Jump to content

Laurinaitis or Gholston


gsnts725
 Share

Who would you rather like to see drafted?  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Who would you rather like to see drafted?

    • Vernon Gholston
      17
    • James Laurinaitis
      29
    • Neither
      6


Recommended Posts

Vernon Gholston and James Laurinaitis seemed to be the most popular among Jets Fans regarding our #6 pick in this year's draft. So, I want to find out which one of these guys Jets fans want to see in a Jet uniform. Here are their scouting reports:

From www.fftoolbox.com

Gholston - Vernon Gholston is quickly becoming a force to be reckoned with. Gholston started all 12 regular season games at DE for the Ohio State for the second straight year. The fourth year junior has recorded 14.5 tackles for loss this season, 13 of them sacks. The 6'4", 264 lbs. Buckeye is practically a fixture in opposing backfield the last two seasons. Gholston has tallied 83 tackles, 29.5 tackles for loss, 21.5 sacks, and even intercepted a pass since being inserted into the starting lineup. Gholston plays what Ohio State calls the "Leo" end, a position that has to both pass rush and be able to drop into coverage when the Buckeyes are playing zone. He possesses excellent speed for a player his size and shows good instincts playing the run and the pass. According to Ohio State's athletic website, Gholston benches 455 lbs., making him one of the strongest players on the team. Gholston shows tremendous promise. He displays good pass rushing moves and rarely will you find him out of position. If Gholston were to declare, he would need to prove that he is indeed fast and strong enough to beat NFL tackles off the edge with his speed.

Laurinaitis - James Laurinaitis will be vying with fellow Big Ten star Dan Conner to be the first linebacker taken in this year's draft. The 2006 Nagurski award winner is an absolute wrecking machine at the inside linebacker position. Laurinaitis was nominated for the Nagurski award again this year, along with receiving nominations for the Butkus award and the Bedinark trophy, which he won. Laurinaitis set a career high against Wisconsin this year with 19 tackles. He recorded 103 tackles during the regular season, 8.5 tackles for loss, and 5 sacks. A good bowl game could see him top his 115 tackle, 8.5 tackles for loss, 4 sack campaign of last season. James Laurinaitis is a run stuffing machine on the inside for the Buckeyes. The thing that will make him a star in the NFL is his ability to drop in to coverage. His 7 career INTs along with 3 pass breakups just goes to show how versatile he is. Laurinaitis can make tackles sideline to sideline because of his tremendous speed. Doug Lesmerises of The Cleveland Plain Dealer wrote that Laurinaitis closes ground as well as any college linebacker you'll find. Should he decide to declare, the 6'3", 240 lbs. linebacker possesses ideal size, strength, and speed to transfer his talents to the pro game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gholston would be worth it if we ran a 4-3. Just because a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB are the same build/speed roughly, it doesn't mean that Gholston will suddenly and seamlessly be able to cover receivers, make plays in space, read changes in offensive shifts prior to the snap, or master any number of responsibilities a LB has that a DE doesn't have. And at #6, he is expected to be just that -- a MASTER at it. He's being drafted for his skill in on the line, particularly in running around OT's and chasing down QB's in predatory-like fashion. To draft him #6 overall and make the giant leap of an assumption that he'd be just as good at a totally different position, we are begging for disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gholston would be worth it if we ran a 4-3. Just because a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB are the same build/speed roughly, it doesn't mean that Gholston will suddenly and seamlessly be able to cover receivers, make plays in space, read changes in offensive shifts prior to the snap, or master any number of responsibilities a LB has that a DE doesn't have. And at #6, he is expected to be just that -- a MASTER at it. He's being drafted for his skill in on the line, particularly in running around OT's and chasing down QB's in predatory-like fashion. To draft him #6 overall and make the giant leap of an assumption that he'd be just as good at a totally different position, we are begging for disappointment.

Great point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gholston would be worth it if we ran a 4-3. Just because a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB are the same build/speed roughly, it doesn't mean that Gholston will suddenly and seamlessly be able to cover receivers, make plays in space, read changes in offensive shifts prior to the snap, or master any number of responsibilities a LB has that a DE doesn't have. And at #6, he is expected to be just that -- a MASTER at it. He's being drafted for his skill in on the line, particularly in running around OT's and chasing down QB's in predatory-like fashion. To draft him #6 overall and make the giant leap of an assumption that he'd be just as good at a totally different position, we are begging for disappointment.

I disagree.

Ive watched a lot of both of them (Im an OSU fan), and I think Gholsten will be much more of an impact for us than Laurinitis.

Ive always felt that Laurinitis benefited more from having a great DL in front of him, (Gholsten, Haywood, Pit****, Richardson) LB crew around him, (Hawk, Schlegal, Carpenter, Grant) and DB's behind him (Malcom Jenkins, Nate Salley, Donte Whitner) then he is a real impact player for that team. He's good, but he's more of a role player than a real difference maker.

I like Gholston a lot more as he has a knack for constantly getting into the backfield and disrupting plays, if not ending them altogether. Thats the player the Jets need more IMO.

:rl::rl: It edited out part of the guys name. :rl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.

Ive watched a lot of both of them (Im an OSU fan), and I think Gholsten will be much more of an impact for us than Laurinitis.

Ive always felt that Laurinitis benefited more from having a great DL in front of him, (Gholsten, Haywood, Pit****, Richardson) LB crew around him, (Hawk, Schlegal, Carpenter, Grant) and DB's behind him (Malcom Jenkins, Nate Salley, Donte Whitner) then he is a real impact player for that team. He's good, but he's more of a role player than a real difference maker.

I like Gholston a lot more as he has a knack for constantly getting into the backfield and disrupting plays, if not ending them altogether. Thats the player the Jets need more IMO.

:rl::rl: It edited out part of the guys name. :rl:

I think you might have missed his point. He's not discounting Gholston's skill as a DE, he is saying that we would have to go on faith that Gholston could convert to a 3-4 OLB and drop in coverage zones nd man to man at times. That leap of faith is costly at the #6 overall position. Me personally, I'd prefer getting Suggs in FA if we can since he's a provn 3-4 OLB commodity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you might have missed his point. He's not discounting Gholston's skill as a DE, he is saying that we would have to go on faith that Gholston could convert to a 3-4 OLB and drop in coverage zones nd man to man at times. That leap of faith is costly at the #6 overall position. Me personally, I'd prefer getting Suggs in FA if we can since he's a provn 3-4 OLB commodity.

I understood his point, but if I had to choose one or the other, even on this team, I would risk it with Gholsten because of his intangibles and his tenacity when rushing the passer.

Laurinitis will be fine, but I doubt he's capable of having as big of an impact as Gholsten is capable of. In fact, I dont think its even close.

I'd prefer Suggs too, but its not going to happen, so dont get your hopes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say Gholston since I have just as many questions about Laurianitis as an ILB. I don't think he's stout enough and seems like more of a finesse player that's great in coverage.

I think Gholston could handle the switch. He's a little stiff in coverage but I think he'd be solid enough. He has the potential to be great at his main duty of rushing the QB though. Also, he's pretty stout against the run and obviously very strong. I think he projects well as a 3-4 OLB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say Gholston since I have just as many questions about Laurianitis as an ILB. I don't think he's stout enough and seems like more of a finesse player that's great in coverage.

I think Gholston could handle the switch. He's a little stiff in coverage but I think he'd be solid enough. He has the potential to be great at his main duty of rushing the QB though. Also, he's pretty stout against the run and obviously very strong. I think he projects well as a 3-4 OLB.

He's a little stiff in coverage?? Solid enough?? He's never covered anybody in his life. He's a pass rushing DE in a 4-3 D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a little stiff in coverage?? Solid enough?? He's never covered anybody in his life. He's a pass rushing DE in a 4-3 D.

Of course he's primarily a DE. I never said he played in coverage all the time. He has lined up at LB occasionally though. Don't act as if he's never played in space before. He's not all that fluid, what's so crazy about that? I don't understand why what I said got you all excited? Maybe I should've said "He looks like he'd be stiff in coverage judging by the times he's occasionally asked to stand up." Lol is that better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course he's primarily a DE. I never said he played in coverage all the time. He has lined up at LB occasionally though. Don't act as if he's never played in space before. He's not all that fluid, what's so crazy about that? I don't understand why what I said got you all excited? Maybe I should've said "He looks like he'd be stiff in coverage judging by the times he's occasionally asked to stand up." Lol is that better.

I wasn't worked up, sorry if the multiple question marks gave that impression. The only time he's ever been caught in space is on a quick screen play to his side. At OLB, he will actually need to drop back and cover a RB, TE, and even WR man to man at times as well as cover areas in zone. He's never done that before. At the #6 overall draft position, that's a big risk to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Draft Laurinitis, sign Suggs. We suddenly have one of the best LB corps in the league and the DL deficiencies won't look nearly as bad. Sign Tommy Kelly from OAK and we suddenly have a top 10 D.

adding suggs would be huge. how about adding Asomugha from oak as well? one of the best in the league and a high character guy.

even if the jets had to keep barton for another year, adding suggs, kelly, and Asomugha and this D is top 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a little stiff in coverage?? Solid enough?? He's never covered anybody in his life. He's a pass rushing DE in a 4-3 D.

From the initial post...

"and even intercepted a pass since being inserted into the starting lineup. Gholston plays what Ohio State calls the "Leo" end, a position that has to both pass rush and be able to drop into coverage when the Buckeyes are playing zone."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't worked up, sorry if the multiple question marks gave that impression. The only time he's ever been caught in space is on a quick screen play to his side. At OLB, he will actually need to drop back and cover a RB, TE, and even WR man to man at times as well as cover areas in zone. He's never done that before. At the #6 overall draft position, that's a big risk to take.

I've seen him lined up at LB and he has played coverage at times. I hate using youtube clips to prove points but here's an example...

He doesn't have much experience in coverage but he is asked to do it sometimes. Also, most hybrid 3-4 OLB had minimal experience in coverage before they were converted to that 3-4 position.

As for Maualuga, I think he's more of a prospect for next year. IMO, he's more of an athlete right now than football player. He needs more time to develp since he's to aggressive and overruns everything and needs to improve awareness. Maybe he's improved on that though, I haven't seen him since the beginning of the year. Definitely not a top 6 player though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.

Ive watched a lot of both of them (Im an OSU fan), and I think Gholsten will be much more of an impact for us than Laurinitis.

Ive always felt that Laurinitis benefited more from having a great DL in front of him, (Gholsten, Haywood, Pit****, Richardson) LB crew around him, (Hawk, Schlegal, Carpenter, Grant) and DB's behind him (Malcom Jenkins, Nate Salley, Donte Whitner) then he is a real impact player for that team. He's good, but he's more of a role player than a real difference maker.

I like Gholston a lot more as he has a knack for constantly getting into the backfield and disrupting plays, if not ending them altogether. Thats the player the Jets need more IMO.

:rl::rl: It edited out part of the guys name. :rl:

lauriaitus has the biger frame and is faster then gholsten.in my estimation.laurinaitus has more upside to play in the n.f.l.paired with david harris would form the best i.l.b. corp in the n.f.l.the jets can draft or sign a very good o.l.b if they choose to.personally I would love them to draft quentin groves if he is available in the 2nd round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen him lined up at LB and he has played coverage at times. I hate using youtube clips to prove points but here's an example...

He doesn't have much experience in coverage but he is asked to do it sometimes. Also, most hybrid 3-4 OLB had minimal experience in coverage before they were converted to that 3-4 position.

As for Maualuga, I think he's more of a prospect for next year. IMO, he's more of an athlete right now than football player. He needs more time to develp since he's to aggressive and overruns everything and needs to improve awareness. Maybe he's improved on that though, I haven't seen him since the beginning of the year. Definitely not a top 6 player though.

Fair enough. And I agree that most all 3-4 OLB's in the NFL were DE's in college, just most of them aren't drafted so high when the intention is to play them in a 3-4. If Gholston is as good as you say in pass covg already, I'll definitely give him the upper hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have watched a lot of Laurinaitis and I absolutely love him. Similar to AJ Hawk, he has great athletic ability. The pairing of him and Harris in the middle of our D would be awesome.

eh.

I really dont think he can have the same impact as a Gholston can have.

Laurinitis is a role player, he does his job and does it well, but isnt exactly a big difference maker. Gholston on the other hand is always in the backfield getting sacks, hurries, and forcing mistakes. I like his game A LOT more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gholston would be worth it if we ran a 4-3. Just because a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB are the same build/speed roughly, it doesn't mean that Gholston will suddenly and seamlessly be able to cover receivers, make plays in space, read changes in offensive shifts prior to the snap, or master any number of responsibilities a LB has that a DE doesn't have. And at #6, he is expected to be just that -- a MASTER at it. He's being drafted for his skill in on the line, particularly in running around OT's and chasing down QB's in predatory-like fashion. To draft him #6 overall and make the giant leap of an assumption that he'd be just as good at a totally different position, we are begging for disappointment.

I couldn't disagree more.

Taking a fast DE from college is much better than taking a strong OLB. He already possesses enough power and speed to take on an NFL OT, which is something a college OLB might never be able to do.

Saying that it might take him too long to learn to cover receivers is a cop out. Of course it will take him long to do certain aspects of the NFL. The one thing that coaches cannot teach is something he already has, talent.

The Jets have not had a pass rusher since Abe left, and he was never there when the games were big. We need a pass rush, and I am all for drafting Gholston.

With that said, I voted for JL. The Jets have never had a run defense to speak of, we now have a power in Harris, we need to keep building to our strengths, and let the other pieces fall around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't disagree more.

Taking a fast DE from college is much better than taking a strong OLB. He already possesses enough power and speed to take on an NFL OT, which is something a college OLB might never be able to do.

Saying that it might take him too long to learn to cover receivers is a cop out. Of course it will take him long to do certain aspects of the NFL. The one thing that coaches cannot teach is something he already has, talent.

The Jets have not had a pass rusher since Abe left, and he was never there when the games were big. We need a pass rush, and I am all for drafting Gholston.

With that said, I voted for JL. The Jets have never had a run defense to speak of, we now have a power in Harris, we need to keep building to our strengths, and let the other pieces fall around them.

One of the most common comparisons I see with Gholston is comparing him to Abraham. Abraham, in his prime under Donnie, sucked when he was asked to play some OLB. Absolutely sucked. We had to scrap our 3-4 looks because Abraham was such an ill fit in it.

Now this was a guy who was a star at the NFL level.

I just think the move to full-time OLB is being over-simplified. We also lined up Ellis a little bit at OLB & it worked out well. Is there anyone who really believes this 285-lb man who runs a 4.9 would flourish as a full-time OLB?

I'm saying it's a leap of faith. I'd rather take that leap of faith with a lower pick. #6 overall is time to get a sure thing. This isn't a 3rd-down play call. It's a decision being made at a desk. Lead with your head, not with your balls when drafting.

Tell me -- what are we to do if he is a liability in coverage & when a RB has space to make serious moves? What do we do with this player we gave a $16M signing bonus to? Switch the whole team to a 4-3 to justify a draft pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This pick has trade down written all over it.

The Jets will do their heavy lifting in Free Agency, and use the draft to supplement what they have done there.

For teh Jets, I believe that the draft will come down to what they perceive as best value, rather than need. And that may present itself in the form of more or future picks.

Of course, this is very early speculation, and just one man's opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This pick has trade down written all over it.

The Jets will do their heavy lifting in Free Agency, and use the draft to supplement what they have done there.

For teh Jets, I believe that the draft will come down to what they perceive as best value, rather than need. And that may present itself in the form of more or future picks.

Of course, this is very early speculation, and just one man's opinion.

Not a terrible move if it's an option. Trading down from the very top is tough to do, since the antiquated draft chart these GM's still adhere to suggests so much in return for trading up. However it may be easier to trade down from #6 than from a top-3 pick b/c the compensation is so much less.

Depends on who's there, which will depend on the combine. Right now I don't see any prospect a team wants to leapfrog up to the #6 slot to grab. Some higher-profile guys may drop as a result of the off-season & some will skyrocket up. Happens every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a terrible move if it's an option. Trading down from the very top is tough to do, since the antiquated draft chart these GM's still adhere to suggests so much in return for trading up. However it may be easier to trade down from #6 than from a top-3 pick b/c the compensation is so much less.

Depends on who's there, which will depend on the combine. Right now I don't see any prospect a team wants to leapfrog up to the #6 slot to grab. Some higher-profile guys may drop as a result of the off-season & some will skyrocket up. Happens every year.

Somewhere, somewhere is someone's Mike Mamula.

I really do believe the jets try to attack everything in Free Agency, and allow the draft to come to them and they will be accumulators. Last year they were attackers and buyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the most common comparisons I see with Gholston is comparing him to Abraham. Abraham, in his prime under Donnie, sucked when he was asked to play some OLB. Absolutely sucked. We had to scrap our 3-4 looks because Abraham was such an ill fit in it.

Now this was a guy who was a star at the NFL level.

I just think the move to full-time OLB is being over-simplified. We also lined up Ellis a little bit at OLB & it worked out well. Is there anyone who really believes this 285-lb man who runs a 4.9 would flourish as a full-time OLB?

I'm saying it's a leap of faith. I'd rather take that leap of faith with a lower pick. #6 overall is time to get a sure thing. This isn't a 3rd-down play call. It's a decision being made at a desk. Lead with your head, not with your balls when drafting.

Tell me -- what are we to do if he is a liability in coverage & when a RB has space to make serious moves? What do we do with this player we gave a $16M signing bonus to? Switch the whole team to a 4-3 to justify a draft pick?

I agree in taking sure thing picks at the top of the draft, but I believe Gholston is just that. Your argument, seems to be that he may not be able to make the transition to the 34, which is fine, but the Jets don't run a traditional 34.

As you said, Ellis lined up at OLBer in obvious running situations. Can you imagine him chasing down a guy like leon in space? Probably not, but it is good in running downs. One thing Gohlston could supply is a pass rush when we only rush three, assuming he gets some reps as a downlinemen in 3rd and long situations.

I woudln't assume a guy of his size could play 34 end all the time, but i certainly believe he could be a spot rusher at that postion.

Pass rush is something we lack in an enormous way, taking a flyer on some later round picks might get you the next Bryan Thomas, but i think we have one too many of them as it is.

All things considered, he would probably rush the passer on 50 to 70% of his OLBer downs, which would keep him playing to his strength. Again, i would still rather have Lauronitus, but could definatly go either way. I'm really happy we have the 6th pick, IMO, it coudln't have worked out better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...