Jonathan Bullard, DT, Florida

[Seahawkwalt1967]

Wow!
That burst is special. Im ok w him in the late first. I wonder how much wt he can add to his frame without sacrificing

 

[cover-2]

If given the choice of moving up in the 2nd round to draft a gap penetrating 3-tech DT, then I would rather target Robert Nkemdiche or Chris Jones.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

Not sure if we're in the market for a Bullard. Certainly I'd think it unlikely we trade up to get him.

I think we already acquired Bennett's 'mirror' with Clark last year. I wouldn't see us spending two draft picks in order to get a 3rd option for the same thing. If he fell to us naturally -- it's possible. That'd put us 4 deep at DE -- but three of those would be identical archetypes.

I do agree that the UFA moves we've made give us the flexibility to trade up. I don't see an R1 trade up situation. There isn't the alpha talent to warrant that move. But I could see us wanting to get up into the early/mid 40s if a particular prospect grades very high for us. Somewhat similar to what was presumed in the 2015 draft.

Not sure I see that kind of player on this board. I think it would have to be some kind of reactionary thing where a specific prospect just happens to slide unexpectedly. I would see us potentially making that move if say Ryan Kelly, Keanu Neal or Shon Coleman pushes into the 43-45 range. Guys that I think would be considered as options for the #26 pick if the board fell a certain way and we were forced to make a pick.

Right now, I think the board sets up very well for us to sit back and let the talent come to us. The number of quality options at positions we're wanting is really high. In addition, while this is considered a weak draft -- it's actually got quite an abundant number of great testing development projects in the late rounds. I do think that the cupboard is really quite full for the tastes of PCJS in this draft.

It's a trenches draft. So it's kind of unsexy. And getting a bit of a bad rap. There is understandably a generic concern that there is this desert of options after the first few prospects at many positions. It's ridiculously deep at CB if you're wanting an R4-R6 prospect. I think there will be at least 2-3 attractive CB prospects with requisite length and superior testing values available at our R5 selection. Given our depth at CB -- we're not even really pressured to make a pick that early.

This draft just seems very attractive to our archetype of prospect in the R3 through UDFA range. It'd be a good draft to have 8+ day three selections for Seattle.

 

[McGruff]

Clark has thinned out to regain some speed and agility and looks to be gunning for Avril's job, not Bennett's.

I don't see Bullard as a DE. Maybe eventually to replace Bennett. But I see him as a significant upgrade from Jordan Hill, Clinton McDonald, etc. He's a pass rushing rotational DT.

 

[QuahHawk]

But I see him as a significant upgrade from Jordan Hill, Clinton McDonald, etc. He's a pass rushing rotational DT.

Which is exactly what we need. My #1 need for this team is a pass rushing DT. Our DL needs some juice and a guy like Bullard would add some toughness and likely only getting better.

In his highlight film he looks like he loves to tackle. I think those are the type of guys that do well here, they help set the tone, pump up the crowd, and help bring back the swagger we had in 2013 and 2014.

If we can't get Sheldon Rankins at #26 I'd be up for sliding back into the mid to late 30's for a 4th or the early 40's for a 3rd rounder.

 

[drdiags]

English's go to guy, Tony Pauline thinks the Jets, Titans and Lions are all over this guy with talk of Jets thinking of taking him if they can move Wilkerson. 2nd round may be tough


http://walterfootball.com/proday.php

Defensive lineman Jonathan Bullard looked phenomenal in drills, displaying tremendous athleticism, agility and power. He was able to bend, displayed violent punch with his hands and easily moved about the field. Bullard met with the Detroit Lions and Tennessee Titans.

I'm also told the New York Jets like Bullard, whom they would consider if they trade Muhammad Wilkerson. And the word coming from Florida pro day is the Jets are shopping Wilkerson. Whether the team can get a deal done anytime soon is another thing altogethe
Read more at http://walterfootball.com/proday.php#Qa ... msvMwy3.99

 

[QuahHawk]

Would Seattle be in the market for Wilkerson. Think it would take our 1st? He is a beast.

 

[McGruff]

Would Seattle be in the market for Wilkerson. Think it would take our 1st? He is a beast.

Doesn't matter. One year, $15 million dollar contract, and based on this offseason, looking at a 5 year, 80-90 million dollar contract to keep him.

 

[QuahHawk]

Would Seattle be in the market for Wilkerson. Think it would take our 1st? He is a beast.

Doesn't matter. One year, $15 million dollar contract, and based on this offseason, looking at a 5 year, 80-90 million dollar contract to keep him.

Swap Bennett and a 2nd for Wilkerson. Once Lynch's money is off the books we could afford it and we lock in a much younger DL force. Bennett is probably my favorite Defensive player so I don't want to see him go.

 

[titan3131]

reports coming out that his pro day he had a 1.52 split.... which is better then the 1.58 ogbah or 1.59 tapper did....

He is our #1 pick if on the board.

from this article http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/f ... story.html

""When the NFL comes and tells you you're not good enough to be what you want to do for the rest of your life, that puts a chip on your shoulder," he said. "I used that chip, went in, worked hard and just proved that I'm one of the best D-linemen in the country.""

 

[McGruff]

reports coming out that his pro day he had a 1.52 split.... which is better then the 1.58 ogbah or 1.59 tapper did....

He is our #1 pick if on the board.

from this article http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/f ... story.html

""When the NFL comes and tells you you're not good enough to be what you want to do for the rest of your life, that puts a chip on your shoulder," he said. "I used that chip, went in, worked hard and just proved that I'm one of the best D-linemen in the country.""

1.52 is one hundreth of a second slower than Cliff Avril's, and Avril's split was nearly historic.

Someone somehwere else posted that rumor is that Seattle is looking for a Michael Bennett type, and Bullard is about as good as it gets if you are looking for an inside/outisde lineman,

 

[McGruff]

Fun tape to watch . . . lots of Bullard vs. Ryan Kelly

[youtube]pg6qOIHL2mQ[/youtube]

A few observrations . . .

1. The difference between when Kelly blocks Bullard and anyone else blocks Bullard is astonishing. Ryan Kelly is really good.

2. Bullard is better inside than outside.

3. Bullard can bull rush with the best of them, but is at his best shooting the gaps.

4. Manage to play with violence and discipline at the same time. Plays with great scheme integrity, but battles his space to the bone. He's got a pretty shocking first impact and uses his hands well.

5. I come back to this over and over again with elite DT's . . . Bullard plays DT with linebacker awareness. He knows what is going on around him and moves really well.

 

[titan3131]

from field gulls

"Jon Bullard

Tuesday was an easy day for Bullard. His 4.93 official 40-time at the Combine wasn't eye-popping, but as a defensive tackle, long-distance speed isn't a must. What's important for interior defensive linemen is burst: How quickly can they get out of their stance and into the backfield. Those explosive traits are measured mostly through the first ten yards of a 40-yard dash (10-yard split), the broad jump and the vertical jump.

Bullard's 1.52 10-yard split was fastest among all interior linemen at the Combine, and his 9'6" broad jump put him in the 96th percentile for that drill as a defensive tackle. That's incredible burst, and scouts knew that's what they needed to see. Bullard knew that, too.

Bullard did participate in some on-the-field work at Pro Day, which was nice to see. Coaches ran him through the gauntlet of bags, and from all accounts, he did his job well."

 

[kearly]

The more I watch this guy the more he feels like a blend of Frank Clark and Jason Jones. Somewhat underwhelming as a pass rusher, but he can be a game wrecker against the run. Like Clark he is particularly good at blowing up ZBS rushes.

He has that same kind of fire that Frank Clark had. I'm sure Seattle rates him very highly. He's probably on Seattle's board in round 1 at this point.

That said, I have mixed feelings on Bullard. He got a tweener body and often times looks more like a 3-4 DE than a 4-3 DT. And while he is definitely a playmaker, I struggle to see him as an impact pass rusher. Bullard is explosive and pretty good as a snap count guesser, and he plays with serious fire, but his pass rush repertoire is virtually non-existent and he can also give up some big plays in the run game as he tends to play with aggression instead of discipline.

But I think Seattle will love him. Simply put, Bullard is a player that always has to be accounted for and Seattle is well known for drafting boom or bust pass rushers with elite athleticism.

He doesn't have the build of a classic 4-3 DT, but about 80% of his highlights are from the 3-tech spot. His build and reliance on athleticism remind me of Jason Jones, but his nastiness reminds me of Clark.

With Clark seemingly transitioning to a LEO role, it makes one suspicious that Seattle already has their eye on a pass rushing 3-tech replacement like Bullard.

 

[kearly]

The more I meditate on this pick at #26 the more I lean against it. Not that I think Bullard is a bad prospect or anything, but it recently occurred to me that he's only barely superior to Jaye Howard as a prospect, and Howard was a 4th round pick. Howard was also a guy who was athletic and really helped his stock with a strong final season. Bullard is more athletic than Howard was, but Howard had a much better repertoire and didn't rely so heavily on guessing the snap count.

Another thing is that if Bullard fails as a pass rusher in the NFL I'm not sure you could salvage him. With Jaye Howard he had natural DT skills which allowed him to develop into a well rounded DT after a few offseason training programs, but Bullard has a tweener body and doesn't seem to be good at anything other than shooting a B gap. Maybe Bullard becomes a star situational pass rusher but I don't think he likely has a future as a traditional 300 pound 3-tech or a traditional 4-3 DE since he has the build for neither of those things.

Basically, he's a boom or bust pick and I feel like you could get a player nearly of his caliber in round 2 or later in most drafts.

 

[titan3131]

The more I meditate on this pick at #26 the more I lean against it. Not that I think Bullard is a bad prospect or anything, but it recently occurred to me that he's only barely superior to Jaye Howard as a prospect, and Howard was a 4th round pick. Howard was also a guy who was athletic and really helped his stock with a strong final season. Bullard is more athletic than Howard was, but Howard had a much better repertoire and didn't rely so heavily on guessing the snap count.

Another thing is that if Bullard fails as a pass rusher in the NFL I'm not sure you could salvage him. With Jaye Howard he had natural DT skills which allowed him to develop into a well rounded DT after a few offseason training programs, but Bullard has a tweener body and doesn't seem to be good at anything other than shooting a B gap. Maybe Bullard becomes a star situational pass rusher but I don't think he likely has a future as a traditional 300 pound 3-tech or a traditional 4-3 DE since he has the build for neither of those things.

Basically, he's a boom or bust pick and I feel like you could get a player nearly of his caliber in round 2 or later in most drafts.

Im down with Andrew billings if he is available. Otherwise I dont think there is a better option then bullard.

 

[McGruff]

Kearly, I hear what you are saying, but I think one of the mistakes we fans often make, and I am as guilty of it as anyone, is comparing prospects in THIS draft to prospects in previous drafts. I understand why we do it, and its helpful to get rough approximations of relative talent, but its not really helpful for determining where a prospects should be drafted.

Just because Bullard (or any other prospect) may be equivalent to THIS year's 4th round prospects, doesn't mean its a reach to draft him with THIS year's first. All that matters is how a prospect ranks in the current draft pool. How he ranks relative to the players immediately around him in the current class.

This is a really weak draft class. Really, across the board it's pretty bad, even at positions of strength within the class. But its the group we have to pick from. You really do draft in a vacuum.

The only other recourse, and its probably a pretty decent plan, is to draft this year's picks for future picks in the reasonable expectation that next year will be better. Because this year is pretty bad.

 

[kearly]

I remember somebody in the know saying that teams are always looking ahead to future drafts even as they make current draft plans. I have little doubt that JS already has a good feel for the strengths and weaknesses of the 2017 and 2018 draft classes. I remember when he passed on some good WRs in 2013 (including Alshon Jeffery and albeit indirectly, DeAndre Hopkins) despite a BIG need at the position. I thought he was insane, but he made remarks afterward that basically said he didn't like the WR class. Turns out, the very next WR class that came in 2014 was historically good. Schneider knew it and factored it into his draft plans.

This is a good draft for run stuffers but a pretty terrible one for pass rushers. I think it's totally fair to look back on previous drafts to guage value and then decide whether or not a player is a good value historically at the pick you take him at. Not only look back, but look ahead to 2017 and 2018 which John Schneider can easily do with his scouting resources.

The #26 pick is five times more valuable than the pick Seattle used on Jordan Hill, and seven times more valuable than the pick they used on Jaye Howard.. Bullard is the best prospect of the three but for me it is pretty close. And I'd rank Bullard well behind Frank Clark, who Seattle got with a late 2nd rounder (albeit under unique circumstances).

Seattle could use pass rush help and I do think Seattle drafts a pass rusher this year. I just don't love the value of Bullard at #26. I think in a better pass rush draft he'd be a round two or round three guy.

FWIW these are my feelings personally but I think PC/JS feel very differently with regards to Bullard. He just seems like the exact kind of player they would love and I think Bullard has to be considered a heavy favorite at #26 right now.

Im down with Andrew billings if he is available. Otherwise I dont think there is a better option then bullard.

He's a good player. In a draft full of hype job DL he's one of the few that has substance. That said I just don't feel great about selecting a run stuffer in round one when you can find elite level run stuffers in FA every year for $4m APY.

Javon Hargrave is currently projected as a late 3rd round pick. He's not as good as Billings, but he really stands out to me as the best DT value in the draft.

 

[titan3131]

If we are talking pure value. Hargrave is a favorite of mine and a phenomenal value in the 3rd.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

from field gulls

"Jon Bullard

Tuesday was an easy day for Bullard. His 4.93 official 40-time at the Combine wasn't eye-popping, but as a defensive tackle, long-distance speed isn't a must. What's important for interior defensive linemen is burst: How quickly can they get out of their stance and into the backfield. Those explosive traits are measured mostly through the first ten yards of a 40-yard dash (10-yard split), the broad jump and the vertical jump.

Bullard's 1.52 10-yard split was fastest among all interior linemen at the Combine, and his 9'6" broad jump put him in the 96th percentile for that drill as a defensive tackle. That's incredible burst, and scouts knew that's what they needed to see. Bullard knew that, too.

Bullard did participate in some on-the-field work at Pro Day, which was nice to see. Coaches ran him through the gauntlet of bags, and from all accounts, he did his job well."

Bullard most definitely did not run a 1.52 10-yard split at the combine. He ran a 1.66 split.

If he'd run a 1.52 10-yard split that would've been faster than Keith Marshall, the running back who ran a 4.31.