ESPN Insider on Kris Jenkins

[BUFFALOTONE]

There is no rule that says you have to keep only 4 DT's. Actually I beleive two years ago we kept 5. The number of players on a roster is 52, that doesn't change. What is flexible however, is how you get to 52. There are generally guidlines to the number of players you keep at each position (i.e. QB -3, O-line - 9, DT -4), but they are just that, guidelines. Last year we kept 6 receivers, but you can keep as low as 5 or has high as 7 (as we did a few years back). It's a give and take at each position. So saying that we would have to get rid of a DT if we brought in another one makes aboslutely no sense.

 

some teams have a few roster spots solely for long snappers and return specialist. We don't have a return specialist.

 

If you want an example of how its done maybe we keep 5 DT's instead of 4 and 5 receivers instead of 6. That's just an example and the substraction is more likely to come from Defense instead of offense but the point is that It's flexible.

 

Its a 53 man roster. But anyway I agree with the above, who gives a shhit who we cut as long as we can add someone who can help this team win. This is a big guy that gets great push and takes up two blockers. How do you think Fletcher had those unreal tackle numbers when PW and SA were here. Its because they ate up the oline to let he and Spikes fly around untouched. Lets see what Pat Willis can do flying around untouched. I will be so pissed if he goes to SF.

[jri111]

Its a 53 man roster.

 

 

Wow total brain fart! boy do I feel embarrased! thanks for the correction though!!

[BUFFALOTONE]

Wow total brain fart! boy do I feel embarrased! thanks for the correction though!!

 

NO PROBLEM!!!

[Pyrite Gal]

There is no rule that says you have to keep only 4 DT's. Actually I beleive two years ago we kept 5. The number of players on a roster is 52, that doesn't change. What is flexible however, is how you get to 52. There are generally guidlines to the number of players you keep at each position (i.e. QB -3, O-line - 9, DT -4), but they are just that, guidelines. Last year we kept 6 receivers, but you can keep as low as 5 or has high as 7 (as we did a few years back). It's a give and take at each position. So saying that we would have to get rid of a DT if we brought in another one makes aboslutely no sense.

 

some teams have a few roster spots solely for long snappers and return specialist. We don't have a return specialist.

 

If you want an example of how its done maybe we keep 5 DT's instead of 4 and 5 receivers instead of 6. That's just an example and the substraction is more likely to come from Defense instead of offense but the point is that It's flexible.

 

I agree we can do what we want, but what we do has implications.

 

If we spend some bucks on Jenkins, the likely implication means we have less cap room to sing someone like a Turner.

 

While there is a balance in the draft between taking the best player available or filling needs, when going after FAs we have more of a choice and it is a very difficult thing to choose Jenkins even if we judge him to be one of the better players available at his position (an issue in dispute because of his injury history judging from the posts in this thread).

 

Jenkins would be nice to have to give us depth, but unless you want to suggest we go to a 5-2 set-up this team is likely to spend its time and resources dealing with the fact that we lost 2 starting LBs from the team which started last season (and on the O side that given dissatisfaction with Shaud W. and Jackson being a longshot even if he is good so we may acquire as many as 3 RBs not on the roster today) picking up Jenkins and keeping 5 DTs is a luxury when we have some pretty stark essentials this team must deal with in order to be competitive.

[jri111]

I gotta admit I don't know much about Jenkins besides that he's a "named" player but here's insider's scouting report on him:

 

77 Kris Jenkins | DT

 

Full Name: Kristopher Rudy Jenkins

Born: August 3, 1979

Ypsilanti, MI

Height: 6-4

Weight: 335 lbs. Age: 27

Pos: DT

Experience: 6 years

College: Maryland

Drafted: Year:2001 Round:2 Pick:13, Panthers FANTASY

Percent Owned: (Week +/-):

NFL: 4.8% (0.0%)

Avg. Draft Position:

NFL: Undrafted

 

TACK 41.0 | FF 0 | INT 0

Profile Stats Splits Game Log News Scouting

 

 

2006 Scouting Report - Scouts Inc.

Grade: 92 | Key

Alert: D

 

Comment:

Jenkins is huge, very powerful and had been very mobile before suffering a string of injuries. He has a very thick, wide body and he can eat up space with the best of them. He has a massive, very strong lower body and exceptional upper-body strength. He gets off the ball low and with power. He has very powerful hands and is quick to shed. He had outstanding movement skills for his size when healthy. He was equally adept at shooting gaps or tying up multiple blockers. He ran well and wasn't confined to a phone booth. He could close on the ball with burst and was an explosive tackler. His lateral quickness and change-of-direction ability were well above-average for the position. He has a variety of pass-rush moves, including a quick swim and a powerful rip. He can knock back almost any interior offensive lineman with his bull rush. But Jenkins' durability is an enormous concern. He missed most of the last two seasons because of serious knee and shoulder injuries. He might be more prone to stamina issues and carrying extra weight after the injuries. He occasionally took a play off and would get upright, even when healthy

 

 

____

 

well i had a decent analysis laid out and then my computer went AWOL and i lost it so here's the quick and dirty...

 

1. Because of his injury/durability/stamina concerns carolina may not be asking so much for him.

 

2. These "negative" about him actually may be benefical to buffalo. It appears we want to substitute our DT's in "waves" to keep them fresh throughout the game and adding Jenkins in the 1-technique with McCargo and Williams would ensure that he's more fresh. This would lessen his chances of getting "fatigued" as well as lowering the opportuntities for him to be injured. In addition, he'd be less likley to be taking plays off if he's only in the game when he's fresh and ready to go.

 

There are still many questions and concerns however that I would have:

 

1. Would he be a good 1 technique player in a cover 2 defense?

 

2. What's his contract sitaution? he's 27 so that means he's either at the end of his rookie contract or at the beginning of a new one. If he's at the end of a rookie contract that may be advantageous. He's not in a very good position of asking for a lot of money since he's had shoulder and knee injuries the last two years. Whoever signs him may be able to sign him for a decent price and get a steal if he returns to form. Anybody know his contract situation?

 

3. What's carolina's asking price? We're in no position to give up a first or second rounder right now. Not with bigger needs at LB and RB. And especially for a guy he would be a rotational player. But if we'd have to give up a third or less and everthing esle would work out, i'd consider it. I'm just speculating, I have no clue what carolina would want in return.

 

 

 

anyways, he's definitily an interesting development and something to keep an eye on. I think he would solidfy the D-line and be that run-stuffer that we still may be missing. I wouldn't mind seeing our D-line look like this:

 

3 technique DT:

Tripplett

Walker

 

1 technique DT:

McCargo

Jenkins

Willaims

 

DE:

Shobel

Kelsey

Denny

Hargrove

[jri111]

I agree we can do what we want, but what we do has implications.

 

If we spend some bucks on Jenkins, the likely implication means we have less cap room to sing someone like a Turner.

 

While there is a balance in the draft between taking the best player available or filling needs, when going after FAs we have more of a choice and it is a very difficult thing to choose Jenkins even if we judge him to be one of the better players available at his position (an issue in dispute because of his injury history judging from the posts in this thread).

 

Jenkins would be nice to have to give us depth, but unless you want to suggest we go to a 5-2 set-up this team is likely to spend its time and resources dealing with the fact that we lost 2 starting LBs from the team which started last season (and on the O side that given dissatisfaction with Shaud W. and Jackson being a longshot even if he is good so we may acquire as many as 3 RBs not on the roster today) picking up Jenkins and keeping 5 DTs is a luxury when we have some pretty stark essentials this team must deal with in order to be competitive.

 

 

oh I agree 100%...actually as my new post just pointed out, I don't know too much about Jenkins and would have many questions/concerns. My reply here was merely to point out to those who were talking in "absolutes" that we could have more than 4 DT's if we wanted to. We don't need to keep only 4.

 

I totally agree we have bigger needs and cocerns and adding Jenkins would be a "luxury" (one that may be worth it, but whose knows), but what if Okoye is still availbe at 12 and Willis and Peteson are gone. Do we just pass on him though becuause we already have "4" DT's? I still think we go LB in round one no matter what (wither Willis or Puz) regardless of whose there. But I think that's more of an outcome of our LB situation then anything else. My sole point was that we could add another DT if we wanted to. Anways, i got off track! I agree with you though, Jenkins would be a luxury that would have to be weighed with our current situation.

[jri111]

well here's the contract answer:

 

 

"Signed a $31 million, five-year contract extension through 2009 in Septmeber 2003. Signing bonus: $9.175 million."

 

per rotoworld: http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=2914

 

 

more details: http://www.charlotte.com/141/story/77146.html

 

"Jenkins, who has a salary-cap figure of about $4.5 million for this season and is under contract through 2009, was named to his third Pro Bowl last season. It capped a triumphant comeback after he missed most of 2004 and 2005 with shoulder and knee injuries. Jenkins could be expendable because the Panthers have depth at defensive tackle."

 

$4.5 million wouldn't kill the cap-to-cash policy with about $12 million to work with. That would put us around $7.5 million for draft picks and what now. I gotta admit the more I find out about this guy the more I like about him. Still many quesitons though...

[Pyrite Gal]

o but what if Okoye is still availbe at 12 and Willis and Peteson are gone. Do we just pass on him though becuause we already have "4" DT's? I still think we go LB in round one no matter what (wither Willis or Puz) regardless of whose there.

 

I actually would trade down if Peterson and Willis are gone and probably trade down if I can even if Willis is still there.

 

I think we produce a better record next year if we can flip-flop our firsts with a team lower down and in exchange get extra picks in the 2nd and third (how much depends on how far down you go).

 

My sense is that we likely will need to acquire 2 or 3 RBs who are not on the current roster and getting a couple of RBs amongst the Pittman, Booker, Bush, etc. crew to compete to either be the star lead back or do an RBBC seems like the most competitive route for us.

 

I think that a rookie starting at MLB in our Hybrid Cover 2 which will require vet level reads by the LB to choose whether he is going to pass cover like a safety or tackle like a DT means even the most competent rookie will struggle his first year as our MLB (and I do not think even the biggest Willis boosters want to claim that he does not have a lot to learn in pass coverage as a rookie even though I suspect he can hold down the MLB job for years).

 

Instead, I like the current depth chart which shows Crowell at MLB. Crowell is no where near a Pro Bowl level player at MLB in my assessment, but he clearly has been the best Bill LB back-up at multiple positions the last few years (he came in for F-B when he went out in one game last year and backed up TKO at WLB quite well when he went down last year and then went over to SLB doing quite well when TKO went out last year.

 

His game results have included INTs (including a pivotal one to win the first game against the Fish) and a pretty good tackle number total finishing 4th on the Bills last year despite a truncated season. Crowell also got a number of sacks to his credit the last two years competitive with any other Bills LB indicating a willingness to be aggressive.

 

He ain't perfect at MLB by a longshot, but IMHO almost certainly would produce much more than the rookie Willis starting at MLB.

[jri111]

I actually would trade down if Peterson and Willis are gone and probably trade down if I can even if Willis is still there.

 

I think we produce a better record next year if we can flip-flop our firsts with a team lower down and in exchange get extra picks in the 2nd and third (how much depends on how far down you go).

 

My sense is that we likely will need to acquire 2 or 3 RBs who are not on the current roster and getting a couple of RBs amongst the Pittman, Booker, Bush, etc. crew to compete to either be the star lead back or do an RBBC seems like the most competitive route for us.

 

I think that a rookie starting at MLB in our Hybrid Cover 2 which will require vet level reads by the LB to choose whether he is going to pass cover like a safety or tackle like a DT means even the most competent rookie will struggle his first year as our MLB (and I do not think even the biggest Willis boosters want to claim that he does not have a lot to learn in pass coverage as a rookie even though I suspect he can hold down the MLB job for years).

 

Instead, I like the current depth chart which shows Crowell at MLB. Crowell is no where near a Pro Bowl level player at MLB in my assessment, but he clearly has been the best Bill LB back-up at multiple positions the last few years (he came in for F-B when he went out in one game last year and backed up TKO at WLB quite well when he went down last year and then went over to SLB doing quite well when TKO went out last year.

 

His game results have included INTs (including a pivotal one to win the first game against the Fish) and a pretty good tackle number total finishing 4th on the Bills last year despite a truncated season. Crowell also got a number of sacks to his credit the last two years competitive with any other Bills LB indicating a willingness to be aggressive.

 

He ain't perfect at MLB by a longshot, but IMHO almost certainly would produce much more than the rookie Willis starting at MLB.

 

 

There seems to be a lot of Willis supporters on this board and although a share your concerns about him as a MLB as a rookie, i just don't see us trading down. The fact is we need a starting running back and a starting Linebacker. As you alluded to we can get RB's in rounds 2-4. I agree we'll probably add more then one (but not three). Most likely we'll add either one RB and a FB (say like a pitmann in round two and a FB later in the draft) or two rb's (like a pittman or irons in Round two and a RB that can block well also, maybe like a tony hunt in the 4th??).

 

That said, I think LB becomes our number 1 pick. However, although I share my concerns with you about Willis, I think he is the odds on favorite. Now if he's not there, that's where opinions differ vastly. Count me as one of those who don't think we're going to trade down. The fact is we need a guy that can come in and start right away at LB. There are only three guys that can do that without the probablility going down significantly. That's Willis, Poz, and Timmons. If Willis is gone come the 12th pick I don't think we play russian roulette and gamble on trying to trade down and hope someone doesn't take one of the remaining two before our pick comes up.

 

Linebacker is a need position for ALOT of teams. I think you can make an argument that as many as 2/3 of the teams out there would be justified in taking a round 1 linebacker. Just looking at the teams between picks 13-20 that could take a linebacker in round one: st. louis at 13, Carolina at 14, Pittsburgh at 15, the Bengals at 18 and the Giants at 20. and those are the only ones I know of at the top of my head! Now granted they all have other needs too, but i have seen many, many, mock drafts with Poz going to each one of these teams. This is why I don't see us trading down. If Willis is gone do we reallly risk losing out on one of the 1st-tier LB's by attempting to trade down?

 

It obviously all depends on how marv and co. have the LB's rated. I would assume they have POZ rated higher then Timmons just becuase he seems like a better fit both character wise and system wise. Although if they rate them both realtively the same, then the chances of trading down and picking whoever is left greatly increase. I just don't see that, however. I think they definitely have Poz rated higher then Timmons (IMO). In fact I'll go on a limb and say they MAY even have him rated higher then Willis. Either way, that's why I don't see trading down in round 1 a viable option.

 

As far as the other LB's go, it's true that this is a deep class, but unfortunatley we don't have the luxury of time and development for whoever we pick up. One of the linebackers we pick up on draft day is going to be a starter in the fall and as i alluded to earlier the probablility of suceess decreases the farther down the draft board you get. I like many of these guys and think they're worth drafting, but not to be that player that has to be thrown into the fire on day one.

 

In fact, I think your analysis of RB's is how I look at LB's. I think we draft two wih the first four picks, maybe even our first two picks (Willis, Beason?/ Poz, Beason?). More likely though I think we'll take one in the first round and then another in round 3 or 4 (alla tim shaw). The second guy we take would be a back-up who pushes either Ellison or the new guy for the starting spot. He would also provide valuable depth. Anyways, just my two cents.

[jri111]

would you trade our first third round pick to get Jenkins, a pro bowler in 2006?

 

That looks like the market price right now, per rotoworld: http://rotoworld.com/Content/playernews.aspx?sport=NFL

 

Kris Jenkins-DL- Panthers Apr. 9 - 7:54 pm et

 

 

The Rams are reportedly at the top of the list of teams interested in Panthers Pro Bowl defensive tackle Kris Jenkins.

 

However, the Rock Hill Herald hears teams aren't offering higher than a third-round pick, and Carolina may want more. The Panthers will probably have to lower their asking price because of Jenkins' work-ethic issues.

 

Source: Rock Hill Herald (http://community.heraldonline.com/?q=word_around_the_campfire)

Related: Rams

_________________-

 

Carolina will probably hold out for more and someother team will probably offer more, but why not put our third in the mix.

 

Because we're tied record wise with the 49ers and falcons, we get the 10th pick in the third round. St. Louis is in the same boat with the 8-8 teams so they don't pick until 18th in the third round. so our third would be 8 spots higher then their's. We'd be offering the highest pick at the moment. If the bidding gets too high we just pull out.

[billsfanmiami(oh)]

Sorry to go off on a tangent but I gotta tell a story about Jenkins. One of my best friends from college was down in NC visiting his mom a couple summers ago. His step dad, him, and his step dad's friend were golfing and Jenkins was in a group in front of them. Throughout the round, they ran into his group and shot the sh-- on the teebox as play was kinda slow. After the round, they were having a couple beers in the clubhouse and Jenkins came in and recognized them from talking to them earlier. He proceeds to start drinking beers with them, starts firing up rounds of Jaeger bombs, etc. A couple hours and a few hundred bucks later, they get ready to leave. Jenkins grabs the whole tab. They say thanks and all that and before they can leave Jenkins asks my buddy if he wants to come to a party at his house later.

 

Obviously, my buddy wants to go and his step dad of course gives the go ahead. My buddy has to change so Jenkins follows him to his mom's house and comes in. He meets the family, takes pictures and hangs out for a little bit. He promises my friend's mom that he'll take care of him and all that and they head to Jenkins crib. The party is of course awesome. Women everywhere, unlimited top shelf booze, food, couple hundred people, etc. Oh yeah by the way, my buddy is the ONLY white person there. He ends up getting trashed, swimming in the pool with a bunch of hot women and all kinds of stuff. Jenkins notices he is about three sheets to the wind at some point and drives him back to his mom's. He gives him a shirt since his got thrown in the pool or something, and gives him his cell number. He tells him to call him anytime he's in town and wants to come hang out. My buddy obviously had an awesome time and said nobody was a dick to him, questioned him being there or anything like that. May not fit in 100% with Marv's character thing but This story ist 100% legit and my relatively short lifetime remains the best "partying with sports star/celebrity" story I've ever heard.

[Dibs]

Surely this is plugging a square peg into a round hole situation.

Even if it's a gold plated square peg, it still won't fit into that tricky round hole.

Over & over again Marv. & DJ have shown that they are interested in "Tampa 2" type DTs not Pat William type DTs.

We sign Tripplett(295)....ignoring all of the bigger DTs on the FA market.

We pass on N'Gata(338).....& draft McCargo(295) & Williams(295)

We trade for Walker(294)

And we actually offer a tender to Anderson(304)

Jefferson was the largest on the roster at 310.

 

What makes people think that Jenkins(335) will even be considered for more than 2 seconds by Marv & Co.?

[jri111]

Surely this is plugging a square peg into a round hole situation.

Even if it's a gold plated square peg, it still won't fit into that tricky round hole.

Over & over again Marv. & DJ have shown that they are interested in "Tampa 2" type DTs not Pat William type DTs.

We sign Tripplett(295)....ignoring all of the bigger DTs on the FA market.

We pass on N'Gata(338).....& draft McCargo(295) & Williams(295)

We trade for Walker(294)

And we actually offer a tender to Anderson(304)

Jefferson was the largest on the roster at 310.

 

What makes people think that Jenkins(335) will even be considered for more than 2 seconds by Marv & Co.?

 

 

Because cover 2 defensiive tackles don't mean smaller, they mean faster tackles that can penetrate. That usually results in smaller tackles because they can move quicker, but that doesn't automatically exculde bigger tackles who can penetrate well also. These big guys who can move are obviously rare commodities and don't come along very often which is why Buffalo has smaller DT's. Its also why Indy, Chicago and Tampa have smaller DT's. Not surprisingly though, all these teams also have trouble stopping the run. Every Cover-2 team is looking for the next Warren Sapp, a guy big enough to stop the run but quick enoug to penetrate and get upfield. ( I think okoye has that kind of potential BTW)

 

Now, I don't know if Jenkins fits that description or not, but just because he weighs 335 pounds does not mean he's a bad fit for the cover-2, it whether he's a good penetrator or not. Actually some things I read about him indicate that he may be. Again, I'm not saying I'm an expert on him, all I know about him is what i have read. But from this, I would infer that there is a chance that he could fit in a cover-2 defense as a 1-technique DT. Here's ESPN's scouting report on him again:

 

 

2006 Scouting Report - Scouts Inc.

Grade: 92 | Key

Alert: D

 

Comment:

Jenkins is huge, very powerful and had been very mobile before suffering a string of injuries. He has a very thick, wide body and he can eat up space with the best of them. He has a massive, very strong lower body and exceptional upper-body strength. He gets off the ball low and with power. He has very powerful hands and is quick to shed. He had outstanding movement skills for his size when healthy. He was equally adept at shooting gaps or tying up multiple blockers. He ran well and wasn't confined to a phone booth. He could close on the ball with burst and was an explosive tackler. His lateral quickness and change-of-direction ability were well above-average for the position. He has a variety of pass-rush moves, including a quick swim and a powerful rip. He can knock back almost any interior offensive lineman with his bull rush. But Jenkins' durability is an enormous concern. He missed most of the last two seasons because of serious knee and shoulder injuries. He might be more prone to stamina issues and carrying extra weight after the injuries. He occasionally took a play off and would get upright, even when healthy.

[Dibs]

Every Cover-2 team is looking for the next Warren Sapp, a guy big enough to stop the run but quick enoug to penetrate and get upfield.

BTW, Sapp was/is 6'2" & 303lbs.....he is not the 'big' DT people believe him to be.

 

I see what you're saying about Jenkins though......mind you, it sounds like the injuries have ended his uniqueness.

[jri111]

BTW, Sapp was/is 6'2" & 303lbs.....he is not the 'big' DT people believe him to be.

 

True, but he played big enough to hold his own. That's the type of player I see Okoye being (or could be). That's of course if he even gets in a cover 2 defense. I think it would be beneficial for him if he does because he can use his speed and adequate size to dominate in that system. I would love for the Bills to get him, but he's most likely not going to be there when the Bills pick at 12 and even if he is, with our needs and the addition of walker, I don't see us picking a DT at 12 anymore.

 

As for Jenkins, yea i don't know if he'd fit or not. And the injury are a major concern, but they could also be the reason some team gets him for a steal. Carolina wont give him a way for free, but they may eventually settle for a high third rounder or a combination of mid-lower round picks if they feel like that's the best they can get.

 

Frankly, I'm taking an interest in Jenkins and this thread more out of sheer bordum and exhaustion from participating in the same threads over and over again about Turner, Willis and the media . I don't fault anybody on the boards for this because that's all that's out there right now, but I saw something new and different and decided to run with it!

[Dibs]

............from participating in the same threads over and over again about Turner, Willis and the media .......

What's that you say about Turner, Willis & the media?????

It sounds like you've got original thoughts combining all three topics......you should start a new thread about it.

[ndirish1978]

On the cheap!