Purely academic: Suh or Berry? I just thought I'd pose this question to start a (hopefully)...

Purely academic: Suh or Berry?

I just thought I'd pose this question to start a (hopefully) interesting conversation. OBVIOUSLY we would have never known because Suh was not available when we picked. But if we had, and we know then what we know now, which would you choose?

Both (do / would) add a very interesting and unique dynamic to whatever defense they are put on and are the type of players, I believe, that would flourish anywhere.

I have a very hard time answering this myself, to be honest. What do you guys think?

-Chris

11 months ago Chris Sembower 43 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Suh

Berry is awesome, no question about it and KC is a lucky team to have a player of his ilk on the team. But Suh, being on the actual “first line of defense”, the impact he would have on the other members of the d-line and the linebackers, wow. it’s not crazy to think that Hali would have had 20 sacks or more with Suh making his push.

i also think it’s pretty cool that scheme matters not with Suh. his all-around scheme is “dominate the dude in front of you” which he does pretty darn well. Crennel would have had a field day with Suh.

by bansky on Jul 3, 2011 2:29 PM CDT reply actions

i think this is the direction i tend to go.

i think you could actually line suh up at the nose at times. he could play damn near everywhere and could probably drop into coverage every once in a while also. he’s one hell of an athlete.

i sure would miss berry though :P

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions

Berry

I know a lot of people have claimed that Suh could have played NT for us, I don’t think so. We have 2 top 5 pick DE’s and I wouldn’t have wanted yet another. Don’t get me wrong Suh is a hell of a player when he plays with pure force, I would stick with Berry for the overall improvement he gave our defense

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 4:00 PM CDT reply actions

You can't say Suh can't 2 gap

I don’t care if he’s not the ideal size, Suh would dominate regardless of scheme and position, he’s one of the few players that can play EVERY defensive line position in ANY scheme

BOOM!

by 808NaNz808 on Jul 3, 2011 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions

i don't mean that suh could have played the NT position full time,

what i meant above is that he is the kind of player that is versatile enough that you could play all across the line and wouldn’t have to worry that he couldn’t hold his own. suh’s NT play would look different than powe’s or edwards’, but i didnt really mean he’d be a full time NT.

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions

Gonna be a reply to both you and NaNz

He prolly could play NT for us, but he would not have the same sort of impact. If he was asked to 2 gap that would kill most of his game where he completely just overpowers the man in front of him and gets into the backfield. Instead of holding up the C/G waiting to see whats going to happen on run/pass THEN splitting them and trying to make a play. He can play 2 gap NT but it wouldn’t be the same.

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions

i guess i was thinking that in those situations where the NT position would be two gapping like suh probably doesnt do (and more like powe or edwards), suh would just be somewhere else

that benefits from his skill set. but hypothetically what if we see a huge opportunity for a pass rush up the middle (like teams did on us this year)? we could give suh 7 snaps (or whatever) at NT when it was time for it.

suh seems like the type of guy that could be a matchup nightmare to any Oline. they just have to pick the weak spot. inside or out. much like we use berry… who is a threat in the run and pass game.

i can definitely be swayed either way and i see the benefit of both… i guess i see them as equally impactful, but i’m just more of a “build it from the inside, out” kind of guy, so i referred to that mindset for the pick.

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions

smith saw a similar sort of treatment this year with his DE/NT play

and I’m hoping we see similar (and different) things from allen bailey this year. he really intrigues me

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions

(though obviously smith's skillset isn't as extensive as a lot of other Dlineman)

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions

The pass rush up the Oline is really not how RC works his defense

Look at Wilfork, at NT he stands his ground holding up 1 or 2 guys seeing how the play develops then makes his move to get push. Suh was able to pin his ears back and get into the backfield almost at will(like Tamba)

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions

If Suh fell to us I made the case for moving Dorsey to NT(due to his gapping/run stopping)

With Suh at DE and no one went for that haha

In all reality I would love to have both(especially with the amount of subpackages we are using) if I had to pick one, it would be Berry as I feel he has a greater impact with this defense on every play

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions

well, the pass rush up the middle is exactly what we're trying to conjure up with our subpackages right now (which i know you mention below), especially with the drafting of bailey

along with our boys on the outside. but if we are in more subpackages where our DTs (gillberry and dorsey last year) are rushing a large majority of the time, wouldn’t it make sense to have a downright monster at that spot? i personally think that suh in our specific subpackage set would be downright nasty

(at this point i’m just playing devil’s advocate :P)

both guys had prototypical HOF rookie seasons and I think both teams are recognizing what they have & are building accordingly. DET has made a solid push on Dline the last two years and we’re continuing to beef up our secondary (along with the all important pass rush). I think for our team it makes a lot of sense to have berry, and for DET, it makes a lot of sense to have Suh

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions

Yes he would be a beast in our subpackages

However if he couldn’t play well(Which I have stated I don’t think he would play well as a 2 gap NT) then how could you justify spending a top 5 pick on a situational player?

I understand why people love him, its been a long time since we have seen a rookie DT come in and play with such power. I just personally believe that he would be wasted as a 2 gap NT

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions

but if we'd just need him to one gap in certain situations where's the harm?

i’d hardly think that makes him a “situational player”… being able to only play limited snaps at one of many positions he fills

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 4, 2011 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions

So basically you think he can play NT but he shouldn't

you basically just disputed your original opinion.

Suh would be a great NT, he took on double teams the entire back half of last season and dominated while doing it. Yeah he wouldn’t be living up to his full potential, terrorizing the back field, but he’d be more than capable of getting space for our linebackers to run with.

BOOM!

by 808NaNz808 on Jul 4, 2011 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions

no, i think he could line up there occasionally. hardly a contradiction. i never said he'd line up anywhere full time. he'd be the swiss army knife of the Dline.

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 4, 2011 12:03 AM CDT up reply actions

just because he wouldn't be two gapping the nose doesn't mean he wouldn't be useful there if they saw a weak point

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 4, 2011 12:06 AM CDT up reply actions

That was for BAMF

not you

BOOM!

by 808NaNz808 on Jul 4, 2011 2:50 AM CDT up reply actions

ha, gotcha

i was sitting here trying to line up the chat boxes from top to bottom and there was just too much space in between :P

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 4, 2011 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions

Maybe saying 'I don't think so' wasn't the right choice of words

He is better when he can split his man and then get into the backfield, especially after seeing him last year in the NFL. That’s not what RC requires out of his NT. I still think he would be a beast of a DE but not a great NT

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 4, 2011 5:50 AM CDT up reply actions

Our backfield is young and good...

One guy on the D line would not in my opinion add as much to the unit as Barry does.

by chieffaninfl on Jul 3, 2011 5:14 PM CDT reply actions

just for the record... i'm not protesting the berry pick ;)

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 5:20 PM CDT reply actions

Berry Hater

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions

I knew you'd see right through me :P

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 3, 2011 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm telling Joel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 3, 2011 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions

Berry hands down without a second thought

He changes the passing game, he is a force in the rushing game, and if called on he gets to the QB. Effects the game on all 3 levels.

by RamX21 on Jul 3, 2011 9:33 PM CDT reply actions

I would much rather Suh over Jackson thats for sure. Suh would be our Seymore no doubt about it.

by BigRatt on Jul 3, 2011 10:16 PM CDT reply actions

Look at the stats each has accrued and you will have to go with Suh. And then there is the issue of salary. We have the highest paid safety in the league, That tells me that you don’t draft a safety that high. We could have drafted Nate Allen in the second and though he isn’t quite as good as Berry, He is putting up good numbers. and we could have picked Okung with that first pick and had our franchise LT for the next 10 years or so. Okung was hurt and played with a high ankle sprain and was still listed just below Clady on the LT list of pass protecters.

by Jim from KC on Jul 4, 2011 12:03 AM CDT reply actions

Albert is our LT :)

No need for Okung. I would of been beyond pissed with that selection.

Bleed Chiefs

by tomahawk44 on Jul 4, 2011 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions

With Berry and possibly Suh on the board

Yeah I woulda been pissed as well

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 4, 2011 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions

In other words you would rather have a LT that has 3 years experience and is ranked 10th from the bottom than a rookie LT that is good enough to be ranked 9th from the top? I would have taken Suh or Okung before Berry. That is not disparaging Berry’s talent in the least. He was the best safety in the draft, but Suh and Okung were the best in the draft at their positions and would have made an even bigger impact on the team in the long run.

by Jim from KC on Jul 4, 2011 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions

Okung for Berry? No,Thanks.

Albert is doing just fine. The talk about him is just media hype every season.

Bleed Chiefs

by tomahawk44 on Jul 4, 2011 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions

Plus Safeties will start getting paid more now that they have a bigger role in defenses

One used to be a smaller/faster LB, the other a deep ball hawk

Now both are asked to fill both roles along with manning up with TEs/WRs/RBs/blitz/etc

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 4, 2011 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions

yeah, i remember crennel saying something to that effect when he first got here,

that ideally you’d have two very balanced safeties instead of the free & strong roles you described above because of the way the passing game is progressing these days

if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
My Chiefs Illustrations | Tweet @ me | Facebook

by Chris Sembower on Jul 4, 2011 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions

If you have 1 or even 2 good Safties they can mask a lot of your defense

From the corners not being great, or the Lbs not being great in coverage, etc. Charles Woodson/Ed Reed would be the ideal Safeties IMO. Good in man coverage, zone coverage, blitzing, grabbing ints, forcing fumbles, just about everything you could think of do to on defense

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 4, 2011 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions

Then you will see a guy like Pollard who tries to do one thing very well

Which in his case is being an extra LB and playing up towards the line tackling, but then he will fail at that because he won’t wrap up. When he is in coverage, well we know how well he can cover

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 4, 2011 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions

such hate

by Steve_Chiefs on Jul 4, 2011 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions

No hate just stating the obvious

I don't start arguments, I provoke thinking. -Me
H^2-Hali and Houston

by BAMFSpecialOps on Jul 5, 2011 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions

I definately understand where your coming from. I was a big fan of Okung and the forum i post on talked about how he wasn’t fast and strong enough, came from the spread, blah blah. I argued till i was blue in the face. Glad to see Okung came out and had a good rookie season despite the injury. However, I still wouldn’t have picked Okung over Berry. Berry is one of those Ed Reed types that you only get once in a decade type of player. Berrys rookie year didn’t disappoint. He is only going to get better. I would have loved to had Suh, there is no doubt that Suh and T jackson been sitting there at 3 a year before i would have went Suh and never even blinked an eye.

by BigRatt on Jul 4, 2011 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Berry

Trust me i love just the thought of being able to get Suh but think about our secondary and how it would be without this man. Sure we could have picked up a safety in the second round but that just makes it impossible for us to have Javy or DMC. Suh is a great player but giving up the secondary and weapons just isnt good enough for me.

by ChiefsAnalyst0809 on Jul 4, 2011 12:46 PM CDT reply actions

And by Javy or DMC i mean.....

that we would have to give one of them up not to be misconstrude as we unable to get either one.

by ChiefsAnalyst0809 on Jul 4, 2011 12:48 PM CDT reply actions

Berry

But I’d take Suh over Berry
Berry over Suh any day

I was once fired from a job two days after I waited on Matt Cassel and his wife Lauren Killian. Totally my AP moment to remember. Unfortunately also one of my stupidest moments.

by Chiefs_swagger on Jul 4, 2011 8:56 PM CDT reply actions