Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NFL Draft Forum' started by texanphinatic, Feb 21, 2009.
fine with me. He'll be a solid player and good in coverage. Durable, elite linebacker for multiple years. the negatives seem like they are coachable, and he has the intangibles you can't coach
Unlikely you can bust the pick by choosing him
I like Laurinaitis, personally. Style wise, he strikes me as kind of similar to Brian Urlacher. Not the greatest stack and shed guy, but a sideline to sideline guy who can make plays both going forward and back on passing downs.
When you consider Kevin Burnett, his build and style of play, I could see the Dolphins having an interest in him.
Wouldn't be dissapointed by that at all either. He's got most of the checklist that Parcells & Co seem to like: size, productivity, leadership, football IQ, work ethic. Plus, as mentioned, he's good in coverage and is a decent blitzer.
From the stuff that I've been reading he seems to be a more "finished product" that Maualuga. Is this the case?
I thinked both guys have room to be coached up.
For Laurinaitis, the instincts are there, just needs to be more physical with blockers and quit relying on his speed. Since we're likely looking for a signal calling sort of ILB, I think Laurinaitis could fit that mold.
For Maualuga, the instincts are not quite there, he misses holes, takes himself out of plays by accident. But he has better size, and is a big play highlight reel type.
Depends which one you think you can coach. I would think Laurinaitis would be more coachable and you know he is very durable. I don't see either as more of a finished product than the other
Some of the comments I've read....
RE: Laurinaitis - "excellent form in wrap up and big hit tackles. Able to cover and has softer hands that you might think. Chooses correct lanes and does not waste time. Pad level is always where it needs to be."
RE: Maualuga - "Has a tendency to over pursue and not keep gap/lane control. Needs to wrap up better. May struggle covering the backs and athletic TEs coming out at the next level. Overall, needs to play with more discipline."
The discipline remarks etc, are what led me to think in those terms. The above comments aren't due to instincts for the most part, but discipline right?
I don't know enough to form a concrete conclusion, however.
I haven't done a Dolphins mock yet, but Laurinaitis is the guy I want the Phins to draft at #25 if he's there.
He strikes me as a "Parcells guy."
Oh, I couldnt disagree more with the bolded part Travis. Truth is, one of his key strengths IS his ability to play sideline to sideline.
Ranking one over the other, Maualga has LOTS of learning to do. I have seen him make tackles in the backfield due to shear athleticism, but I have also seen him get run over and completely take himself out of plays often....actually in that aspect, he reminds me quite a bit of Vernon Gholston...
What about the contention that Laurainitis has trouble shedding blocks? Have you seen this as well?.........
as I stated in an earlier post - I'm just trying to gather information.
I'd much rather take a LB like Scott McKillop of Pitt with our 2B pick. He is just as good if not better than Laurinaitis with much more potential. I think McKillop will be the next Zach Thomas and I am hoping we grab him late in the 2nd round if he is on the board.
I have seen in mentioned, mostly in here.
Truth is, the kid still makes TONS of tackles each game.
Is he the absolute beast he was made out to be going into last years draft? Probably not.
Is he going to be a very good linebacker in the right scheme? I think so.
Remember this. Many also said Zach Thomas had a tough time shedding blocks and that he was too small to play. That seemed to work out alright. I think JL is much more athletically gifted than Zach was, probably not as strong as he was, but I do see similarities in the style.
For my money, if I had to choose over the two? It would be Laurinaitis. I think he is going to fill more potential roles any scheme would ask of him, especially a 3-4 that utilizes very large DE's..
Yet it's reported that he's not a good blitzer and he has trouble shedding blocks - the very thing that some people say Laurainitis can't do either.
So why would you prefer to take him? What is it that gives him more potential?
I watched five of Pitt's games this year and McKillop just has more desire than just about any LB I have seen on the college level. That's why he reminds me of Zach. I have watched Laurinaitis as well, and I don't have that many issues with him, I just feel McKillop will be better at the next level.
Nobody is going to work harder than this guy. He has only really been playing the middle LB position for a couple years but he just keeps getting better. I just think we can get McKillop at the 2B spot, so why waste the #25 overall on a guy who in my opinion is not better then McKillop. We can take Hakeem Nicks with the #25, or Alex Mack, than go with a CB like Sean Smith of Utah or Victor Harris of Va Tech with the 2A, and then take McKillop with the 2B.
Here is a nice article on McKillop:
Zach didn't play in a 3-4 (most of the time), and he did have trouble shedding blocks (see any game versus the Jets with Mawae at C). When Zach started his career he had Tim Bowens and Gardener in front of him, and Larry Chester and other big guys after that. Zach was very smart, hustled, and was a sound tackler. That doesn't mean he was great at shed blocks (not that he was bad at it).
Thanks for that. It is a good write up.
I like this part......"The senior middle linebacker is so destructive that he has torn through five facemasks and two helmets this season. As a last resort, late in the year, McKillop began wearing a titanium facemask ("If I ever bent a titanium facemask," he said, "something's wrong.")
"My favorite story involved a defensive coach for one team asking Ohio State linebacker James Laurinaitis why they should pick him. "Tell me something,'' the coach said. "When is the last time a linebacker from Ohio State came to the NFL and was worth a s---?'' That shook the Buckeye out of whatever confident zone he might have entered the room in.
Come to think of it, he makes a good point. A.J. Hawk has been OK, but nothing spectacular, and he followed the likes of Bobby Carpenter and Andy Katzenmoyer."