Nap Harris vs. Kawika Mitchell
 

Just wondering where you'd stand on this particular issue.

Mitchell doesn't have Harris' versatility, but he was a tackling machine. Harris puts up decent numbers tackling, but I doubt he'll top Mitchell's tackling numbers from 2006.

Mitchell displays a lot more fire on the field, but Harris is undoubtably the better field general.

Harris is also a lot faster, and better in coverage. A classic Cover 2 MLB.

But that's my opinion. Yours?

Based on my very limited knowledge, I thought Mitchell was doing very well, and I was suprised when he got released. However, based on what you said, and what I had heard, in general, about his lack of speed, I can see why Herm would release him and get someone who can cover more of the field. Truth be told, though, I miss Mitchell.

I miss Kawika's hitting ability. Other than that, Nap is teh man.

Another thing.

Mitchell at least displays the desire to be a team leader. Whereas Harris doesn't really show any inclination, he just does his job and leaves the leadership up to Donnie.

Just FYI, to beat the hounds that'll rush in to correct you, we released Mitchell. We didn't trade him.

mitchell floundered in deep zones. he looked like a reerun when he tried to tackle. I'l settle for harris because he can at least wrap up and drop back.

harris> maslowski > patton > mitchell

Fixed it. Thanks for the heads up.

First off, Mitchell was better than Maslowski...just thought I'd point that out.

Mitchell got a bad rap here, he was a good LB in the wrong scheme.

Looks like the hounds are in to correct you.

We didn't release Mitchell. He was a free agent who we didn't resign.

QFT

Tackle-wise, it isn't fair to compare Mitchell and Harris. Mitchell had Bell playing WLB, so of course he was going to get a bunch of tackles. DE is a tackling machine.

when you said Huard > Croyle, I let that go

Mitchell was the poor man's Polamalu. a good LB in the wrong scheme can be ammended to read; the wrong LB.

I don't know if this makes any sense.

did i miss something or can you now make comparison between players who play different positions.

Mitchell ****in sucked, I said that forever.....Harris is solid which makes him better than Mitchell by a good degree.

Mitchell is just another example of how our starters would be backups on any other NFL team.[/Mecca]

You know...except for that whole "first on the depth chart" thing in NY.

And the Giants defense isn't exactly good.....they have awesome ends but after that it's like uhh.

Yeah. They're only 8th in total defense.

How is that even possible they gave up 45 to Dallas and 30 something to Green Bay...and 24 to the Jets..

It always amuses me when race is the first criteria for comparing players.

The scoring defense is still 16th in the NFL, but they have really improved after that horrible start. They are giving up 13.8 ppg since allowing 70 points in the first two games.

They have 3 awesome ends, Kiwanuka is a bit of a hybrid and they go to a 4 DE line at times. Pierce is good and Ross has been solid...

That D is still a bit eh but they have some talent.

KM had a big tackle number because of the D line ... NH in fairness to KM hasn't had to make the tackles because of a better D line this year.. that said KM played too far off the line, tackled most after a 5 to 6 yard gain plus was lost in pass coverage... so NH gets my vote so far ....

Their pass rush is just insane. Kiwi, Tuck, Osi, and Strahan have a combined 23 sacks between them.

i don't miss Mitchell, he was too easy to block out of a play, took bad angles....have fun in NY, don't ever come back....

I miss Mitchell about as much as i miss William Bartee and Snoop Minnis.

Night vs. Day

I'm verry happy with Nap. Sure he's not flashy but we sure see Edwards and DJ free to make some plays. Football isn't always about individual states, especially on defense.

I miss Mitchell whiffing the QB.

Apparently Kawika was in jeopardy of losing his starting position to Gerris Wilkinson after the second week. (He posted his best numbers tackle-wise during that game). Tackles aren't a good stat to look at. And by the way, if you spread out Harris's tackles over the rest of the season, he'll have more than Kawika's 2006 numbers:

49 tackles / (7 games) = 7 Tackles/Game

7 Tackles/Game * 16 Games = 112 Tackles

112 Tackles (Harris) > 104 (2006 Kawika Tackles) OR 105 (2005 Kawika Tackles)

So not only have you been a complete moron when saying that Harris won't have as many tackles as Mitchell, you didn't even compare this imaginary number of tackles that Harris will have to Mitchell's best year! You should try to isleptwithyourmomdireckshun make a better argument next time.

Mitchell with a fat 0....smart fans

I'm surprised Nap has stayed healthy. I was afraid he would be Tinker Bell part II.

Sims was a fat 0

QFT

It seemed he always had a free shot at the QB and then whiff missed him. And more than likely it was on a 3rd and long. :banghead:

FYP

Only thing Sims did in his years here that I remember was the interception in the Sunday Night game vs Buffalo. And the stop of Denver's 4th and 1 two years ago at Arrowhead. Other than that I remember him getting blown off the line time after time.

He was also a zero....and fat

I thought Mitchell started tackling better, but he had a hard time getting off blocks, which Harris seems to do better.

Mitchell absolutely was the worst at finishing a blitz. He usually timed it great, but man, did he whiff.

I can't say he particulary stood out in coverage, but seeing as how I really haven't seen Harris get beat much, I have to assume he is doing it well. All in all, Harris is definately an upgrade IMO.

Napolean Harris has been the unsung hero of the Chiefs defense. He was a FA acquisition that has really paid off. His coverage skills are second to none, okay Urlacher, but not many are that good in coverage being the size of LBer that he is. He is also fundamentally sound when tackling, something Mitchell never was. I'm very pleased with Harris' play up to this point.

bump

Not trying to stir the pot, are we? Haha. I would take Mitchell back at this point.

mitchell just didnt have the body to play physical coupled with his inability to play zone coverage, ya he looked like a tard.

[QUOTE=Direckshun;4317742]Another thing.

Mitchell at least displays the desire to be a team leader.QUOTE]

Too bad that doesn't mean shit if you don't prove it on the field from leading by example.

Heart and desire go only so far before at some point, talent steps in.

mitchell was much better than the harris we 'upgraded' to.

HAHAH..this thread is comedy gold.

Ditto.

I'll watch a game taped from the week before looking for reasons to rip Nappy and he's just...not...there.

He's not near the ball, he's not in on plays, it's like he's Predator cloaked or something. At least you could bag on Kawika for the sure sack he managed to miss or half-tackle before someone like Trent Dilfer managed to elude him.

Nappy isn't even on screen...

yes. Mitchell was nothing special, but like it or not, a team won a Super Bowl with him starting at MLB.

He missed some plays but made more than he missed.

Having Napoleon Harris on your team is like playing with 10 guys on defense.

meh .... a lose/lose situation


if i had to choose i would go with Mitchell


stupid ...... but athletic

He played OLB for the Giants.

I thought Mitchell was much better than Harris. Harris didnt do crap last year, thats why hes no longer starting. Mitchell atleast improved every year thanks to Gunther. I dont see Harris every being a good player in the NFL..... Go Pat Thomas!

How is Harris leading this vote after being benched after 1 year as the starter?

they both suck

reading this thread you would think harris had 2 tackles total last year(his first with us) if you all need reminding the guy had OVER 100 TACKLES LAST YEAR. he didnt make the huge game changing plays but still over 100 come on

Every middle linebacker has decent tackle stats.

I mean, they are right in the middle of the field, how could they not always be around the ball??

After thinking about it for a little while,I think id rather have neither....

This thread was started last year when Harris was actually doing well at the beggining of the season, then dissapeared.

NM. la la la la la

He had the body. He was strong and when he did hit people they flew backwards. IMO his only problem was he tended to over react to plays.

I guess i would have rather kept Mitchell, and not ever signed Harris. Mitchell was pretty good in NY. now the Bills have him

thats great but people are saying that the guy DID NOTHING LAST YEAR,
100+ tackles=nothing?

Both suck. You missed that option last year sir!

No of course not. I was just trying to say that the tackle stat for a MLB is a little inflated in the overall evaulation.

I would be willing to bet most NFL MLB's have 100-200 tackles a year.

I always thought that if KM hadn't whiffed on so many quarterback blitzes, he would probably still be here and people would like him. I'll bet that he had clear shots at the quarterback more than half a dozen times and ran by the guy every, single time. That kind of stuff will turn the fans against you.

I also thought he was treated poorly here by the "veteran" defensive players (Law, Surtain, etc.). It seemed as though they just sort of laughed at his enthusiasm. At this point, even though he didn't have the kind of mobility a MLB really needs in the C2 scheme, I'd rather have him than Harris, but I'm glad he's still in the league and contributing.

FAX