Steeler Rookie Outside Linebackers

[Stryker]

I've been reading some posts about Jarvis here, and it got be thinking. Since the Steelers switched to the 3-4, Jarvis is the first OLB to get a crack at being the full time starter as a rookie.

Lloyd 3rd year
Gildon 3rd year
Clark Haggins - 5th year
Porter 2nd year
Harrison 6th year
Woodley 2nd year

If you play ILB you have a better chance of being a rookie starter.
Bell and Williams last year come to mind.

 

[antdrewjosh]

I wonder what his stats look like compared to these guys in their first year.

 

[Idioteque]

None of those guys were first-round picks. Woodley was the only one who was anywhere close, and he saw lots of action as a rookie before becoming the unquestioned starter in Year Two.

 

[Idioteque]

I wonder what his stats look like compared to these guys in their first year.

Lloyd had 0.5 fewer sacks, despite starting only 4 games to Jarvis's 8.

Porter doubled his sack total and recovered two fumbles. Even Gildon doubled his sack total.

Woodley destroyed him with 4 sacks in probably less than half the snaps.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Does the round matter because all of those guys would be 1st round picks in hindsight.

Jarvis was good against the run and coverage. When I say good I mean not a negative. Always room to improve. I wanted more from Jarvis no question. But I wasnt surprised he needed more time. He flashed alot to me.

 

[Idioteque]

Does the round matter because all of those guys would be 1st round picks in hindsight.

Jarvis was good against the run and coverage. When I say good I mean not a negative. Always room to improve. I wanted more from Jarvis no question. But I wasnt surprised he needed more time. He flashed alot.to me.

It matters because a first-round pick is often required to start, or at least play a ton. If I'm not mistaken, only one non-injured player taken in the top 20 (Dion Jordan) didn't see a heavy compliment of snaps. Usually, a team drafts someone with a 1st because they have a massive hole at his position, as we did at Jarvis's. We didn't take Greg Lloyd in the 6th because we needed him to be a franchise ROLB, but that's what we needed from Jarvis.

 

[Idioteque]

I respect that you saw flashes. I saw them too; his bull rush of D'Brickashaw was a thing of beauty. But I didn't see nearly enough from a first-round pick to give me the warm fuzzies I'd like. He didn't have nearly as much impact as I did from most of the guys taken above him. Ziggy Ansah and Barkevious Mingo were raw, polarizing prospects, but they contributed majorly as rookies.

 

[antdrewjosh]

It matters because a first-round pick is often required to start, or at least play a ton. If I'm not mistaken, only one non-injured player taken in the top 20 (Dion Jordan) didn't see a heavy compliment of snaps. Usually, a team drafts someone with a 1st because they have a massive hole at his position, as we did at Jarvis's. We didn't take Greg Lloyd in the 6th because we needed him to be a franchise ROLB, but that's what we needed from Jarvis.

But is the team expecting double digit sacks his first year. Im sure they hoped for more. But i dont think they were expecting a monster right off the bat. They knew there would be growing pains. Woodley is the one who should of been dominating..

 

[antdrewjosh]

I respect that you saw flashes. I saw them too; his bull rush of D'Brickashaw was a thing of beauty. But I didn't see nearly enough from a first-round pick to give me the warm fuzzies I'd like. He didn't have nearly as much impact as I did from most of the guys taken above him. Ziggy Ansah and Barkevious Mingo were raw, polarizing prospects, but they contributed majorly as rookies.

I loved Ziggy Ansah last year. He was my dream pick last year. How many sacks did Mingo have i thought he struggled last year too.

 

[Idioteque]

I loved Ziggy Ansah last year. He was my dream pick last year. How many sacks did Mingo have i thought he struggled last year too.

Mingo had 5 sacks and 3 PDs, with 42 total tackles. He did it as a part-timer, playing almost exclusively in passing situations.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Mingo 42 tackles 5 sacks
Jones 40 tackles 1 sack

 

[keslerclan]

Jones shouldn't have been starting (or sharing starts) last year BUT now I'm glad he did. It gives him the best motivational tool he will have in his tenure right off the bat. We didn't have the $$ to back-up the position with a 'unspectacular veteran' which is the standard operating procedure. I get it. There wasn't much else we could have done. We made the offer to cut Deebo's salary (instead of the under-performing Woodley) and got put in a bind.
It wasn't like we weren't a team in transition anyway, so why not get some PT under his belt. Hopefully, it works out for him and us. The thing I DON'T agree with is that 'some' players are getting on the field more BECAUSE of where they are drafted instead of the 'potential' Greg Lloyd's on the team. Not to say that we have had any but while Vets continue to get precedent playing opportunities under Tomlin, just like Cowher, Cowher didn't seem to give a flip where some of his vets were drafted originally. Maybe it is coming from Rooney?

 

[Idioteque]

Turns out Mingo and Jarvis played about the exact same number of snaps. Still, the gap from 5 sacks to 1 is huge for a ROLB whose first, second, and third duties are to rush the passer.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Turns out Mingo and Jarvis played about the exact same number of snaps. Still, the gap from 5 sacks to 1 is huge for a ROLB whose first, second, and third duties are to rush the passer.

Not that much a difference considering I saw Jarvis just miss at least 4 or 5 off tge top of my head. Jarvis was better against the run also.

 

[Idioteque]

Not to be a douche, but imagine how many sacks Mingo and Ansah just missed.

Hurries would be a better stat here, but I can't find any consistency on them. They're like tackles: an unofficial stat that get inflated/deflated every day. I've seen one source credit Jarvis with 23 hurries, more than Mingo and Ansah. I've seen another one credit him with 8, outside the top 100 or so.

 

[TMC]

I am all for not expecting anything out of a rookie. I get that. Many do not start. So, if we are not expecting anything out of rookies, why draft an immediate "need" in the first round? Why should they have not taken a WR or CB or other position?

See, that is the rub. If we draft to fill a hole, then should the expectation of that player not be to produce? If we are drafting to better this team for the next 4-5 years, shouldn't the idea be to get the best overall player?

As for comparing him to players of the past, many did not see the snaps because they had better talent ahead of them. Jones did not. ****, I think I could have stumbled into a sack.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Not to be a douche, but imagine how many sacks Mingo and Ansah just missed.

Hurries would be a better stat here, but I can't find any consistency on them. They're like tackles: an unofficial stat that get inflated/deflated every day. I've seen one source credit Jarvis with 23 hurries, more than Mingo and Ansah. I've seen another one credit him with 8, outside the top 100 or so and way, way behind Mingo and Ansah.

I was going to say Mingo probably missed some too but thank god i dont have to watch the Browns. Lol. Just going on what i saw as far as Jarvis.

 

[Steel Ballin]

I am all for not expecting anything out of a rookie. I get that. Many do not start. So, if we are not expecting anything out of rookies, why draft an immediate "need" in the first round? Why should they have not taken a WR or CB or other position?

See, that is the rub. If we draft to fill a hole, then should the expectation of that player not be to produce? If we are drafting to better this team for the next 4-5 years, shouldn't the idea be to get the best overall player?

As for comparing him to players of the past, many did not see the snaps because they had better talent ahead of them. Jones did not. ****, I think I could have stumbled into a sack.

I believe his was exactly this way. lol

 

[Superman]

I am all for not expecting anything out of a rookie. I get that. Many do not start. So, if we are not expecting anything out of rookies, why draft an immediate "need" in the first round? Why should they have not taken a WR or CB or other position?

See, that is the rub. If we draft to fill a hole, then should the expectation of that player not be to produce? If we are drafting to better this team for the next 4-5 years, shouldn't the idea be to get the best overall player?

As for comparing him to players of the past, many did not see the snaps because they had better talent ahead of them. Jones did not. ****, I think I could have stumbled into a sack.

IMO, and this could be incorrect, but drafting a rookie to start either means that the previous starter either left the team or can be improved upon by the rookie. I'd guess that a vet has more savvy and know-how, but is starting to run down athletically. Whereas a rookie will make more mental mistakes but has the athleticism to make up for it.

When I saw Jarvis last year, he flashed some good athleticism. Not every down, though, which leads me to believe he was trying to grasp the speed of the game and adapt to it.

 

[antdrewjosh]

The steelers had Jarvis high on their board. So were they reaching when they took him? They believe he was similar to Decastro top talent that fell that also filled a need.

 

[ark steel]

Mingo also had 9 TFL and 12 QH. Jarvis had 4 and 3.

Without any specifics to check, it'd be impossible to correctly determine "almosts". You would expect that "almost" would have a decent correlation to QHs. Maybe.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Mingo also had 9 TFL and 12 QH. Jarvis had 4 and 3.

Without any specifics to check, it'd be impossible to correctly determine "almosts". You would expect that "almost" would have a decent correlation to QHs. Maybe.

Thats QB hurries? I call bullshit on that cause i saw more then that. Then again maybe im hoping and wishing..

 

[Idioteque]

QBH is QB hits, not hurries. Now that I think about it, they're probably the most fair and objective way to quantify almost-sacks.

 

[ark steel]

QBH is QB hits, not hurries. Now that I think about it, they're probably the most fair and objective way to quantify almost-sacks.

To me, as long as the raw stat comes from an NFL site, ie. not the coaches site or someone else's site, I'm OK with it from a consistency point of view. This is because, I presume, the people who accumulate the stats during the games actually work for the NFL also different individuals are used for different games, ie one guy doesn't do only Steelers games.

 

[Idioteque]

To me, as long as the raw stat comes from an NFL site, ie. not the coaches site or someone else's site, I'm OK with it from a consistency point of view. This is because, I presume, the people who accumulate the stats during the games actually work for the NFL also different individuals are used for different games, ie one guy doesn't do only Steelers games.

I don't know about hits, but what you just described is indeed the process for tackles. The home team records them.