-
Stephen Paea: Quickness vs. strength
Stephen Paea: Quickness vs. strength
Kevin Seifert
Another in a periodic series examining the roles of NFC North newcomers.
Unless you follow the Pac-10, your first introduction to Oregon State defensive tackle Stephen Paea might have come at the February scouting combine. Still recovering from minor knee surgery, Paea set a combine record by completing 49 reps of a 225-pound bench press.
Combine that accomplishment with a 6-foot-1, 303-pound frame and a natural perception emerges: A space-eating nose tackle who projects as a two-down player in the NFL.
As it turns out, however, the Chicago Bears have a different plan for the man they traded up in the second round to draft last month. The Bears are hoping Paea can be stout against the run, but the middle of the second round is high to pick a player solely on his run defense. Ideally, they hope he can play the "three-technique" position vacated by the release of Tommie Harris, a position that requires quickness and pass-rushing skills that exceed those of a typical nose tackle.
Tim Ruskell, the Bears' vice president of player personnel, said Paea can and will play both spots for the Bears.
"[He has] the strength and ability to be able to hold off the double-team with his upper body," Ruskell said. "So if we have to move him over to the nose ... he would have the capability to do that. It's just a unique guy for us. When you combine that with his effort level and his passion for the game, it was kind of a no-brainer for us. Whereas all of those other guys [in the draft] had something missing here or there."
Don't let that sell job sway you, however. Space-eating nose tackles are much easier to find than pass-rushing defensive tackles, and the success of this decision largely will rest on whether Paea can get into the backfield and be a disruptive force.
Setting the bench press record surely generated Paea some attention, but he made clear his ambitions extend beyond its implications.
"It's a blessing to do that," he told Chicago-area reporters. "I feel like the bench press was something in my back pocket. When I watched the replay after, some of the experts, [the NFL's Network's Mike] Mayock and all of those media guys saying that I'll be a true nose tackle [that was great]. But in my mind, strength is my plan B, as far as the quickness and stuff, that is what I feel like I can bring to the game."
Paea said he models his style after two classic "three-technique" defensive tackles, John Randle and Warren Sapp.
"I can't compare myself to [Randle]," he said. "I feel like that is exactly what I want to play like, and Warren Sapp, the quickness. [I'm] not much of a bull-rush type of person."
Today, you might laugh at the thought of putting John Randle, Warren Sapp and Stephen Paea in the same sentence. But we do so more to describe a mentality than assess his skill level. I would be worried if a second-round draft pick was hoping to become, say, the next Ted Washington or Tony Siragusa. All I'm saying is the Bears are hoping for -- and need -- more than run defense from the No. 53 overall pick of the draft.
-
-
Glad to see to least one national media guy 'get it".. and realize despite the perception because he's shorter, he must be a NT, that paea quickness is actually Suited to the '3", as well as NT. If he can play like randle or sapp, we are going to be VERY happy with this pick.After watching all the vid's on him, alot more impressed with his quickness and penetration he got, than just his obvious raw strength.
-
High Fives / Like - 3 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
That would be nice if we got someone comparable to Raji or Suh, or even a younger williams sisters with our 2nd..
-
Originally Posted by
Henry Burris 
That would be nice if we got someone comparable to Raji or Suh, or even a younger williams sisters with our 2nd..
why ? we need a '3' DT penetrating for the tampa-2 scheme( which are what sapp and randle were), not a fat 3-4 NT, space eating nose tackle, that can't help with the pass rush.. why would we want a raji or fat pat williams that doesn't fit out scheme? that doesn't make much sense
-
Originally Posted by
dabears54 why ? we need a '3' DT penetrating for the tampa-2 scheme( which are what sapp and randle were), not a fat 3-4 NT, space eating nose tackle, that can't help with the pass rush.. why would we want a raji or fat pat williams that doesn't fit out scheme? that doesn't make much sense
True, but those big bodies in the middle never hurt. Keith Traylor and Ted Washington did great things for us when they were there for us.
I will never say no to having wide bodies on the line who are good at their job.
-
Originally Posted by
The Benjamin True, but those big bodies in the middle never hurt. Keith Traylor and Ted Washington did great things for us when they were there for us.
I will never say no to having wide bodies on the line who are good at their job.
And when had traylor and teddy, we weren't playing the tampa-2 "D' with Jauron. that is the the point. You fit players that are desigend for your Scheme, not want players that are bad fits- that's a sure-fire way to a bad record IMO.. And to gve you the "otherside" of the traylor/washington "scheme", was while no one ran up the middle on that "D". no Qb worried about an inside pass rush either, and pretty sure saw Qb's havign a beer and hot dog back there, while waitng for W's to come open, soemtimes 6-8 seconds after the play, becaue neither could get up field.. and sweps to the putside were a nice 6-7 yard gains, because those 2 not chasing a thing.. in 2002, we had 35 sacks, 2003 a pathetic 18.5.. FOR THE YEAR... so will disagree they did 'great things".. they did a great job holding the line and god-awful job penetrating or getting Pressure on the QB...And esp when playing the Tampa-2, you need that penetrating DT and DE's to b successful and the LB's for the run support
-
Originally Posted by
dabears54 And when had traylor and teddy, we weren't playing the tampa-2 "D' with Jauron. that is the the point. You fit players that are desigend for your Scheme, not want players that are bad fits- that's a sure-fire way to a bad record IMO.. And to gve you the "otherside" of the traylor/washington "scheme", was while no one ran up the middle on that "D". no Qb worried about an inside pass rush either, and pretty sure saw Qb's havign a beer and hot dog back there, while waitng for W's to come open, soemtimes 6-8 seconds after the play, becaue neither could get up field.. and sweps to the putside were a nice 6-7 yard gains, because those 2 not chasing a thing.. in 2002, we had 35 sacks, 2003 a pathetic 18.5.. FOR THE YEAR... so will disagree they did 'great things".. they did a great job holding the line and god-awful job penetrating or getting Pressure on the QB...And esp when playing the Tampa-2, you need that penetrating DT and DE's to b successful and the LB's for the run support
No, was not the tampa two, but it was still a 4-3 structure. You have those two fat guys taking up space demanding double teams and allowing others free shots and easier penetration. I do not see how having two wide bodies in the middle of a 4-3 arrangement would hurt at all.
-
Ruskell got his new Brandon Mebane. Not a bad thing but I have my doubts he'll ever be mentioned along with Sapp and Randle, or early Tommie Harris.
The versatility is great though, and I can't wait to see him and Melton lined up next to each other in certain packages.
-
High Fives / Like - 2 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by
The Benjamin No, was not the tampa two, but it was still a 4-3 structure. You have those two fat guys taking up space demanding double teams and allowing others free shots and easier penetration. I do not see how having two wide bodies in the middle of a 4-3 arrangement would hurt at all.
hurts because NO PASS RUSHor inside prescence, so qb's can step up in pocket and throw all day.. its why the bears were 29th in pass "D" in 2001( Despite going 13-3), 21st in 2002 and 13th in 2003( that's more a function of teams not passing and rushing with big leads for that), and 28th 30th and 30th in sacks in the league during that time. Guess you do not remember all the times you were yelling at the TV to 'get the qb!!", when they would just stand there waiting for WR's to come open.. and when the DE's did beat the OT's the qb jsut had to step up and throw to avoid the sack, because those 2 not getting upfield at all
There is a HUGE downside to having 2 wide bodies in the middle of the 4-3 tampa-2 "D"
and ironically even on the rush "D":
bears gave up 1,3113 yards in 2001, 2,,076 in 2002( as teams took the run game to the outside the tackles) and 1,895 yards in 2003
contrast to the small, non fattie now:
2010 run "D' gave up 1,441, 2009, 2022( abberation year) and 1,496 and 1,590 the years before.. so not giving up mcuh if anything against the run, BUT getting much better penetration( qb presure ways up) and sacks with 40.40,34 and last year 34
Last edited by dabears54; 05-10-2011 at 09:05 AM.
-
High Fives / Like - 2 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
I was just meaning having a DT of note, someone that is so good, they're known around the league. To me, I just hope he can make a name for himself quickly.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
