Kent Babb Defends Tyson Jackson

Tyson Jackson is gonna be a Beast!

Oh, the pass rush was pretty lousy, too.

For the purpose of BOTH pass rush and run stops, I think the middle is going to have quite a bit more raw power. We'll see what the LBs can make of what the d-line gives, but, as others have pointed out, you suddenly realize what GREAT LBs you have when the d-line takes the o-line out of their way.

also consider that next years linebacker corps are much stronger coming out in the draft than the D end spots will be.

That's a nice little tidbit, redbeard.

I agree with your discussion on "reach." But part of the rankings comes from too much attention paid to glamour positions. Everybody looking for a Ferrari, and Pioli going after a pickup with a 5th wheel hitch and duallys in the rear end.

Pioli was in a tough spot in terms of balancing team needs, short and long term, and the lack of strong offers to trade up. Your tidbit is something I didn't put much thought into, other than knowing how hard it is to get yourself a true DE in the draft, these days, relative to how easy it is to find a good-enough LB if the D-Line is solidly in place. Sanchez was a huge reach (to MY mind) at #5, and who else was clamoring for the #3 pick?

If the d-line isn't set, then all the other stuff is wasted.

ok reach , no reach..
players get ranked and always will, rankings do show who certain people who do rank them place them talent wise amongst all other players within a draft year.

#1 once they have been projected ranking wise, by talent...

#2 those same guys who rank them talent wise, as well as adding analysts, fans,teams, and a bunch of other people to the mix...they will ...

#3 carefully go down all the teams drafting possitions...

they look at the team drafting, see what the needs are for that team, they see who is there...
they decide if the team is so bad they draft by talent alone or if they go by need...(most top five picks are going to be a need as with all top five picks they have more than a couple holes)

so the majority of people will see drafting along the pure talent of a player lines (within each draft year) as the best way to go.

after the top five have been picked thru...need will sometimes make the picks look out of whack to some....

#4 reach represents a players talent level ranked, to when they were drafted within the draft class...
To me reaching would be closer to when we grabbed hali in the first when we could have drafted a different player in round one, and still picked hali with a second round pick. that would also make some who frown upon hali now, a little bit less critisized.

#5 trades, free agency, combines, and other things we as fans dont see until later , will start to change things in a draft, as it comes closer to draft day...some players as with jackson rise after a combine, or even later as he did.

#6 for me the rankings do work , more for the top guys, and then after that, more so by determaning what rounds players should be drafted...

to me reaching is grabbing a 2nd round concessus player in the first round... or a fifth rounder in the third round...lol

was jackson a reach yes as far as did we get the more talented, player (ok who was thought to be the more talented).

was it a big reach I personally dont think so,... we are again rebuilding to an extent, we dont have to completely rebuild, piolli was forming what we will now have for a long time a front for our defence.

so a reach as defined by the definition of it yes, as for our team not that much so...as either jackson or curry will work for us,

also consider that next years linebacker corps are much stronger coming out in the draft than the D end spots will be.

Moufwash: Right on. The fact that some teams are continually near the top and others are continually near the bottom says that there are quite a few who just don't get it.

But we're seeing fewer 4-12 teams going after RBs in the first round, which is a good sign. I do agree that there's still a lot of good-ole-boy b.s., else how could Gunther Cunningham just walk straight into another DC job?

mock drafts, reaches etc.. are complete BS.. the good ol boys that have their foot in the door with these franchises rate and pick players at what has to be the highest error rate of any professional sport. Mike Leach was right, history has shown these guys a really bad at this stuff. We have nothing to compare the whole NFL process to so we really have no idea how truely bad they are at their jobs.

BBQ- Email Adam if you'd like to contribute.

I suggest to some of you new guys that you spend some time "going back in time" on this blog.

Click older entries for the last few months or even years and poke around. We've had a lot of writers on this site, and a lot of good stuff that myself and Adam and others have gotten on Deadspin, HashMarks etc...check the banners on the right.

We might have just talked about something last week, but since its buried a few pages back, you might have missed it.

I've heard at least one pundit say he was trying to descry what a given team would do, more than making his own recommendation. And before WE get too humble, I think many of us can point to obvious, nonsensical "reaches."

Tyson Jackson might be a reach. I'm hopeful that he's so thrilled to receive the prestige of the #3 pick that Pioli and co. worked something sensible with him, rather than just letting a greedy agent insist on slotting the salary. The thing about building a D is that we'll cry all year about lack of production from our LB corps if the D-Line isn't working, and the way the line was built was (to me) an outmoded way of thinking, from the day when a 6'5'', 260 pound Buck Buchanon was bigger (maybe bigger than the numbers I'm using), stronger and faster than any offensive lineman he faced.

The fact is that OT's are HUGE, these days, and anybody that can out-big 'em is too slow to play on the d-line. So you want BIG D-linemen, but you can't expect someone stout enough to chase down QBs and RBs every play (although the QB and RB will be flushed into their grasp in a solid scheme).

Anyway, I also see Dorsey (I keep wanting to call him "Levens") playing DE on the strong side, opposite Jackson in the 3-4 look. I also see him lining up in the B gap on the weak side next to Jackson in a 4-3 look, with Jackson lined up outside the ROT, with the added responsibility of stringing out the run to that side, so the WLB/S/LCB can finish the play for minimal gain.

Jackson just plain makes sense with what the Chiefs want to do. BJ Raji will be a good DT, but I think we want someone to close things down, not rack up big sack totals. Furthermore, he probably wouldn't rate as high as Dorsey, if they were both in the same draft. And Curry? What's the point of a high-dollar LB if the D-Line isn't taken care of?

Trading the #3 pick is problematical, especially when the draft class is weak. Picking Jackson at #10 or so might've been more ideal, but would we have landed him? I was personally partial to Ron Brace, myself, and had fantasies of Jackson and Brace in the same draft. Turned out that Belichick took Brace. Great minds think alike.

Finally, I really liked the Jackson pick, because it fit with my own thinking about the switch to a 3-4, and a player personnel philosophy that made sense. As a mathematician, I'm always reasoning from general principles. The trick is to find guiding principles that work...

I think I first heard of Tyson Jackson here, and then his name started cropping up on NFL.com and other sites.

If you can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen, writers! I think the attitude in this thread is mostly people who are tired of disrespect being shown, and I can agree with that, but I will never take any writer's opinion as sacrosanct. But some of the younger guys, I'm guessing, turn disagreements over the facts or theories into personal attacks, and that's just the way immature people behave.

As consumers of news and opinion, we build our own "profiles" on certain writers, just as moviegoers learn which critics reflect their tastes the best. Perfectly natural and practical.

But I think it's fair to say that a lot of the sports media seems influenced by "fantasy league" type thinking, and fall in love with RBs, QBs, and WRs. Seen it for years, and it really chaps my hide, when I'm more interested in how much time the QB has or doesn't have, or whether the O-Line is opening-up holes for the RB and passing lanes for the passer.

And Ill agree with a previous poster, adam is the one bringing the information and articles that are worth reading lately, not to be rude, its just a low news time, and adam HAS been bringing his A game.

I 100 percent disagree with you

In fact, Im shocked that you took that stance.

Mock drafts arent made my NFL personnel people in the know, they are made by sports writers with credentials that rival mine, and anyone else with a journalism degree.

ANYONE can make a mock draft, the point is, just because Curry is overhyped in mocks, doesnt mean hes of that value to the ACTUAL teams.

Kent is simply saying, NFL GM's, Coaches, Scouts, have a different board that what some guy with ZERO league experience has...and if a GM who has won 3 super bowls doesnt feel its a reach, then...its not a reach.

Your argument is as flawed as just because a sports writer doesnt agree with a call on the field, the sports writer is correct? Because? They are in the know?

I wont predict what happens to Jackson,but I did predict Kc would take the guy, and to be honest, Mock drafts had Rey Mauluga going in the 1st, he falls to the 2nd, so OBVIOUSLY he was not first round rated on a lot of boards.

To actually put stock into a mock draft over ACTUAL league employees...is kinda dumb...

Gosslin is the only guy who is remotely close with his predictions on players.

Ill take a dominate DE that can move inside to create match up problems over a 4-3 OLB at pick 3 any day, they felt he was the best DE available, they felt he was worth the cash they spent on him.

This is one of the worst arguments made FOR the mock draft being accurate Ive ever read.

It seems like most fans don't like ANY sports columnist/talk show host, or beat writer. Everyone hates Bob Gretz, Adam Teicher, Kent Babb, Jason Whitlock, Kevin Keitzman ... the list is endless. Anyone that writes or talks about the Chiefs is wrong it appears. Yet, everyone continues to read and listen.

Just because a bunch of talking heads call someone a reach doesn't mean shit.

The "experts" get like 1 out of 10 picks right, if that, then how can they call someone a reach.

Tyson Jackson in a few years will be Darnell Dockett (lets hope).

Oh and btw the comments around here lately have been ridiculous. If you guys think you can write so much better than the regular contributors, then stop reading and start writing.

Did Cleveland, who brought him in for a workout, consider him a reach? Did Green Bay, who brought him in for a workout consider him a reach?

Babb makes an excellent point...every year a player is considered a "reach" by everyday people like you, me, scout.com and newerascouting.com (yes those are normal people...they are not professional or independent scouts...ask Nick Athan, who has a day job, or Matt Miller, who has a day job).

Babb brings you plenty of material, Merlin, so I would be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you.

yeah i dont like Kent Babb much either, but it's not like youve brought anything hot to the table lately either. I think Adam Best is the only guy in this place that at least tries to "bring it" on a consistant basis. Adam rarely "hits one out of the park" but he does get his fair share of doubles. Merlin, instead of critizing people who are trying like Kent and Adam you should make yourself a little more vonurable and go out of your comfort zone. You'll become less pretentious and stale.

your friend,

Square Bender

For a 10 to 15 pick slide anyway.

I agree with the dude. Mock drafts don't mean shit.