To me, this is a great comparison between two players who have similar games and measurables: David Veikune: http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/de/David-Veikune.php 6'2/7/4.76/4.87/254/35 reps Grade rd 3-4 Paul Kruger: http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/de/Paul-Kruger.php 6'4/263/4.72/4.94/24 reps Grade Late 2 early 3 From reports, they are similar prospects, though Veikune was slightly faster on average then Kruger, Paul Kruger managed the better single 40 yd time. Veikune is strong as an ox, 35 reps is Jake Long's number from last years Combine. So head to head, between the two, both may be available in the third round, who would you draft and why?
So head to head, who would you take? As for me, I like them both, Veikune has the edge because if we are looking for a Roth with an upside, he would seem like a better fit for us, but he couldn't swing over to play WOLB if Porter is hurt this season. And 3rd or 4th round is a great value for a guy who can start.
Kruger could play both IMO. He's got a good enough first step to play weak side and he can set the edge on the strong side. Btw, how are the measurables the same? Kruger is 2 inches bigger than Veikune, 6 pounds heavier while Veikune had 11 more reps and ran a faster forty?
Enough to leap 30 positions in the draft our #3 the 89 or so vs the #2 the #57? And that is what I meant with Talent v Value. Similar Alen, that is what makes Veikune v Kruger an interesting match up, their strengths are in different areas, but their measurables are similar. One is a stronger player, the other maybe a bit more mobile.
Sets the edge more consistently and has spent time as an OLB in Utah's 3-4. Not to mention Kruger would likely start over Roth.
I'd take Kruger. Not the same workout numbers as Veikune, but I like his game better, for basically the same reasons Alen gave.
I find myself leaning to Veikune just on a value basis, if there at #87 we can take a CB/Wr with the #2 picks, and he is stout enough to fill in for Roth, and he could also play as a down lineman if he bulked up. Nothing against Kruger though, but I did notice he had the dreaded "Short Arms" disease...which used to be the thing Roth was labeled with.
I think if you go by value, then you won't ever end up with the best players. Its kind of the same thing that rafael posted with needs in my opinion. What stands out to me between Kruger and Veikune is that Kruger could start. I don't see the same for Veikune because I don't think he will set the edge as well. Short arms, slow forty, injuries off the field are all brought up with Kruger; Yet he gets the job done. That's all that matters to me to be honest. I don't put much stock in numbers, barely any honestly. I just look at the tape.
Kruger has 32.5-33" arms from what I've seen. Matt Roth had 30 7/8" arms. His arms are not vines, but they are about the average for most players his size. 33" is fine for arm length.
Tape tells me all, yes. I have more trust in the tape than the combine. They likely can't handle the pressure or maybe they interviewed poorly and teams still took a chance on them. Maybe they lacked a work ethic. There's many other things than the tape.
There are things about a player's game that become apparent the more you watch. There are little things that show up and can prove to be very telling on the next level. Like if a guy does not lead with his hands a great deal. Then chances are, no matter how hyped he is, he's gonna struggle to get free a great deal IMO.
Bruce Smith normally let the OT get his hands on him though Conu, there is a school of pass rushing that doesn't rely on hand techniques as much as others. It's a sort of chest bump and power through the blocker move, granted it is not used alot because the athlete who uses it has to special, B Smith could do it, Kevin Greene never could. I can recall Glenn Dorsey blowing by a then hyped OSU tackle (Alex Boone) and it looked like he had explosiveness required to play outside, but it turned out that Boone was pretender and KC is stuck with a tweener (so far anyway). Tape does not tell the whole story, it's the projection off the tape that matters, at least that is what Ireland stated at the presser. As for Veikune, I've seen him in three games, what impresses me is his motor he keeps himself "alive" for plays, so did Scott Mckellop.
I like Kruger's natural instinct for playing in space, his intelligence, drive, heart, and athleticism (nationally ranked HS QB). These traits make for a very good pro. Posted via Mobile Device
kruger's 3 cone time 6.91 veikune's 3 cone 7.20 kruger is way quicker at changing directions. all the other times [ 10 yd split,shuttle,.. broad jump] are very close. would like to know the arm lengths of each since veicune had 11 more reps on the bench.
Just for official reference, from the Combine: Paul Kruger: 6'4 1/4 263 32 3/4" Arms 9 1/2" Hands 4.86 40 Time 24 Reps David Veikune: 6'2 3/8 257 33 1/4" Arms 10 3/8" Hands 4.87 40 35 Reps http://www.footballsfuture.com/2009/combine/de.html
Obviously there are more elements to it than the simple one I mentioned, but my basic point is that tendencies to become apparent from watching film. The other thing is who are they playing, as you mentioned. I guess I'm looking at it from a slightly different view though I guess. I've seen so many of these guys plays games, it is ridiculous. Some guys need to win battles off the snap or they are dead, some guys are better as the plays develops due to their hand use, some guys can extend, but never move their hands. Some guys have bad feet, played straight legged, too tall, dip their heads etc. Tons of little things that do give you a big picture. I guess right now I benefit from watching so many of these guys that I have a wide base to compare them. If you watch an entire class of prospects, it is a great deal easier to slot them into places and compare them. I am writing up both over the next day or so, so i will come back and post the links for you guys - would that work, in terms of my thoughts on both?
True, if one looks at Larry English (who could have easily been in this discussion) the money is made in successfully projecting them into the NFL. Probably Conu, I have a feel for a players game but that's all, youube highlight reels only reveal so much, but the guys I like I've seen play in several games. Sounds great! For me, Kruger is more mobile, but weaker, Veikune is more powerful, but can disappear, I think Veikune is a bit more polished as a DE though.
Look how evenly matched they are on paper, to me this comparison is a good test of how they translate to the draft, as for translating to the NFL, that is far more complicated.
Not trying to take anything away from Paul, but considering David's arm length I find his +11 reps very impressive.
They are a nice indication, but they apply more to the offensive side of the ball when the player already know which way the play is going or which way they want to move. On the defensive side, these drills point out nothing more than a players capacity to perform this way as the player does not not which way the play is going or which way their next step will have to be. (in the drills, the player knows exactly where their marks and changes of direction are.) Instincts and reaction time play a bigger role. A half second longer to read and react to a play is a longer overall time even though a player might be 2/10 of a second faster in these drills. Reaction time coupled with accuracy of your read are what make good shuttle and come times really effective on the field. Posted via Mobile Device
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=14790&draftyear=2009&genpos=DE http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=72893&draftyear=2009&genpos=DE They have Kruger's 3 cone at 7.52. I am inclined to believe the 7.52 from that site as opposed to your unreferenced 6.91 (which is .01 secs slower than Clay Matthews for reference).
So Veikune is a bit quicker as well? At least in the three cone drill. I do have to go with Alen a bit on that one Kruger does seem a bit more mobile to me out on the field, Veikune is more of a power guy, not a change of direction player.
I'm not saying one way or the other in regards to their play (I have not got to see either of them enough), I am just disputing Kruger running the 3-cone in 6.91s.
Fair enough, the thing with these sorts of DE/OLB types have troubles in their hips when they try to change directions in coverages, it's not easy for a 250 pd man to flip their hip and turn and go with a Te or Rb out of the backfield and still be powerful enough to stuff the run.
IMO Kruger plays with more instinct. That's why I think he's a better prospect. The strength thing is something that can be improved. I think that's one of the things Parcells feels is least important b/c if they have a good work ethic he can stick him in their off-season program and get their strength up.
Veikune also never played OLB. He could flourish in that roll or fold. Veikune has a great motor and thats one thing I really like about him. He never seemed to quit, But I think this guy can succeed as a OLB or Rass Rushing DE (4-3). He is too small to play end full time and I don't think that will ever change cause it would be really hard to add more weight to his fram.
you may be right but that is true of all tests its a set enviroment if a guy tests faster he is faster. kruger clearly isn't as i read the wrong time for him it was 7.52. instincts is what your going to find by watching film which should be most of the evaluation anyway.
Padre already knows I am one of the wheels on the Veilune bandwagon and I've already done a thread in this and the club forum on him. I was ready to say draft him w/ our 3rd rd pick but...Now that we have traded places w/ the Raiders in rd 4 we may be able to pick him w/ that pick if he falls. With the expected early run on OLB/DE types I'm not sold that he even makes it to our third rd pick honestly. Veikune had a GREAT Senior Bowl week and Game, he had good numbers - great numbers at the combine, followed it up with a good pro-day. Here is last seasons stat line: 73 tackles (16½ for loss), nine sacks and four forced fumbles I think we would take 16 1/2 TFL 9 sacks and 4 FF from any of our DE/OLB players not named Peezy and be laughin', wouldn't we. I must confess I've never seen Kruger play so I can't offer an unbiased opinion of who to rate higher.
That wasn't necessarily directed at you, DW...but more to people who over emphasize these drills as absolutes regarding speed and quickness. Like I said, they're more relevant to the offensive side of the ball. On the defensive side, they should be taken with a grain of salt. LOL