Agree or not: Drafting D-lineman high is risky, yet they're seen as 'safe' by most

[Halsey]

It seems to me like there have been many D-lineman over the years who have been drafted high only to never play up to their Draft position. Names include guys like Courtney Brown, Steve Emtman Gerrard Warren, Dan Wilkinson, Aundrey Bruce, Jonathan Sullivan, etc. More recent names include guys who are not exactly taking the NFL by storm so far, such as Gaines Adams, Glen Dorsey, Jamaal Anderson and Chris Long. Yet, year after year it seems to me that most observers of the Draft view top rated D-lineman as 'safe' picks. Obviously, there have been guys who proved to be worth high draft picks, but D-lineman are not as safe as many people seem to think.

[Babylon]

I wouldnt say any less riskier than QBs: Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell, David Carr. The thing with QBs i think is when they're real good you can reap bigger benefits.

[Halsey]

Originally Posted by Babylon

I wouldnt say any less riskier than QBs: Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell, David Carr. The thing with QBs i think is when they're real good you can reap bigger benefits.

Yeah, but people seem to be aware that QB's are risky. A lot of fans seem petrified at the idea of their team taking a QB with a high pick. QB's get nitpicked to oblivion while D-lineman don't receive near the same level of scrutiny.

[fenikz]

every pick is risky, its hard to find a position where someone hasn't become a bust, I would say LB is the safest though

[Halsey]

Originally Posted by fenikz

every pick is risky, its hard to find a position where someone hasn't become a bust, I would say LB is the safest though

Obviously we're talking in relative terms. I'm saying D-lineman are riskier than pretty much any position other than QB. I could be wrong, however. I haven't done any hard research or anything.

[billsfan1234]

I think that people see d-linemen as "safe" picks because they dont know the importance of a good d-line. being a bills fan, i know that when a team has a good d-line, they have a good d. when the bills still had pat williams and sam adams at d-tackle, with schobel, the bills were consistantly ranked in the top 3. since they left our d has gone down the tubes.

[DeathbyStat]

Drafting them in the first round is almost a must....drafting them in the top ten is just as risky as any other position

[SuperKevin]

DL is only risky because so many of them are scheme specific. The slightest change in the defense and the player can be obsolete.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Drafting D-lineman in the first round expecting them to be all-pros is risky, but most of the players listed, except for those whose careers were cut short by injury, were starters and/or contributors for a while.
Dlineman usually have a higher floor if they turn out to be less than advertised than say QBs; meaning in most cases they are still starting caliber lineman, just not exceptional superstars.

There's really no formula for predicting the success or failure of any prospect; all you can really do is weigh them, test them, watch their game film, compare them to previous similar players who were successful, coach em up and cross your fingers.

Take a guy like DE Andre Wadsworth from FSU. 6'4, 275 pound BEAST. Quickness, speed, power, and production at FSU. 3rd overall pick in the '98 draft, now compared to some of the alltime busts to ever play in the NFL.

His film was great, he had all the measurables, great intangibles and....amounted to nothing in the NFL.

[wordofi]

Originally Posted by Halsey

It seems to me like there have been many D-lineman over the years who have been drafted high only to never play up to their Draft position. Names include guys like Courtney Brown, Steve Emtman Gerrard Warren, Dan Wilkinson, Aundrey Bruce, Jonathan Sullivan, etc. More recent names include guys who are not exactly taking the NFL by storm so far, such as Gaines Adams, Glen Dorsey, Jamaal Anderson and Chris Long. Yet, year after year it seems to me that most observers of the Draft view top rated D-lineman as 'safe' picks. Obviously, there have been guys who proved to be worth high draft picks, but D-lineman are not as safe as many people seem to think.

I think that quarterback and defensive line are the riskiest positions to draft.

[Paranoidmoonduck]

Originally Posted by SuperKevin

DL is only risky because so many of them are scheme specific. The slightest change in the defense and the player can be obsolete.

Only? I tend to disagree.

I had an interesting discussion a while back that touched on this when the question "Is it better to draft offensive linemen or defensive linemen high?". Part of my argument was that while the draft process for offensive linemen focuses heavily on the present technique of the player, the defensive line scouting process appears far more susceptible to freak athletes who leave a lot to be desired both in their mental approach and in their technique. Every year we see defensive linemen who come across as lackadaisical or inconsistent, but NFL teams still convince themselves that they can light that fire and everything will work out. The jump from playing defensive line (especially interior defensive line) in college to the NFL is perhaps one of the biggest jumps that any position has to deal with. If you don't understand how to stomach that brutal fight while maintaining a coherent plan of attack, you don't stand a chance.

In short, defensive lineman are among the riskiest picks that high mostly because scouts are still looking for those players who were physically dominant in college and tend to ignore players who aren't as physically impressive but have a strong understanding of their position.

Of course, this means that defensive linemen are risky for entirely different reasons then quarterbacks (who have their mental approach picked apart way more than any other position).

[PossibleCabbage]

Well, part of this is that every position you draft is risky. Half of more of players, no matter where they're drafted or at what position, aren't going to see a second contract in the NFL.

But part of this is just that the perception is that defensive linemen are disappointing draft picks if they don't take the league by storm in their first couple years. Other than quarterbacks, I would say that defensive linemen have the toughest adjustment to professional football. This is for a couple of reasons. First that the blocking schemes that college offenses run are dramatically simpler than the ones you will see in the pros; so a player that usually went one-on-one against a blocker and dominated in college will rarely see that happen in professional football. Secondly, that a lot of college standouts on the defensive line make a name for themselves because they're significantly more physically gifted than the guys they're lined up against; while in the NFL they will generally line up across of people who are similarly physically gifted and are better in terms of technique. So a guy might well take several years to get up to NFL speed (and, like all players, he might not ever accomplish that).

But I would have to say that the sense in which drafting top defensive linemen high is "safe", is that the floor for defensive linemen is higher than the floor for most other positions. Busts at the skill positions will often be entirely out of the league after their first contracts, while the underwhelming big bodies will almost always get another look. Plus, along the defensive line there is room on a lot of rosters for specialists. If you're drafted to play DE, but you're wretched at rushing the passer but you're reasonably good against the run, you'll play LDE on non-passing downs. If you're drafted to play DE and you can rush the passer but you can't hold the point of attack against a stiff breeze on a running play, well congratulations... you'll get to play on third down. Defensive tackles who were supposed to dominate the league but didn't, can still fill an important role on most rosters as a rotation player.

So they're safe in the sense that all but the very worst of the disappointing ones can contribute to an NFL team on the field. I think that's a reasonable standard for determining safety.

[bigbuc]

After Qb's... D linemen is the hardest to draft for.

[eagles6606]

Every pick is a risky pick in the draft. But if you do your homework on not just a players physical skills, but his intangibales then he's a safe pick. A player who is a good person, has a good football IQ, and loves the game will not dissapoint as long as they have some skills. In my opinion you build from the defensive line. To have a good defense you must be able to stop teams from running up the middle and put pressure on the quarterback. Taking a good defensive lineman is a smart move.

[TACKLE]

Disagree.

I think people get caught up especially the numbers with DT's, the sacks, tackles, etc., but the value of a good DT is much more than that. Unless your watching a guy every week, its hard to judge the kind of impact he's has on a defense. There is no stat for taking on a double team so your linebackers can flow to the ball. There's no stat for getting penetration and disrupting the play in the backfield. There's no stat for doing a good job at shedding blocks causing the RB to cut back. There's no stat for collapsing the pocket and not allowing the QB to step up. I think people look at how many sacks a guy has and think they can judge whether he was a bust or not. If a team drafts an O-Lineman and we don't hear much about him, we probably assume the guy is solid. If a DT isn't getting a lot of pub, people assume its because he isn't getting the sacks and are therefore a bust. Now obviously if you take a DT in the Top 10, you expect him to be one of the more productive players at his position. But if he isn't its unfair to call that player a bust. He can still be a solid DT and not put up impressive stats.

DE's is a little different. DE's are paid to get after the QB and get sacks. But you can't deny the value of a DE in draft terms. With so many teams drafting LT's and QB's high in the draft, you need to be able to rush the passer. Being a dominant pass rusher requires a very rare physical skill set. It's very hard to find that freakish skill set later in the draft.

[FUNBUNCHER]

TACKLE, how do regard Dan Wilkinson's career?

Looking back at his stats and production, I think was a much better player than he was given credit for, but because I think he ran like a sub 4.8 at over 300+ pounds, people expected him to be a dominant pass rusher from the interior.

Also I believe there was an expectation he could turn the Bengals into a playoff contender with his presence alone.

I think if he were playing now in his prime, he'd be considered one of the top DTs in the game.

[TACKLE]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

TACKLE, how do regard Dan Wilkinson's career?

Looking back at his stats and production, I think was a much better player than he was given credit for, but because I think he ran like a sub 4.8 at over 300+ pounds, people expected him to be a dominant pass rusher from the interior.

Also I believe there was an expectation he could turn the Bengals into a playoff contender with his presence alone.

I think if he were playing now in his prime, he'd be considered one of the top DTs in the game.

Obviously there are DT's who bust. There's no denying that. Also, just because you don't meet expectations doesn't make you a "bust". I don't think Big Daddy was a bust for that reason. He was the #1 pick and people had very high expectations of him. He wasn't the dominator people thought he'd be but nonetheless, he was still a very solid player who could stuff the run and put pressure on the QB.

[Halsey]

Wilkinson may have been a solid NFL player, but he never was close to being worth the #1 pick in the Draft. I don't like to use the word 'bust' very often. It's easier to just try to judge if a player was worth the draft pick used to select him. Wilkinson was not, even though he wasn't necessarily a bust.

And someone mentioned injuries earlier. Injuries are part of what make D-lineman so risky. Especially DT's. I imagine DT's are about the most often injured players. If a player's career is ruined by injuries, the team that drafted him still gets less value from the pick. It doesn't make it any less of a wasted pick for a team when a player is lost to injuries.

[Lions WMD]

Drafting anybody while you're high is risky.

[Halsey]

Originally Posted by Lions WMD

Drafting anybody while you're high is risky.

I love having an excuse to post that pic.

[slightlyabroncosfan]

I think it's because defensive line, defensive tackle especially, is based so much on motor. And they're big ass dudes. Like if they didn't burn so many calories playing and training, they'd be even bigger. So when they get paid, there's always that risk that they lose that fire and that motivation to both stay in shape and keep taking that beating. For everyone who saw that video in the RDT about Kris Jenkins vs. the average dude, DTs absorb and deliver that punishment every single play. Sometimes doubly so, when they're being double teamed. And sometimes they get cut at the knees(as a former O-lineman, that's a lot of fun to do, but not for the D-line). So basically it takes a lot of character to keep getting up and doing your thing when you're taking that kind of physical pounding, especially once you've gotten paid.