LVD vs Derrick Brooks

[Jonny]

LVD will be one of my favorite players all time. I wasn't old enough to watch and understand how good Derrick Brooks in his prime was. His first ballot HOF induction clearly tells me what the football world thought of him.

The questions I have are as follows:

How does LVD compare to Brooks overall career wise?

How did LVD in his prime compare to Brooks in his prime?

How does LVD in his early-mid 30s compare to Brooks in mid 2000s?

Watching LVD play I cannot imagine how it is possible for any ILB in 3-4 or OLB in 4-3 to play better.

[Grahamburn]

I’ll come back with more, but I’m always baffled by the fact that Brooks played 14 years in Tampa and never missed a game. Not one. Ever.

[Snake]

Sounds like a question for @Nobody

It makes me sad to think about all those years that Lavonte David spent on truly irrelevant teams. He’s so insanely disciplined from snap to snap. Imagine him on the level he is right now cerebrally but even faster and more explosive. I think there were a few years there where he wasn’t utilized properly. was still productive in spite of that.

The man has survived five head coaches. Tells you everything you need to know about how damn good he was and is.

[Snake]

I’ll come back with more, but I’m always baffled by the fact that Brooks played 14 years in Tampa and never missed a game. Not one. Ever.

Ronde Barber also played 15 years straight without missing a game.

[These Are The Days]

Brooks at the time of his retirement was arguably a top 10 all time for his position. All these years later he may or may not still be. It really depends on who you ask. I argue being a Buc hurt his legacy because we're such a bad franchise overall. Put a big, blue star on his helmet and he shares breath with Ray Lewis and LT for eternity. LVD might have an outside shot at the HOF one day (it really depends on how generous the voting panel wants to be) but his legacy vs Brooks is more about being a Buc and how much he means to Buc fans.

As players you can't really compare them because Brooks is a bad comparison for almost anyone. He was that good

[mdb1958]

Derrick Brooks was highly skilled in coverage.

[Jonny]

As players you can't really compare them because Brooks is a bad comparison for almost anyone. He was that good

Can you elaborate in what way he was better? Instinctively it must be a push. Was Brooks the better athlete?

[mdb1958]

LVD's instincts are closer to the LOS while Brooks instincts were in coverage.

[mdb1958]

Would have been a beautiful thing to see them as a tandem.

[mdb1958]

In what year did we switch to a 3-4?

[GreatTimes]

Brooks had a great cast around him. Rhonde Barber, John Lynch, Simeon Rice, Warren Sapp and some others who were really good on that defense. LVD doesn't have that supporting cast. But watching both play I have to go with Brooks because he made more splash plays.

[Bahamian:bucfan]

Here is what I'll say about this:

- as someone mentioned, Brooks had an all world cast around him thus it made his job easier. Yes he excelled in said job however, without that cast I highly doubt Brooks would be the same player

- Brooks was very instinctive and athletic. The way he played that spy position on Vick during Vick's hayday was a thing of beauty

- despite his great play, I am one that feels like Brooks was a bit over rated.

- Lavonte David is instinctive, athletic, smart and fast. He has done a whole lot basically by his self.

- despite all the terrible teams and coaches; Lavonte still produced. On top of that , I honestly feel like Lavonte was not put in the best position to produce for the majority of his career. The few years in which he was used correctly; he flat out balled. I think it was Schiano that used him correctly. During 2013 season he had 147 tackles, 7 sacs, 5 ints, 2 ff, 1 fr, and 10 pd! Had he been used correctly his entire career, this would not even be a debate!

- for me, I would give the nod to Lavonte David. David's prime play, imho was better than that of Brook's.
Both are great in their own right, but if you were to switch them, I doubt Brooks would be as good as Lavonte was playing on the Buc teams from 2012-2023.
Likewise, if Lavonte played on the BUCS from 90's - mid 2000's........I think he would have been much better than Brooks was with that supporting cast!

[Cheb]

The '02 Bucs Superbowl team had four Hall of Famers on it including the aforementioned Mr Brooks. All four played together for the majority of their careers and grew up together as defenders.

LVD had Gerald McCoy for awhile but literally no one else of note as defensive teammates until we experienced our defensive renaissance under Todd Bowles and got the man some help.

I only mention this because the argument could be made that if you did a hypothetical freaky-friday kinda swap between LVD and Brooks with their draft years, with LVD being drafted with Sapp in the 90s and Brooks being drafted by Schiano, that LVD would be the consensus first round Hall of Fame and Brooks would have labored largely in obscurity.

But that's neither here nor there. Both LVD and Derrick Brooks are/were phenomenal players. Both smart and disciplined, good leaders in their own ways, great in both phases against the run and pass. As far as one versus the other, I think it's a tossup, and I mean that as a high compliment to both players. To me they are 1A/1B in franchise history as linebackers and I am obviously a huge fan of both men. Excellent players, excellent Bucs, excellent people. 10/10, no notes.

[Grahamburn]

LVD's instincts are closer to the LOS while Brooks instincts were in coverage.

LaVonte is brilliant in coverage.

[Snake]

LVD's instincts are closer to the LOS while Brooks instincts were in coverage.

LaVonte is brilliant in coverage.

Right. As far as I can tell, Lavonte's only deficiencies in coverage are the fact that he has short arms, small hands, and is generally compact.

[Buc2]

I’ll come back with more, but I’m always baffled by the fact that Brooks played 14 years in Tampa and never missed a game. Not one. Ever.

Ronde Barber also played 15 years straight without missing a game.

That's incredible when you factor in the positions they played...how physical they had to be to do what they did.

[mdb1958]

LaVonte is brilliant in coverage.

Right. As far as I can tell, Lavonte's only deficiencies in coverage are the fact that he has short arms, small hands, and is generally compact.

I'll give Brooks the edge with hands. And playing together instead of versus would of made a better thread.

[mdb1958]

Ronde Barber also played 15 years straight without missing a game.

That's incredible when you factor in the positions they played...how physical they had to be to do what they did.

I got miserable to see prevent get played.

[Nobody]

Brooks vs LVD is a really tough comparison, the primary reason of which is that Brooks played one position in one defense for basically the entirety of his career; Stacked WLB in a 4-3 Over, 1 gap defense that overwhelmingly played variations of 2 Zone defense and very stray 2 Zone blitzes or 1 Man blitzes. LVD has played three different positions in 4-5 (depending upon how you want to split hairs) different defenses.

That is before you even get into the personnel disparities and the era disparities (which were colossal).

Consequently, you're talking about a narrow, focused skillset for Brooks, but he just so happens to be either the greatest in history at those assignments or one of the greatest. So you're talking:

* 2 Zone Hook/Seam defender: Greatest all time.

* 2 Zone Blitz Curl/Flat defender: Greatest all time.

* Man coverage vs RB: He or Kuechly are the greatest of all time (different positions though).

* Fitting the run in 1 gap: <So long as his DTs have done their job and he's not dealing with climbing/pulling guards due to losses in front of him or due to formation changes that turned him from WLB into SLB late and they couldn't adjust> One of the greatest of all time.

* Run & Chase vs Screens and Fill/Spill on the edge vs runs or escaping QBs: One of the greatest of all time.

* Play-making within that position (picks, recoveries or scoops & scores): One of the greatest of all time.

* Film study, knowing offensive tendencies, or "being in the other team's huddle": He or Kuechly are the greatest of all time (different positions though).

++++++++++++++++++++++

Now once you move out of that specific skillset, Brooks wasn't an all-time player in particular assignments. In fact, he was average to JAG-ey at:

* Blitzing/pass rushing, beating Guards and still fitting the run and/or making the play, covering dynamic receivers in space in man (like today's TEs or slots).

But he wasn't asked to do these things much. He wasn't tasked with playing Low or High Hole defender or to run the Hole in Tampa 2 (that fell to the Hardy and Quarles). He was overwhelmingly playing Zone, but when they played Man, he wasn't covering dynamic slot players or prolific pass-catching TEs. This wasn't a downhill scheme for off-ball LBers where they're tasked with reading > reacting > playmaking behind the LoS.

So when you look at LVD vs Brooks?

No, LVD isn't in Brooks class on the things listed at the top. Brooks is in a class of his own. But LVDs assignments were the broadest for any great off-ball LBer I've ever seen play...and LVD has shown himself to be Hall of Fame worthy at everything (including things that Brooks wasn't asked to do at all or was just JAG-ey at). Brooks best comparison is Kuechly who is an MLB in the same defense. LVD could compare historically to several players because of the breadth of defensive concepts, assignments, and positions he has had to fulfill throughout his career.

TLDR: Very different players with very different surrounding circumstances. Both first ballot HoFers in a world where the sports writers aren't terrible at their jobs (we don't live in that world).

[Rocker]

The '02 Bucs Superbowl team had four Hall of Famers on it including the aforementioned Mr Brooks. All four played together for the majority of their careers and grew up together as defenders.

LVD had Gerald McCoy for awhile but literally no one else of note as defensive teammates until we experienced our defensive renaissance under Todd Bowles and got the man some help.

I only mention this because the argument could be made that if you did a hypothetical freaky-friday kinda swap between LVD and Brooks with their draft years, with LVD being drafted with Sapp in the 90s and Brooks being drafted by Schiano, that LVD would be the consensus first round Hall of Fame and Brooks would have labored largely in obscurity.

But that's neither here nor there. Both LVD and Derrick Brooks are/were phenomenal players. Both smart and disciplined, good leaders in their own ways, great in both phases against the run and pass. As far as one versus the other, I think it's a tossup, and I mean that as a high compliment to both players. To me they are 1A/1B in franchise history as linebackers and I am obviously a huge fan of both men. Excellent players, excellent Bucs, excellent people. 10/10, no notes.

I would have sexy times with this post in another world.