that hold him back when he’s breaking out of his pedal. Those issues can be limiting and may be enough to drive one of the most productive safeties in the draft down the board behind less-established athletes.
Interesting on the negatives. I thought D. Thompson fell mostly due to injuries and dings. Every player outside super elite ones have negatives but tight hips for a free safety doesn't sound too good to me.

It'll be an interesting camp battle between the two.
Ballhawk  
annexOPR : 7/8/2017 9:35 pm : link
gimme the big play safety over the "good job being in position for the tackle" guy
Turnovers  
ChicagoMarty : 7/8/2017 9:38 pm : link
are key.

Guys who generate turnovers get the nod over guys who don't generate turnovers

Thompson generated turnovers in college.

If he can do the same for the Jints than we are golden
RE: Turnovers  
SGMen : 7/8/2017 9:43 pm : link
In comment 13523440 ChicagoMarty said:
Quote:
are key.

Guys who generate turnovers get the nod over guys who don't generate turnovers

Thompson generated turnovers in college.

If he can do the same for the Jints than we are golden
Nothing is as back-breaking to a team as a defensive touchdown.

I'm all for D. Thompson if he clearly has the goods to start over solid Andrew Adams.
Judgment is a big part of it. When to go for the interception  
Ira : 7/8/2017 10:01 pm : link
is something the best players just know.
RE: Judgment is a big part of it. When to go for the interception  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 10:11 pm : link
In comment 13523450 Ira said:
Quote:
is something the best players just know.


I think that assumes you are playing man coverage and the ball is just there, ect. I think what we are speaking to here are guys that "jump routes" ect. in the hope of making a play. Whether they get it done or not, it's usually a gamble to just "break off".
Like I said, the two are not really opposites.  
robbieballs2003 : 7/8/2017 10:13 pm : link
You could argue that they go together. Some interceptions are just being in the right place at the right time. Others are because you are playing within the scheme. No player wants to play with another player that doesn't do his job.

Look at the difference with Jenkins on STL and here. He was a gambler in STL. He got INTs and defensive TDs. In the Giants he continually talked about just playing within tye scheme and doing his job. What happened? We had a top defense and he is one of the top corners in the game.

Look at Collins getting pissed at Apple during the season. Apple had that one brutal game where he either did or almost singlehandedly lost that game because he was not in the right position.

This doesn't discredit turnovers at all. However, if you are asking which is more important to a defense and team overall it is executing your job. Just ask Belichick. This doesn't mean that turnovers aren't important. They are. Coaches don't teach their players to do whatever the hell they want just as long as they create turnovers. They have responsibilities that they need to execute. When you get 11 players working in unison then the turnovers are more likely. That means there is a level of trust amd understanding of what the other teammates are doing on the field.

When I played corner I always knew where my safeties were and under what defenses, down and distances, opponents, offensive schemes, game situation, etc I could take chances and be more aggressive. When I was a safety I would let the LB to my side know I was there to clean up anything behind him so he was able tp be more aggressive. I would communicate with him, the corner, and the other safety. Even if we called the same defense other information dictated what I would communicate to them.

My teammates could always rely on me as a safety to be a coach on the field to point out all the little nuances. It is way more important to be a technician than create turnovers. Safeties have to be the QB of the defense. They have one of the best vantage points on the field to make sure everybody is lined up correctly and just as important that everybody got the call.

Putting a turnover over being a technician is like saying you want to invest your entire pension in a new tech company. Yes, the return could be huge but are you willing to risk all the money you saved for your retirement on something so risky? A good safety gets how many ints per year? What about fumble recoveries. Lets say 10. Ok, that is 10 plays over a 16 game season. There could be roughly 80 dedensive snaps per game which means there could be about approximately 1280 snaps a season. Those 10 plays could be game changers. Or they could not be. Those 10 turnovers don't mean shit if your teammates cannot trust you to do your job on those other 1270 snaps.

So, for the last time i promise, being a technician and a ballhawk aren't opposite things. You can be a good technician and never create turnovers or you can do both. I think if you are a true technician then you will find ways and times to create turnovers. Turnovers are also part luck too. You cannot force them. If a QB doesn't throw your way then you cannot change that. That doesn't mean you were bad. Look at Revis for all those years. People didn't challenge him. He made Rex Ryan look smart. It is so easy to call a defense when you know you have a battle won every snap. Revis was a technician.
RE: RE: Turnovers  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 10:16 pm : link
In comment 13523441 SGMen said:
Quote:
In comment 13523440 ChicagoMarty said:


Quote:


are key.

Guys who generate turnovers get the nod over guys who don't generate turnovers

Thompson generated turnovers in college.

If he can do the same for the Jints than we are golden

Nothing is as back-breaking to a team as a defensive touchdown.

I'm all for D. Thompson if he clearly has the goods to start over solid Andrew Adams.


"If he has the goods". Well yeah... then of course. Here's what I think. I think you have two guys that are going to be pretty even and it's going to come down to the last day of pre-season. Both will have different strengths and weaknesses and both are completely different players. I don't think Adams is a big playmaker (although that could change as he gets more comfortable) and based on scouting reports of Thompson in college I think Thompson might have a chance at a decent amount of picks but he might leave us a little weaker over the top with the chance of the blown play from time to time. Again.. No right or wrong answers here. Just wondering what people prefer and also what we think the coaches might prefer.
Thompson is substantially bigger  
Marty in Albany : 7/8/2017 10:16 pm : link
Adams is substantially faster
If they are both good players, we can select the one that matches up the best against the opponent's offense.
Robbie...  
ZGiants98 : 7/8/2017 10:21 pm : link
Nobody was saying you can't have both. You point out a guy like Revis who might be the best CB of the last 30 years. That is the complete opposite of what Im talking about here. Does anyone think Adams or Thompson are pro bowlers in 2017? I sure dont. I do think they both have a chance of being solid albeit with some warts. Their warts, at least on paper today and from the information we have available, appear to be very different. One guy doesn't seem like a big play maker and the other guy has a reputation for jumping routes and leaving a defense vulnerable over the top. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion that went really further than that.
RE: Robbie...  
robbieballs2003 : 7/8/2017 10:29 pm : link
In comment 13523461 ZGiants98 said:
Quote:
Nobody was saying you can't have both. You point out a guy like Revis who might be the best CB of the last 30 years. That is the complete opposite of what Im talking about here. Does anyone think Adams or Thompson are pro bowlers in 2017? I sure dont. I do think they both have a chance of being solid albeit with some warts. Their warts, at least on paper today and from the information we have available, appear to be very different. One guy doesn't seem like a big play maker and the other guy has a reputation for jumping routes and leaving a defense vulnerable over the top. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion that went really further than that.


I think your view of DT is off. He knew the defense basically inside and out. Soags had a semi talking about him last year hiw he was barking out coverages and adjustments. He did his job. I never saw him as the player you describe him to be. That is why I keep saying that the two are not nexessarily different. Why can't both Adams and DT be technicians? Just because DT created turnovers in college doesn't mean he abandoned his post.
Ok.  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 12:04 am : link
I don't think 1.5 professional games is enough of a sample to just say... Ok cool. He's a stud. Done deal.

Likely, his MUCH larger body of work in college will show up in the pros and we have a lot more data and ability to assess the kind of player he was there for now. Some scouting reports I've read, suggest he was a bit of a gambler. I would think most ball hawks are actually (no I'm not talking about the perfect all-pro types).

This wasn't a bash Thompson thread. I think you're confused.

RE: Ok.  
adamg : 7/9/2017 12:10 am : link
In comment 13523497 ZGiants98 said:
Quote:
I don't think 1.5 professional games is enough of a sample to just say... Ok cool. He's a stud. Done deal.

Likely, his MUCH larger body of work in college will show up in the pros and we have a lot more data and ability to assess the kind of player he was there for now. Some scouting reports I've read, suggest he was a bit of a gambler. I would think most ball hawks are actually (no I'm not talking about the perfect all-pro types).

This wasn't a bash Thompson thread. I think you're confused.


To be fair, you created a false dichotomy in the premise in the OP which forced these kinds of problems to arise. In trying to find the primary or more necessary trait, you're forcing people to either declare Adams or Thompson is preferred when more goes into it.
RE: Ok.  
robbieballs2003 : 7/9/2017 12:13 am : link
In comment 13523497 ZGiants98 said:
Quote:
I don't think 1.5 professional games is enough of a sample to just say... Ok cool. He's a stud. Done deal.

Likely, his MUCH larger body of work in college will show up in the pros and we have a lot more data and ability to assess the kind of player he was there for now. Some scouting reports I've read, suggest he was a bit of a gambler. I would think most ball hawks are actually (no I'm not talking about the perfect all-pro types).

This wasn't a bash Thompson thread. I think you're confused.


I never said you bashed him. Maybe I am confused at what you were asking but your OP was pretty clear on what you asked and i think I answered that. My opinion of DT is coming from more than 1.5 games. It is coming from the rookie minicamp, OTAs, minicamp, training camp, and the preseason as well. Spags needs guys he can trust. So, while his scouting reports say one thing there is more to him than that just like what people were saying about Jenkins before he showed what he could do here.

Can you explain what i am confused about? Your OP was about what would you prefer a technician or a ballhawk. I think I very clearly answered that amd supported my opinion.
RE: RE: Ok.  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 12:19 am : link
In comment 13523498 adamg said:
Quote:
In comment 13523497 ZGiants98 said:


Quote:


I don't think 1.5 professional games is enough of a sample to just say... Ok cool. He's a stud. Done deal.

Likely, his MUCH larger body of work in college will show up in the pros and we have a lot more data and ability to assess the kind of player he was there for now. Some scouting reports I've read, suggest he was a bit of a gambler. I would think most ball hawks are actually (no I'm not talking about the perfect all-pro types).

This wasn't a bash Thompson thread. I think you're confused.




To be fair, you created a false dichotomy in the premise in the OP which forced these kinds of problems to arise. In trying to find the primary or more necessary trait, you're forcing people to either declare Adams or Thompson is preferred when more goes into it.


That's fair I guess although is it really a false dichotomy? Does it have to be either/or? Can't they both have strengths and weakness and still be good players? Can't the coaches decide at the end of training camp which strengths they prefer in a starting role?
RE: RE: Ok.  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 12:29 am : link
In comment 13523500 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
In comment 13523497 ZGiants98 said:


Quote:


I don't think 1.5 professional games is enough of a sample to just say... Ok cool. He's a stud. Done deal.

Likely, his MUCH larger body of work in college will show up in the pros and we have a lot more data and ability to assess the kind of player he was there for now. Some scouting reports I've read, suggest he was a bit of a gambler. I would think most ball hawks are actually (no I'm not talking about the perfect all-pro types).

This wasn't a bash Thompson thread. I think you're confused.




I never said you bashed him. Maybe I am confused at what you were asking but your OP was pretty clear on what you asked and i think I answered that. My opinion of DT is coming from more than 1.5 games. It is coming from the rookie minicamp, OTAs, minicamp, training camp, and the preseason as well. Spags needs guys he can trust. So, while his scouting reports say one thing there is more to him than that just like what people were saying about Jenkins before he showed what he could do here.

Can you explain what i am confused about? Your OP was about what would you prefer a technician or a ballhawk. I think I very clearly answered that amd supported my opinion.


I thought you were confused because it seemed like you were making my point into something "against Thompson". If you weren't fine. You seem a little defensive about who Thompson is as a player, though. We have barely a scratch of data on him, your OTA observations not withstanding. It's all good and frankly I'm beyond caring.

Rather than defend that players "can be both" I guess what I would have liked you to do would be to hypothetically play along and go with the fact that you did have two players that had the weaknesses and strengths that I laid out. In that hypothetical, which would you prefer? Some people got what I was saying fairly easily. There were people that immediately said they would prefer a player that gambled and created turnovers, leaving the top of the defense soft be damned. Others said a FS job is to be the last line of defense and they SHOULDN'T gamble, ect. That's the kind of responses I was looking for. To sort of get a pulse on what people hold more important.
Again,  
robbieballs2003 : 7/9/2017 12:42 am : link
I feel I was very clear with that hypothetical where I said technician but realized you wrote tactician over a ballhawk.
I think it's a good question  
adamg : 7/9/2017 12:45 am : link
Clearly people remember the highlights (Eagles game was mentioned explicitly), but don't remember the blown coverages (no mention of particular games where Adams missed plays)....
RE: Again,  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 12:47 am : link
In comment 13523510 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
I feel I was very clear with that hypothetical where I said technician but realized you wrote tactician over a ballhawk.


It's fine. I get what you were saying. Sounds like you are clearly making a case in my hypothetical for tactician (IE Adams) but are excited for Thompson so you are trying to defend against the premise of this thread because you think Thompson can be both. I get it. I was reading his scouting reports that suggest otherwise though so thought it might be an interesting topic. There's a disconnect there but it's all good.
RE: I think it's a good question  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 12:51 am : link
In comment 13523511 adamg said:
Quote:
Clearly people remember the highlights (Eagles game was mentioned explicitly), but don't remember the blown coverages (no mention of particular games where Adams missed plays)....


Yes. This exactly. And for this very reason I feel Adams doesn't get enough credit as he might deserve. I brought it up in the other thread but good QBs will find the weak link on D and exploit it. When DRC went down in the playoffs, Rodgers went to town. This simply didn't happen to Adams all year which in the very least tells me he was in the right position most of the time. PFF only helps reaffirm this.
DT was such a confusing prospect.  
robbieballs2003 : 7/9/2017 12:56 am : link
I remember reading reports that were so different from one another. You would read one and it would say he was a SS. Read another and he was a FS. One said he was a poor tackler. Another said he was a solid tackler. I never saw a prospect have such different writeups. So, imo, I trust what Spags says about players. He doesn't BS. If he needs to see more from a player he says that. From day one it was all praise for DT. He basically had the job locked up extremely early and not because there was a lack of competition but because Spags trusted him. That says more to me than any scouting report. So, this isn't me being argumentative at all. I am just stating what I have heard/seen/read about him. Everybody has a right to their opinion. That is just what I believe about him as a player. And, yes, you hit the nail on the head when you say I prefer the tactician and think it is DT's job to lose.
Got it.  
ZGiants98 : 7/9/2017 1:03 am : link
That's your feelings on it. Mine are that even if Thompson does win the job I still think he's going to be a bit of a gambler. Guys generally dont rack up as many picks as he did in college without jumping routes and being a little undisciplined. I also don't think it's necessarily a bad thing as long as he's picking his spots somewhat appropriately.

I think we can all agree Thompson and Adams have different styles and different strengths and weaknesses and it will be a close battle this pre-season. How far you want to take it from there is up to you. :)
Surprised  
grizz299 : 7/9/2017 7:19 am : link
about the reports coming out about Adams. I didn't realize what I was looking at last year. I heard that he was a weakness and believed it. Unlike many, I believe in the now ciculating report or analysis..Not that its an absolute, but clearly anyone who goes over game film (even if he makes mistakes) is going to come up with a better report than my vaguness watching from a limited action, no replay, no depth of understanding...living room.
I want the conservative last line of defense. For lots of reasons, but also because It will produce MORE not less INTs.
The idea of "last line of defense" I have you covered means ints are pushed to the CB's who will feel empowered. They are the ones you want gambling and risking and they can only do that if there's a security blanket in back of them...Keep the play in front of you, don't get beat deep...that's the first amendment in a Free Safety's constitution.
The one man on the field I don't want gambling.
RE: Surprised  
SGMen : 7/9/2017 9:08 am : link
In comment 13523531 grizz299 said:
Quote:
about the reports coming out about Adams. I didn't realize what I was looking at last year. I heard that he was a weakness and believed it. Unlike many, I believe in the now ciculating report or analysis..Not that its an absolute, but clearly anyone who goes over game film (even if he makes mistakes) is going to come up with a better report than my vaguness watching from a limited action, no replay, no depth of understanding...living room.
I want the conservative last line of defense. For lots of reasons, but also because It will produce MORE not less INTs.
The idea of "last line of defense" I have you covered means ints are pushed to the CB's who will feel empowered. They are the ones you want gambling and risking and they can only do that if there's a security blanket in back of them...Keep the play in front of you, don't get beat deep...that's the first amendment in a Free Safety's constitution.
The one man on the field I don't want gambling.
I'm not for a gambler either. I want the guy who is in position to PREVENT the big play deep every single time. The interceptions will come and are of course important but lets keep plays from getting past the 11th guy.
As for who wins the job, I still have D. Thompson winning the job but much of that is based on last year's early pre-injury performance and the fact I had the notion embedded in my head that Adams was the weak link on defense last year. Maybe not so based on these write-up?

My "wildcard" surprise guy this year is M. Thompson, our 3rd year guy who is finally healthy. He has talent and versatility but has not been able to stay healthy. I see him as our potential 4th CB; backup nickel CB; 3rd FS. He is going to bust out and show well this year, you wait and see!
M. Thompson...  
grizz299 : 7/9/2017 9:30 am : link
I have seldom seen more talent among the starters. I count something like 10 all pro types.
But what really amazing, given the implicatons of a cap ,is the amount of depth we see.
Imagine a third CB like Apple.... I'd suggest that s unheard of, and then you've got guys like Hunter and M.Thompson in back of Apple.
This post has earned it's way down to Adams v. Thompson which means on will be depth.
King, Lewis maybe don't make this squad. Tye looks like a cut. I know Eli is titanium, but there's talent behind him for once.
A star like Harris is being talked about in terms of a cut. Darkwa (who I think could be brilliant) is another one.
From top to bottom this is an astouding group of talent.
Go back to the first game against Dallas and watch Thompson  
WillieYoung : 7/9/2017 9:33 am : link
from the deep right safety position tackle Zeke 1 on 1 two yards behind the line of scrimmage on a run off tackle left. Then try to claim it is going to be a tough training camp battle at safety - - nonsense.
If Thompson is healthy  
UConn4523 : 7/9/2017 9:39 am : link
he's head and shoulders better than Adams, IMO. We could have something special in the secondary if he's past his foot injury.
RE: M. Thompson...  
SGMen : 7/9/2017 9:49 am : link
In comment 13523574 grizz299 said:
Quote:
I have seldom seen more talent among the starters. I count something like 10 all pro types.
But what really amazing, given the implicatons of a cap ,is the amount of depth we see.
Imagine a third CB like Apple.... I'd suggest that s unheard of, and then you've got guys like Hunter and M.Thompson in back of Apple.
This post has earned it's way down to Adams v. Thompson which means on will be depth.
King, Lewis maybe don't make this squad. Tye looks like a cut. I know Eli is titanium, but there's talent behind him for once.
A star like Harris is being talked about in terms of a cut. Darkwa (who I think could be brilliant) is another one.
From top to bottom this is an astouding group of talent.
My list of "probowl" (I'll call it top 20% of league for position talent) for defense has to include:

CB Jenkins
SS Collins
CB DRC (nickel)
DE JPP
DE Vernon
DT SNacks

Top 40% (of course this is just fun guesswork):

FS D. Thompson
CB Apple
MLB Goodson (as a 1st & 2nd down LB)

I'm pretty confident in the 20% group, but if the 40% group is correct or they end up ranked in the top 20% then watch out NFL!
Patton  
oldog : 7/9/2017 10:55 am : link
or Montgomery?
Holy crap!  
Doomster : 7/9/2017 11:53 am : link
Thompson is substantially bigger
Marty in Albany : 7/8/2017 10:16 pm : link : reply
Adams is substantially faster

Then Thompson must be a slug....
ball hawk ...  
annexOPR : 7/9/2017 12:09 pm : link
tactician ...

I'm partial to interception monsters myself.
"iNTERCEPTION MONSTER" - ( New Window )
RE: Holy crap!  
Klaatu : 7/9/2017 12:16 pm : link
In comment 13523661 Doomster said:
Quote:
Thompson is substantially bigger
Marty in Albany : 7/8/2017 10:16 pm : link : reply
Adams is substantially faster

Then Thompson must be a slug....


DT was sick at the Combine, where he ran a 4.69 40. Adams did not attend the Combine, so let's compare their Pro Days.

Thompson, 6-2, 208:
40: 4.58.
20: 2.67.
10: 1.59.

Adams, 5-11, 201:
40: 4.54.
20: 2.60.
10: 1.54.
...  
annexOPR : 7/9/2017 12:27 pm : link
I want a guy like DT making diving INT's from time to time opposite a guy like Collins, who quite frankly is so good it doesn't matter who the free safety is.

Apple DRC JJ DT Collins ... good luck Dak.
Tactician  
BlackburnBalledOut : 7/9/2017 9:05 pm : link
last line of defense needs to be a sound tackler and strong cover man. Adams checks both boxes...i love a ball hawk, who doesnt, but give me the technically sound guy making every play.
RE: Turnovers  
BlackburnBalledOut : 7/9/2017 9:07 pm : link
In comment 13523440 ChicagoMarty said:
Quote:
are key.

Guys who generate turnovers get the nod over guys who don't generate turnovers

Thompson generated turnovers in college.

If he can do the same for the Jints than we are golden



so did tyler sash and cooper taylor.......
Adams could get a lot more interceptions  
Jimmy Googs : 7/10/2017 6:02 am : link
but it would require being on the same side of the field as the ball...
You got me with that one  
grizz299 : 7/10/2017 9:22 am : link
Jimmy...encryptor, please.
RE: You got me with that one  
Jimmy Googs : 7/10/2017 6:29 pm : link
In comment 13524128 grizz299 said:
Quote:
Jimmy...encryptor, please.


Really, a nice little funny and I lose the audience?

Simply meant that he is never where the ball is...
They say the biggest jump in "learning / ability / understanding" is  
SGMen : 7/10/2017 11:07 pm : link
from year 1 to year 2. We saw that with Landon Collins last year but not with Erek Flowers. We heard whispers that Flowers maybe didn't work as hard during the off-season as he should have hence the lack of progress.

Andrew Adams worked hard this off-season, at least that is the feeling you get based on reports. D. Thompson is likely the starter if healthy and ready but if he isn't I'm fine with Andrew Adams who should be improved and therefore may end up being around the ball more, grabbing some turnovers for the Giants. Camp can't come fast enough!
Back to the Corner