Calvin Pace is quietly having a good season

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout
1-Pace IS having a poor season. You say 'to say he has done nothing this year is just not true and was pointed out by showing the stats of the other d-linemen'. I don't care if the other d-linemen drafted before him are stinking up the joint too. It doesn't matter. So they're ALL struggling-my point is, Pace hasn't shown much at all this year, stats-wise or otherwise. He can help stop the run. Great. But we need a pass rush. He hasn't been able to do that. At all, really.

2-It IS about where he was drafted, because I would not have drafted him there. It seems you're going on the assumption we absolutely HAD to draft a DE there. We didn't. Oh, we needed one very badly, but not badly enough to reach like that.

3-Granted, first year DE don't show great stats in their rookie campaigns very often. Thing is, they often show flashes of really great moves (when they turn out to be solid DE). Pace has not shown those flashes.

I'm hoping he does better next year, but I'm not going to count on his and Johnson's development as DEs, and a KVB comeback as our pass rushing source next season. We need to add a pass rush, still, IMO.

My point exactly. If you get more talent on this defense (including a pass rusher ) Pace can move back to his natural position.

1. Ok they are all having poor seaosn then. So in that case not one of these guys is any good. Saying he hasnt shown one thing this year is assinine. He has had games where he put pressure on the QB. He has obviously played the run pretty well,etc. In your book that doesnt account for anything? Oh I forgot it is only sacks. I am not saying the kid has had a great year, but what I am saying is given the circumstances he has played pretty well. His stats measure up with everyone taken in front of him and had he played his natural position he probably would have 50+ tackles and at least 4-5 sacks IMO

2. Do the Cards need a Freeney, Rice type? Of Course-no doubt. But if and when they get him, hopefully they will move Pace where he belongs. If you call it a reach well then its a reach I guess, but seems to me your believeing all the other hype from the Kipers of the world. I just dont get who you would have drafted there instead of Pace? If not him, and not a DE then I suppose your pretty happy with Wakefield starting yes?

Look bottom line is I have watched him play a lot and he is out of position. Yes he needs some coahcing on pass rush moves but he has all the physical talent to learn it and excel.

Someone pointed to Dennis Johnson as being more productive this year. I dont think so. Johnson has 33 tackles and 3 sacks. If Pace is lined up over the RT all day his production would be better than that IMO.

We will see what transpires in the draft etc, but I agree with you that this team needs a pure pass rusher type. I just dont think you see past sack numbers enough to give Pace credit for what he has done this year!

 

[Stout]

There were a few, a FEW games where he managed to get some kind of steady pressure on the QB. There were many more where he did not. He's playing the run all right, but for his position, that ain't enough. He's out of position, and he's getting bad coaching, etc? Sure, that's some reason to HOPE he'll do better next year and after, but from what I've seen, it's not a reason to EXPECT he'll do better. I will be holding him to no high expectations next year, so I won't be too disappointed if he doesn't do well next year either.

It's not all about sacks. For a premier pass rusher (and like it or not, being a #1 pick, at this point, he is supposedly our 'premier' pass rusher), it's about sacks, yes, but also about hurries, pressures, knockdowns, etc. Not only is Pace NOT getting sacks, he's not getting many of the rest as well. THAT is the disturbing thing to me. I can live with a low rookie sack total, as long as he's SHOWING the ability to get pressure on the QB on a consistent basis.

I mean, really, how pathetic are YOUR expectations with this team and defense when you call this a good season? Sheesh, I guess 3 sacks and pretty good pressure would be Pro Bowl? I just don't get the love-fest with him at this point. He's got the physical tools, sure, but so do a ton of other players. So did Erik Flowers. It won't mean jack if he can't use those tools.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
I'll take issue with 1 and 2

LV is right to an extent on #1 it is VERY relevant to compare Pace to other rookie DL's because that was our options. We didn't choose Pace over a veteran DE, they all rejected us, or we felt they weren't good enough to sign. In other words Pace isn't keeping Vonnie Holliday or Strahan on the bench, he's keeping Wakefield or Johnson on the bench. So whatever rookie we drafted there, he'd be playing or sitting behind Wakefield and Johnson.

on #2, who would you have drafted? I understand you didn't want to move down, I agree, stay pat and take leftwich, right now we'd be focussing on do we take Roy, Vince, Sean or possibly move down. But given we DID trade down, and you say Pace is a reach at 18, WHO SHOULD WE HAVE DRAFTED?

No. It's not relevant. I didn't want those other guys, for the most part, and I'm talking about Pace, NOT everyone else. How hard is this to understand??? OTHER PLAYER'S PLAY MEANS NOTHING TO PACE'S PLAY. Period, end of conversation. Just because some other rookie played like crap doesn't mean Pace should be good or bad. God! You're basically saying we HAD to take a DE there. We did NOT have to. It's the need reach. It's the Tommy Knight syndrome. Basically, you would be defending Tommy Knight too, because who else where we going to take that year at CB, right?

As to who I would have drafted? Hard to say, as hindsight is 20/20 and I didn't have too much time to form an opinion (I was praying, unfruitfully it seems, that we would not reach). Just checking names, I would have taken Faine, Steinbach, E.J. Henderson, and Woolfork, just for arguments' sake. And that's not to say it would have been a good thing. They may have been reaches too, or not.

Problem is, I ain't paid to make these decisions. Graves is. And there is no doubt, none, not a single valid dissenting opinion-Graves reached. So far, it hasn't worked out.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Stout

I mean, really, how pathetic are YOUR expectations with this team and defense when you call this a good season? Sheesh, I guess 3 sacks and pretty good pressure would be Pro Bowl? I just don't get the love-fest with him at this point. He's got the physical tools, sure, but so do a ton of other players. So did Erik Flowers. It won't mean jack if he can't use those tools.

So who should we have picked Stout?

 

[SECTION 11]

Willis McGahee

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
So who should we have picked Stout?

So...read the post you skipped over, the one directly above this one

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
Willis McGahee

That would have been interesting too.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout
There were a few, a FEW games where he managed to get some kind of steady pressure on the QB. There were many more where he did not. He's playing the run all right, but for his position, that ain't enough. He's out of position, and he's getting bad coaching, etc? Sure, that's some reason to HOPE he'll do better next year and after, but from what I've seen, it's not a reason to EXPECT he'll do better. I will be holding him to no high expectations next year, so I won't be too disappointed if he doesn't do well next year either.

It's not all about sacks. For a premier pass rusher (and like it or not, being a #1 pick, at this point, he is supposedly our 'premier' pass rusher), it's about sacks, yes, but also about hurries, pressures, knockdowns, etc. Not only is Pace NOT getting sacks, he's not getting many of the rest as well. THAT is the disturbing thing to me. I can live with a low rookie sack total, as long as he's SHOWING the ability to get pressure on the QB on a consistent basis.

I mean, really, how pathetic are YOUR expectations with this team and defense when you call this a good season? Sheesh, I guess 3 sacks and pretty good pressure would be Pro Bowl? I just don't get the love-fest with him at this point. He's got the physical tools, sure, but so do a ton of other players. So did Erik Flowers. It won't mean jack if he can't use those tools.

At what point did I ever say he is having a "good season" Never did I say that. Now your making things up...

My expectations are realistic unlike yours. I dont expect a rookie to walk onto a team and get 15 sacks, apparently you do. Try getting your head out of the Draft Gurus ass for a few minutes and actually watch the guys play. Frankly, your suggestion that picking Pace @ 18 was a reach is ridiculous!

I still dont know who you would have chosen at #18 that isnt a reach? Its been asked now of you 5 times. The problem is you would be the first person on this board bitching about "I cant beleive Graves didnt draft a DE when it is plainly obvious the Cards need one..etc" Yet you fail to tell us who you would have drafted?

But of course having that expert eye for talent that you do, I am sure the rest of us have no idea what we are talking about!

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout

, I would have taken Faine, Steinbach, E.J. Henderson, and Woolfork, just for arguments' sake. .

A LB, 2 Offensive lineman, and a CB...WOW that would have helped the Cards Pass rush you keep talking about!

By the way henderson has 26 tackles, 0 sacks, Woolfolk has 23 tackles and 1 int

There goes Quans ROY award!

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
Willis McGahee

Does he play DE now too?

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by Stout
No. It's not relevant. I didn't want those other guys, for the most part, and I'm talking about Pace, NOT everyone else. How hard is this to understand??? OTHER PLAYER'S PLAY MEANS NOTHING TO PACE'S PLAY. Period, end of conversation. Just because some other rookie played like crap doesn't mean Pace should be good or bad. God! You're basically saying we HAD to take a DE there. We did NOT have to. It's the need reach. It's the Tommy Knight syndrome. Basically, you would be defending Tommy Knight too, because who else where we going to take that year at CB, right?

As to who I would have drafted? Hard to say, as hindsight is 20/20 and I didn't have too much time to form an opinion (I was praying, unfruitfully it seems, that we would not reach). Just checking names, I would have taken Faine, Steinbach, E.J. Henderson, and Woolfork, just for arguments' sake. And that's not to say it would have been a good thing. They may have been reaches too, or not.

Problem is, I ain't paid to make these decisions. Graves is. And there is no doubt, none, not a single valid dissenting opinion-Graves reached. So far, it hasn't worked out.

Well, none of us are paid to make these decisions, and we are free to question. But, the way your argument is constructed, essentially anyone we'd have picked at 18 would be a reach.

What do you suggest Graves, et al - should have done with the 18th pick?

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Stout
So...read the post you skipped over, the one directly above this one

I saw it, I'm just not sure how Faine, Steinbach, Woolfork or EJ Henderson would have done a better job at RDE than Calvin pace.


I know your point we didn't have to reach for any pass rusher, but your whole objection to Pace is he's not helping the pass rush, well neither would ANY of the picks you suggested. all of them would help us at another position, and I would argue none of them has helped THEIR team any more than Calvin has helped ours. You have to remember, if we didn't pick Pace, someone else would be playing there, who, and wouldn't they presumably be worse than Pace since he's starting AHEAD of them now?

In most drafts I fully agree pick the best player on the board, at that point the Cards felt they HAD to get a DE. Frankly the only guys picked after Pace that I think were clearly better picks were Barnett, Tinoisamoa, and Ken Hamlin, none of whom filled needs, none of whom were clearly better than Pace at that time.

I do see your point I just think you're missing that if we hadn't picked Pace we'd have even less pass rush than we do, it's not like because we picked Pace, we didn't sign someone else.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
Only the shadow knows.

The Shadow wears a hood, right?

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
At what point did I ever say he is having a "good season" Never did I say that. Now your making things up...

I still dont know who you would have chosen at #18 that isnt a reach? Its been asked now of you 5 times. The problem is you would be the first person on this board bitching about "I cant beleive Graves didnt draft a DE when it is plainly obvious the Cards need one..etc" Yet you fail to tell us who you would have drafted?

But of course having that expert eye for talent that you do, I am sure the rest of us have no idea what we are talking about!

Okay, you didn't say the word good, but tell me, what does this equate to, if not good? 'I am not saying the kid has had a great year, but what I am saying is given the circumstances he has played pretty well.' DIRECT quote of yours from above. If that doesn't equate to good play, you've lost a grip on the English language.

Yeah, it's been asked of me like 5 times who I'd have taken...and if you'd actually take the time to read instead of whine, you'd see that I answered that already. Fact is, I can say lots of things in hindsight, but I hadn't researched it, and I had no idea at the time who we should have taken. Of the guys listed above I'd have taken, I guess Steinbach is the one real guy who wouldn't have been a reach. He's played very well this season.

I DO KNOW he was a reach, as Graves admitted it wasn't who we wanted, analysts said it was a reach, and pretty much everyone on here agreed it was a reach. I'd like to see what you define as 'reaching', then? Unless everyone was touting him as a 1st rounder before the draft? Didn't think so.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
I saw it, I'm just not sure how Faine, Steinbach, Woolfork or EJ Henderson would have done a better job at RDE than Calvin pace.


I know your point we didn't have to reach for any pass rusher, but your whole objection to Pace is he's not helping the pass rush, well neither would ANY of the picks you suggested. all of them would help us at another position, and I would argue none of them has helped THEIR team any more than Calvin has helped ours. You have to remember, if we didn't pick Pace, someone else would be playing there, who, and wouldn't they presumably be worse than Pace since he's starting AHEAD of them now?

In most drafts I fully agree pick the best player on the board, at that point the Cards felt they HAD to get a DE. Frankly the only guys picked after Pace that I think were clearly better picks were Barnett, Tinoisamoa, and Ken Hamlin, none of whom filled needs, none of whom were clearly better than Pace at that time.

I do see your point I just think you're missing that if we hadn't picked Pace we'd have even less pass rush than we do, it's not like because we picked Pace, we didn't sign someone else.

So Russ, what did Tom Knight ever give us as a CB? Absolutely crap, that's what. That's the problem with saying you 'absolutely have' to draft something. If it's not there and you reach, you'll probably get burned.

We reached, regardless of how much LV wants to delude himself. We shouldn't have reached that far, IMO. I'm not saying there was another DE that should have been taken there...I'm saying a DE probably shouldn't have been taken there at all.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Stout
So Russ, what did Tom Knight ever give us as a CB? Absolutely crap, that's what. That's the problem with saying you 'absolutely have' to draft something. If it's not there and you reach, you'll probably get burned.

We reached, regardless of how much LV wants to delude himself. We shouldn't have reached that far, IMO. I'm not saying there was another DE that should have been taken there...I'm saying a DE probably shouldn't have been taken there at all.

Knight was a totally different situation, there were players taken after him who were clearly better players, that could have filled needs, but we took him because we needed a CB and we ignored comments from scouts at the time that said Knight was overrated(not just Kiper).

Among those we passed on to take Knight, Tony Gonzalez, Warrick Dunn, Antowain Smith, Chad Scott(also a CB), Trevor Pryce, Tiki Barber, Jake Plummer, Corey Dillon.

Then you have a guy like Sam Madison who is clearly better now, but at the time wasn't rated as high because he played at Louisville. Most of those guys outperformed Knight the day they signed their first NFL contract. That's not the case with the guys you mentioned over Pace.

So if we don't take a DE, then it's either Wakefield or Johnson at RDE all year, is that going to make the pass rush better than it was? If not drafting Pace had meant we would have signed a better DE I'd be with you, but I don't think that's the case.

maybe it's semantics, my definition of reach is taking a guy higher than you needed to, ie you can easily move down X spots and still get Calvin Pace or a comparable player.

the problem is in THIS draft, that's true of just about every player after Trufant at #11, so if you were picking after #11, which we were after the trade, any guy you picked fits your definition as reach. In fact taking Boldin at 18 would have been a reach since we know we could have gotten him at 54.

I'm not picking on you I just think your first point, we shouldn't have traded down, gets lost when you keep complaining about pace being a reach.


Foster, Kennedy, Asomugha, Larry Johnson, now those were reaches since guys taken after them are much better players.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout
Okay, you didn't say the word good, but tell me, what does this equate to, if not good? 'I am not saying the kid has had a great year, but what I am saying is given the circumstances he has played pretty well.' DIRECT quote of yours from above. If that doesn't equate to good play, you've lost a grip on the English language.

Yeah, it's been asked of me like 5 times who I'd have taken...and if you'd actually take the time to read instead of whine, you'd see that I answered that already. Fact is, I can say lots of things in hindsight, but I hadn't researched it, and I had no idea at the time who we should have taken. Of the guys listed above I'd have taken, I guess Steinbach is the one real guy who wouldn't have been a reach. He's played very well this season.

I DO KNOW he was a reach, as Graves admitted it wasn't who we wanted, analysts said it was a reach, and pretty much everyone on here agreed it was a reach. I'd like to see what you define as 'reaching', then? Unless everyone was touting him as a 1st rounder before the draft? Didn't think so.

I dont think you have a real command of the english language the way you use "reach'.

Fact is I dont think anyone you mentioned is better than Pace and certainly none of them would have helped the pass rush.

Pace wasnt a reaqch at 18 if there were not clearly better players that the Cards passed on...and there werent

You get too caught up in the Mel Kipers of the world. They call it a reach b/c they had him listed as a late 2nd rounder. Well, the way this draft played out, and with as many d-lineman that were taken prior to Pace, he wasnt a "reach" there.

Had only 2 of the previous, what 8 dlineman drafted prior to him, and they grabbed Pace over say, Sullivan, sure than I see your arguement. (Even then though, looking at the stats Cards got a bargain) But the way the draft played out it wasnt a reach. They needed a DE badly, and selected the best one left on the baord. PERIOD!

And that quote you are refering to means just that. "...considering his circumstances, he has played pretty well."

Never said good! Dont think he has played Good. Good is Williams play this year. Pace has played pretty well considering all the factors.

EDIT: I am not trying to be a smartass on this Stout, but you mentioned earlier that Graves admitted that Pace was a reach. I had never heard/seen that. I would really be interested in seeing something backing that up as I have never even heard anyone mention it on this board.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by Stout
So Russ, what did Tom Knight ever give us as a CB? Absolutely crap, that's what. That's the problem with saying you 'absolutely have' to draft something. If it's not there and you reach, you'll probably get burned.

We reached, regardless of how much LV wants to delude himself. We shouldn't have reached that far, IMO. I'm not saying there was another DE that should have been taken there...I'm saying a DE probably shouldn't have been taken there at all.

Why do you bother asking questions, Stout - given that you already have the answer that satisfies you?

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
I dont think you have a real command of the english language the way you use "reach'.

Fact is I dont think anyone you mentioned is better than Pace and certainly none of them would have helped the pass rush.

Pace wasnt a reaqch at 18 if there were not clearly better players that the Cards passed on...and there werent

You get too caught up in the Mel Kipers of the world. They call it a reach b/c they had him listed as a late 2nd rounder. Well, the way this draft played out, and with as many d-lineman that were taken prior to Pace, he wasnt a "reach" there.

Had only 2 of the previous, what 8 dlineman drafted prior to him, and they grabbed Pace over say, Sullivan, sure than I see your arguement. (Even then though, looking at the stats Cards got a bargain) But the way the draft played out it wasnt a reach. They needed a DE badly, and selected the best one left on the baord. PERIOD!

And that quote you are refering to means just that. "...considering his circumstances, he has played pretty well."

Never said good! Dont think he has played Good. Good is Williams play this year. Pace has played pretty well considering all the factors.

EDIT: I am not trying to be a smartass on this Stout, but you mentioned earlier that Graves admitted that Pace was a reach. I had never heard/seen that. I would really be interested in seeing something backing that up as I have never even heard anyone mention it on this board.

I do recall that Graves had a certain turn of phrase, when discussing the PACE pick, that could have been interpreted as, in effect saying - it was a bit of a reach.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Northern Card
Why do you bother asking questions, Stout - given that you already have the answer that satisfies you?

Just making a point...why do you act confused (confused smilie) when you're just being sarcastic?

 

[Stout]

LV-Never said Graves admitted he was a reach-he DID say Pace wasn't the guy they were targeting...it was the DE (McDougal?) that went to the Eagles he targeted when he traded down.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Pace. I took your 'pretty well' to equate somewhat to good, which is damn well what it sounds like...I guess I didn't get the minor distinction between them. Sorry for misquoting you, but it is a very fine line, if there is really a difference.

You think he's played 'pretty well'. I must vehemently disagree. It may have been circumstances beyond the kid's control (coaching, playing out of position, etc), but whatever it was, I don't think he showed up this year. Hopefully he can use that potential and get better coaching and play in position, and the stars can align correctly next season, so that he does play pretty well.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout
LV-Never said Graves admitted he was a reach-he DID say Pace wasn't the guy they were targeting...it was the DE (McDougal?) that went to the Eagles he targeted when he traded down.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Pace. I took your 'pretty well' to equate somewhat to good, which is damn well what it sounds like...I guess I didn't get the minor distinction between them. Sorry for misquoting you, but it is a very fine line, if there is really a difference.

You think he's played 'pretty well'. I must vehemently disagree. It may have been circumstances beyond the kid's control (coaching, playing out of position, etc), but whatever it was, I don't think he showed up this year. Hopefully he can use that potential and get better coaching and play in position, and the stars can align correctly next season, so that he does play pretty well.

OK...whatever. I wont argue with you on my intended meaning.

"Deponds what your definition of "is" is?

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
OK...whatever. I wont argue with you on my intended meaning.

"Deponds what your definition of "is" is?

I won't argue what you intended to say...only you can know that.

But when you say 'pretty well' and someone thinks that means 'good', when we're talking about the play of a football player...well, it's almost the same damn thing. You might not have meant it that way, but that's how it sounds. What's another two-word phrase, starts with 'pretty', and has a second word that's a synonym of 'well'?

I won't dispute what you meant, but won't you even admit you might have phrased this badly? Sounds like you mean he had more of an average year.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Stout
I won't argue what you intended to say...only you can know that.

But when you say 'pretty well' and someone thinks that means 'good', when we're talking about the play of a football player...well, it's almost the same damn thing. You might not have meant it that way, but that's how it sounds. What's another two-word phrase, starts with 'pretty', and has a second word that's a synonym of 'well'?

I won't dispute what you meant, but won't you even admit you might have phrased this badly? Sounds like you mean he had more of an average year.

Look, you know from the beginning of the conversation that I never said Pace was having a good year. Its ridiculous for you to even try and twist this arguement like that.

All I remeber is you coming in saying what a poor season he has had and I have tried to point out to you why I dont think it is as poor as your claiming.

Now your throwing in draft position, reaching, making up things I didnt say etc. Seems to me you dont really know what your point is.

Just for the record: I think Calvin Pace has played pretty well considering the circumstances and I look forward to bigger things next year.

 

[Stout]

For the record? You were unclear and ambiguous. Pace has one sack. He doesn't have a lot of QB pressures. He doesn't have a ton of tackles. He hasn't shown many flashes of pass rushing ability. He played poorly. In what world is this not playing poorly?

Bottom line? He hasn't played good (not saying it's 'your' word), he hasn't played 'pretty well' (just to keep track, that was your phrase), nor has he played pretty good (because it's a logical conclustion). Everything he's done has added up to poor play, REGARDLESS of extenuating circumstances.

And, btw, I'm not the one that brought most of the other stuff up. My ideas on the subjects were in RESPONSE to excuses made for Pace. But good job trying to twist it to make me look bad. Better luck next time