Welcome to Washington Benjamin St-Juste, CB Minnesota

[mistertim]

11 hours ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

Given that I believe Jamin Davis' natural position is Will, MIKE and FS are going to be holes this year. We are still thin at LB. We lack top end talent at FS. We could use more corner depth. We need a 3rd edge. 

But, given the exceptional quality that we DO have, I still think we are a top 3 defense. Now, add  a pro bowl MIKE, a pro bowl FS, CB and edge depth and we could be one of the top defenses of all time if things break right. That would mean at least one more big offseason of investing on defense though, and I'm not sure that would be the best use of our assets. 

 

I think you may be right about JD's position, but IIRC he was an inside backer at Kentucky and he's apparently been getting most of his snaps at Mike during camps. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

12 hours ago, Anselmheifer said:

 We lack top end talent at FS.

 

Sure.  But I want to counter with, so does just about every team in the league.  Everybody gets by with acceptable FS play.  There's just not that many guys in the NFL that are great.

 

Minkah Fitzpatrick is great.  I think New England had a pretty good one but he retired?  Anybody else that can play Cover 1 FS?

 

There's never many in the league.  A lot of "FS" but really it's just a second SS where both operate ok in Cover 2 or 4.  Kind of like our Everett and Reaves.

[philibusters]

If Jamin Davis plays the Mike who plays the Weakside LB?  Hudson, Bostic?   I am kind of going in to the season with the impression that Davis, Bostic, and Holcomb are our top 3 LB'ers and Hudson is not three but has the potential to develop.   So if you are goal is to get your best three LB'ers on the field does that just mean Bostic becomes the weakside LB?  By contrast, is making Davis the Mike a way to get Hudson on the field?

 

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, philibusters said:

If Jamin Davis plays the Mike who plays the Weakside LB?  Hudson, Bostic?   I am kind of going in to the season with the impression that Davis, Bostic, and Holcomb are our top 3 LB'ers and Hudson is not three but has the potential to develop.   So if you are goal is to get your best three LB'ers on the field does that just mean Bostic becomes the weakside LB?  By contrast, is making Davis the Mike a way to get Hudson on the field?

 

 

It's a good question. If I have Davis at Mike, then I'd probably put Holcomb at Will. He's not quite the freak athlete that Davis is (to be fair, almost nobody is) but he's a very good athlete and he had a 73 PFF score in coverage last season. 

 

I think Davis would definitely thrive at Will. But if you have a chance to find a guy who can be a great Mike for the next 10 years then I think most teams would take it as it's a harder position to fill.

 

That being said, nowadays we and most other teams around the league are in some form of nickel or big nickel defense for a good percentage of snaps. So in that situation my two LBs would be Davis and Holcomb with Curl or Collins as a nickel DB in the box.

 

In base, Sam would be an interesting question as well. I'm curious if Toney could eventually wind up there. 

[XxSpearheadxX]

delete

Edited June 19, 2021 by XxSpearheadxX

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

On 6/19/2021 at 9:04 AM, mistertim said:

 

I think you may be right about JD's position, but IIRC he was an inside backer at Kentucky and he's apparently been getting most of his snaps at Mike during camps. 

 

Been diving into a lot of podcasts of late and have been rewatching some games focused on the LBs.  My takeaway is they are immersing players for position flex.  For example they supposedly internally think S. Charles is likely a better guard than LT but want to see him play both spots in camp for 2 reasons.  1.  they might need him in multiple spots in case of an injury.  2.  heck maybe he could play LT well so why not see if he could?   I think with Jamin it might be ditto to some extent as for playing the LB spots with MLB being the most complex of the LB spots for a rookie to master because they have to make calls, etc.  

 

But I think a key component of it is also this.  They are in nickel so much.  When I watched the LBs, I saw so many more 2 LB sets.  And in those Bostic was the common player in the 2 LB set.  Maybe in part because he's the dude they felt comfortable calling the defense?  So if lets say they want the two LB set be Jamin and Holcomb then in those situations they might want Jamin to call the defense. 

 

2 LB sets are common.  3 LB sets not so much.  We all know that but when you watch the games that way at least for myself it brings home the point that these 3 LB sets aren't that common.  About 30% of the time or so for most teams to have 3 LB sets.   The 3 LB sets look almost funky if you watch play after play because the 2 lb sets are so common.   Typically you see the 3 LBs on 1st and 10 but not even always then.  But otherwise its a lot of 2 LB sets. 

Edited June 24, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[NewCliche21]

6 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Been diving into a lot of podcasts of late and have been rewatching some games focused on the LBs.  My takeaway is they are immersing players for position flex.  For example they supposedly internally think S. Charles is likely a better guard than LT but want to see him play both spots in camp for 2 reasons.  1.  they might need him in multiple spots in case of an injury.  2.  heck maybe he could play LT well so why not see if he could?   I think with Jamin it might be ditto to some extent as for playing the LB spots with MLB being the most complex of the LB spots for a rookie to master because they have to make calls, etc.  

 

But I think a key component of it is also this.  They are in nickel so much.  When I watched the LBs, I saw so many more 2 LB sets.  And in those Bostic was the common player in the 2 LB set.  Maybe in part because he's the dude they felt comfortable calling the defense?  So if lets say they want the two LB set be Jamin and Holcomb then in those situations they might want Jamin to call the defense. 

 

2 LB sets are common.  3 LB sets not so much.  We all know that but when you watch the games that way at least for myself it brings home the point that these 3 LB sets aren't that common.  About 30% of the time or so for most teams to have 3 LB sets.   The 3 LB sets look almost funky if you watch play after play because the 2 lb sets are so common.   Typically you see the 3 LBs on 1st and 10 but not even always then.  But otherwise its a lot of 2 LB sets. 

 

Straight up SIP, thank you SO MUCH for all the work that you put into your posts.  They're always well thought-out, researched, and receptive to constructive criticism.

[XxSpearheadxX]

Yeah a "big" nickel formation really is the base defense for us and many other teams

[Burgundy Yoda]

Congrats to Juice and future Mrs. Juice!

[XxSpearheadxX]

she's got legs

[dyst]

Good for them. That's a happy time in your life. Wish them the best.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

When/where did the Juice nickname develop?  Is it recent?

 

I love it.  Also think it's hilarious to call his fiancee Mrs Juice.  Really hope this guys pans out just from meme potential alone.

[CobraCommander]

1 hour ago, XxSpearheadxX said:

she's got legs

Most women do. 

[XxSpearheadxX]

2 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

Most women do. 

Indeed. 

[Vanguard]

All I really care about is what he does on the field; and if he stays out of trouble.

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

Dude is a perfect fit for us.

Think he’s gonna ball.

[LD0506]

Now we just need him to get a ring

[Skinsinparadise]

the Athletic

 

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

I think it's kind of obvious they plan to have St-Juste in the starting lineup, I know there's nothing concrete but the way how he's being talked up right now reminds me of how Gibson was talked up last year and how McLaurin was talked up before him. There just seems to be a lot of buzz and praise. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by Burgundy Yoda

[Going Commando]

6 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I think it's kind of obvious they plan to have St-Juste in the starting lineup, I know there's nothing concrete but the way how he's being talked up right now reminds me of how Gibson was talked up last year and how McLaurin was talked up before him. There just seems to be a lot of buzz and praise. 

 

I think so too.  He showed well against vets in minicamp and is a natural fit in the scheme + offers something unique to the roster.  Plus his position plays in a rotation.  He has all of the hallmarks of someone who, even if he doesn't start, is going to play a lot as a rookie health provided.

 

I think our third rounders are going to be good as rookies.  That'll reduce some of the urgency/disappointment if Cosmi and Davis take a while to develop.  I think Forrest is going to play too, DBs have been showing early development and success in our program.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

35 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I think so too.  He showed well against vets in minicamp and is a natural fit in the scheme + offers something unique to the roster.  Plus his position plays in a rotation.  He has all of the hallmarks of someone who, even if he doesn't start, is going to play a lot as a rookie health provided.

 

I think our third rounders are going to be good as rookies.  That'll reduce some of the urgency/disappointment if Cosmi and Davis take a while to develop.  I think Forrest is going to play too, DBs have been showing early development and success in our program.

 

I think Forrest would be getting more hype if it weren't for Kam Curl, Landon Collins, and the playing time issue there. I'm struggling to see how he gets defensive snaps unless Landon isn't ready yet.

 

I don't think there's urgency for Cosmi to see the field as a rookie.  But I do think there's urgency for Davis.  The LB group needs an upgrade.

 

Also don't think there's an urgency for Brown either.  With McLaurin, Samuel, and Humphrey's getting likely majority of snaps, plus Cam Sims sprinkled in, there's less desperation for Brown.  He'll be in on some deeper patterns and the like, but I don't think there's urgency for him to run a full route tree.

 

St Juste though, there is some.  Jimmy Moreland is the scrappy and plucky fan favorite, who the coaches like...but isn't quite athletic enough for his size.  Fuller is quality overall, but isn't good in Press alignment, and still might be best in Nickel.

 

St Juste has immediate paths to play time unlike Cosmi/Brown, and offers the team play calling flexibility.

 

Maybe training camp comes and Sims and Lucas are struggling.  If so, then yeah, some urgency.  But OTA's did not make it seem like that would be the case.

 

 

[Koolblue13]

As far as Forrest goes, Apke and Reaves are likely cuts from safety. Everett possibly too. Figure Curl, Collins and McCain are the only locks.

[Going Commando]

I think Brown and Forrest are going to force their way onto the field.  They're playmakers and it is hard to keep guys like that on the bench.

[Burgundy Yoda]

Yeah, Brown has a path. He can be the Z WR while Samuel is in the slot. It's truly going to be interesting to see how Samuel is utilized. He is the type of player that will have high variance in production depending on how he's used. Meaning he'll be just average (around 600 to 700 yards) or he can blow up for 1200 total yards. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by Burgundy Yoda