Kevin Williams question-Is he a DT or a DE for the Cards?

[Lomax to Green 84]

I don't know a heck of a lot about Kevin Williams except that I heard he was virtually unstoppable at the Senior Bowl. The Sporting News lists him at DT but the USA Today/Sports Weekly has him listed as a 304 lb. defensive end. In both cases, he is described as a guy with huge upside potential.

So what is he, a DT or a DE if the Cards trade down and take this kid? I need some info.

 

[BACH]

DT in a 4-3 - DE in a 3-4.

So the Cards' would draft as a DT, unless they plan a rotation system, where:

Running Down:
LDE: KVE - DT: Bryant - DT: Bell/Tanner - RDE: Williams

Passing Downs:
LDE: KVE - DT: Bryant - DT: Wiiliams - RDE: Johnson

He's an awesome player, but IMo a bad fit for the Cards'.

 

[azdad1978]

If Suggs is gone I seriously want the Cards to trade down with New England for their 14* and 19* picks. There's a chance Trufant will still be there when they pick at 14* and Williams will still be there at the 19*. WIlliams is a good size DT with a good quickness and he can penetrate the LOS. He will look good next to Bryant as two 1 gap DL that can penetrate and harass the QB but both Bryant and Williams will get run over in the running game. But can you guys believe the heat that these 2 can create? If Trufant is still there at the 14* that also solidify the Secondary. Wilson and Jackson manning the safety spots and Starks and Trufant opposite each other the secondary will look good now all we need is a pass rush. Go BRD

 

[red desert]

Originally posted by azdad1978
If Suggs is gone I seriously want the Cards to trade down with New England for their 14* and 19* picks. There's a chance Trufant will still be there when they pick at 14* and Williams will still be there at the 19*. WIlliams is a good size DT with a good quickness and he can penetrate the LOS. He will look good next to Bryant as two 1 gap DL that can penetrate and harass the QB but both Bryant and Williams will get run over in the running game. But can you guys believe the heat that these 2 can create? If Trufant is still there at the 14* that also solidify the Secondary. Wilson and Jackson manning the safety spots and Starks and Trufant opposite each other the secondary will look good now all we need is a pass rush. Go BRD

I am not sure about anything in this draft, except one thing. And that is that no way is Williams still on the board at number 19.

Okay, I'm not sure of that either, but I sure as hell would be willing to bet on it.

 

[General Chaos]

Originally posted by BACH
DT in a 4-3 - DE in a 3-4.

So the Cards' would draft as a DT, unless they plan a rotation system, where:

Running Down:
LDE: KVE - DT: Bryant - DT: Bell/Tanner - RDE: Williams

Passing Downs:
LDE: KVE - DT: Bryant - DT: Wiiliams - RDE: Johnson

He's an awesome player, but IMo a bad fit for the Cards'.

I disagree. I think he would be a good fit for the cards. If played at end he would bring size. He would use his stretgh and speed to get to the passer. He would also allow the LB's to be freed from blockers. Super Bowl Ravens Team concept of letting the LB's roam. TRADE DOWN, for Kevin Williams and Grossman

 

[kerouac9]

My question is how does he differ quantitatively from Wendell Bryant. Both, from what I've seen from Bryant and heard about Williams, are "tweeners": too big and slow to play end, a little undersized and light to play tackle. Do we really need two of these guys?

 

[Ed B]

Originally posted by red desert
I am not sure about anything in this draft, except one thing. And that is that no way is Williams still on the board at number 19.

Okay, I'm not sure of that either, but I sure as hell would be willing to bet on it.

Seattle is hot to take williams at 11.

I can abso-frickin-loutely guarantee you that Trufant will not be there at 14 and Kevin Williams will not be there at 19.

 

[SECTION 11]

Yeah, I'm not real convinced either by another DT or DE type.
If we go DT, we need a large large ass. Preferably a strong one with some speed.


So, in conclusion, we need a big, strong, fast ass.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
So, in conclusion, we need a big, strong, fast ass.

I thought that was your role?

 

[azdad1978]

Originally posted by kerouac9
I thought that was your role?

hahahahaha!!!!

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by kerouac9
I thought that was your role?

I go about 6'3" 190, so I'm hardly a run stuffer. I'm more of an edge guy.

But I have intangibles... I can be a real D-Bag, I wear boxers instead of briefs and I stay crunchy in milk.

 

[azdad1978]

Originally posted by SECTION 11



I go about 6'3" 190, so I'm hardly a run stuffer. I'm more of an edge guy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're more of a Safety or a CB size!

 

[Capital Card]

Originally posted by azdad1978

Originally posted by SECTION 11



I go about 6'3" 190, so I'm hardly a run stuffer. I'm more of an edge guy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're more of a Safety or a CB size!

I was gonna say that if you bulked up a bit, you would be more like a punter...

Scott Player: 6'1" and 220 lbs.

 

[JeffGollin]

I don't know a heck of a lot about Kevin Williams except that I heard he was virtually unstoppable at the Senior Bowl.
Someone (I think it was Walter M) said he rewatched the Senior Bowl and it reconfirmed his impression that, while Williams stood out in practices and may have made a couple of plays during the game, he wasn't really all that impressive.

We drafted a slightly smaller version of the same guy (i.e. VDB) a couple of years ago and we're still not quite sure where Kyle would fit in a revamped front four. Why add a similar player?

Williams would be a nice fill-in for depth. But we need front line help in the form of an edge-rusher and a big ol' run stuffer. Williams isn't dominant - either as an edge rusher (not enough closing speed) or a run stuffing DT (too light at 297).

He'd neither represent a value at #6 nor would he fill a need.

Ed's scaring me. Couple his comments with Jurecki's 6 week rap on "the guy I'd really like to see here is Kevin Williams" and I'm afraid that's precisely who we'll wind up with.

A Kevin Williams pick would be a beige pick.

 

[jstadvl]

The paper

this a.m. had him listed @ 6'5", 304 lbs., a raw kid,probably move to end. For what it's worth.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
I don't know a heck of a lot about Kevin Williams except that I heard he was virtually unstoppable at the Senior Bowl.
Someone (I think it was Walter M) said he rewatched the Senior Bowl and it reconfirmed his impression that, while Williams stood out in practices and may have made a couple of plays during the game, he wasn't really all that impressive.

Read the game reports on NFL.com(if they're still there) from right after the Senior Bowl. They basically said after being unblockable all week in practice, Williams was largely quiet in the game. But scouts said he'd done so well in practice he'd moved himself up the draft regardless of how he played.

So Walt's film watching basically agreed with what scouts said great in workouts not much impact in the game.

He's a talent there's no question in his ability but I just think he's too similar to Bryant. At least he didn't make the same mistake Joseph did and bulk up to 320 and lose speed.

If there are real doubts about Suggs I think Robertson is the best pick. If Suggs is just not a great workout guy but a great game guy he makes the most sense. I'm just glad I'm not the one who has to determine that. At this point I'm pretty convinced our pick will be a DL.

 

[BACH]

Originally posted by kerouac9
My question is how does he differ quantitatively from Wendell Bryant. Both, from what I've seen from Bryant and heard about Williams, are "tweeners": too big and slow to play end, a little undersized and light to play tackle. Do we really need two of these guys?

My point exactly!!!! That's why I think he's a bad fit.

 

[jstadvl]

If thecase is

Suggs isn't there, we don't want Williams because we have a Bryant, the next guy down on the list is McDougle? Anyone on that?

 

[JeffGollin]

the next guy down on the list is McDougle? Anyone on that?
The Wunderlic of 10 is a bit unnerving. I mean if it was even a 12 - 14, I'd be willing to rationalize. But you practically get a 10 for spelling your own name correctly. You have to wonder if McDougle might have problems with words in the playbook of 2 syllables are more.

I realize that playing rush end isn't as demanding mentally as playing QB, C or MLB. But a 10?

That's got to be for the scouts to call. If they feel an idiot savant can succeed as a rush-DE, I say go for it.

Otherwise, it might be a bit less risky to look to a Dewayne White or Taylor Brayton.

 

[kerouac9]

Re: If thecase is

Originally posted by jstadvl
Suggs isn't there, we don't want Williams because we have a Bryant, the next guy down on the list is McDougle? Anyone on that?

No no no no no no no no no. No. No McDougle. Take Kennedy. Robertson or Kennedy will help us the most right now, and one of them should be on the board at #6. Only if the people in the know are absolutely certain that Suggs can put up Peppers-brand whoop-ass on the field should they draft him. Robertson, Kennedy, Suggs, in that order.

 

[jstadvl]

OK

I like the Kennedy pick. I was just thinking in terms of DE.

 

[Walter Mitchell]

Russ: If Williams was supposedly unblockable in practice at the Senior Bowl, why was he so blockable in the game? Hard to figure, isn't it? Williams did have some monster games...like his performance against Oklahoma. He's got major league talent, there's no question, but he seems to be a real gamble at #6.

I have the sense that the Bears, who wanted to draft Suggs and now like others have soured on Suggs a little, will grab Dewayne Robertson. Their DTs (Traylor and Washington) are getting long in the tooth and don't provide much of a pass rush. In Robertson, they'd be getting an inside player who can keep Urlacher free and rush the passer.

It would be great to see the Cardinals turn the tables on the Bears...in light of the Jones/Urlacher debacle and the recent Kordell Stewart shenanigans. Yes, in Robertson they'd be getting a fine player, but one has to wonder whether a couple of years down the road they would regret bypassing Byron Leftwich. If Leftwich becomes the Cardinals' franchise QB and leads the Cardinals to prosperity, that would surely stick in the Bears' craw (or should I say paw!).

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by Walter Mitchell
It would be great to see the Cardinals turn the tables on the Bears...in light of the Jones/Urlacher debacle and the recent Kordell Stewart shenanigans. Yes, in Robertson they'd be getting a fine player, but one has to wonder whether a couple of years down the road they would regret bypassing Byron Leftwich. If Leftwich becomes the Cardinals' franchise QB and leads the Cardinals to prosperity, that would surely stick in the Bears' craw (or should I say paw!).

This might be the single worst argument for drafting a player that I've ever, ever seen.

Do you think that the Chargers regret passing on Mike Vick, even though he's probably a better player (at "the most important position on the field") than LT? No. If both players become Pro Bowlers, you're not going to care that we got Suggs instead of Leftwich.