Jake did 37 last year. Still for a guy of Veikune's size, 35 is excellent.

 

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?

 

I obviously like David Veikune and I got to draft him 122 overall in the GM League.

 

I'd take Kruger at 44 or 57 and wouldn't look back.

Gotcha. Thanks for explaining.

 

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 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.

 

So you are a fan of LeSean McCoy then? :shifty:

 

Absolutely. Been a fan since his freshmen year. Lets just hope he doesn't end up like his brother. ;)

 

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.

 

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?

 

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).

 

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.

 

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