Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
BoltBacker

5 Worst Moves This Offseason

Recommended Posts

I don't know about 5 worst, but the worst was the signing of Jimmy Graham.  One of the worst signings I've ever seen.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

I don't know about 5 worst, but the worst was the signing of Jimmy Graham.  One of the worst signings I've ever seen.

I thought he’d be lucky to latch on anywhere and wouldn’t have been surprised if he retired. Chicago must’ve saw something I didn’t last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2020 at 10:08 PM, RushHour said:

I was just going to say, the demise of the Rams seems to have gone a little bit unnoticed. Only a couple of years ago they were the darlings of the league. Now they are looking very average.

 

On 3/20/2020 at 1:36 PM, Anarchy99 said:

The Rams rapid fall back to earth was telegraphed and very predictable. You can't pay everyone top dollar while still having multiple players needing a new contract. At the time, their moves screamed that salary cap purgatory was waiting around the corner. It's hard enough to have one SB year, let alone to stay in contention multiple years.

 

There are a few philosophies of approach to building a team in the NFL, mostly variants of two main forms: build now to win now, and continually build incrementally.

NE is usually the poster-boy team for building incrementally and continually -- while they had the luxury of the arguable best QB of all time, they did do a good job of rotating players in and out of the system to protect cap space and overspend, letting higher priced FA walk at times and replacing them with talent that could uphold their role in the system.

Other teams have done this well over time -- PIT, DEN, DAL, and the 49ers have all at times build successful teams that stay fairly successful even when not in a championship window.

The Rams used the other approach.

There are pros and cons to both methods, and we've seen teams do both well and poorly. Rams were a team that actually built themselves to be a contender in a small window well -- I think we were all impressed by the sheer amount of talent (and dollars spent) putting together a team to help a 2-3 year championship window. To @Anarchy99's points, it's a short term strategy that will likely force you to blow up your team as the spend against the cap is not sustainable. You also need things to fall right in terms of performance, injury, team cohesion, etc. The Rams' window simply began to close before they pulled off a championship, and this kind of sell-off was expected.

Some teams handle the implosion differently -- I don't think this can be said about LAR as some of the decisions they made (as pointed out here) are a bit head scratching. But there was no question this implosion was coming and expected, and I for one expected them to be "forced" to make some hard decisions, even ones that might not be 100% ideal, if only to look at rebuilding efficiently. Not sure I can say they are rebuilding efficiently though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Stompin' Tom Connors said:

There are a few philosophies of approach to building a team in the NFL, mostly variants of two main forms: build now to win now, and continually build incrementally.

NE is usually the poster-boy team for building incrementally and continually -- while they had the luxury of the arguable best QB of all time, they did do a good job of rotating players in and out of the system to protect cap space and overspend, letting higher priced FA walk at times and replacing them with talent that could uphold their role in the system.

Other teams have done this well over time -- PIT, DEN, DAL, and the 49ers have all at times build successful teams that stay fairly successful even when not in a championship window.

The Rams used the other approach.

There are pros and cons to both methods, and we've seen teams do both well and poorly. Rams were a team that actually built themselves to be a contender in a small window well -- I think we were all impressed by the sheer amount of talent (and dollars spent) putting together a team to help a 2-3 year championship window. To @Anarchy99's points, it's a short term strategy that will likely force you to blow up your team as the spend against the cap is not sustainable. You also need things to fall right in terms of performance, injury, team cohesion, etc. The Rams' window simply began to close before they pulled off a championship, and this kind of sell-off was expected.

Some teams handle the implosion differently -- I don't think this can be said about LAR as some of the decisions they made (as pointed out here) are a bit head scratching. But there was no question this implosion was coming and expected, and I for one expected them to be "forced" to make some hard decisions, even ones that might not be 100% ideal, if only to look at rebuilding efficiently. Not sure I can say they are rebuilding efficiently though.

NE has done better than any team in managing the salary cap by far, but their situation is so unique that it is really not a consideration for most teams. Many of the other franchises did not have the draw of Brady. The other reason it would be tough to copy is BB has been around for so long and has been so successful that he can do whatever he wants without fear of reprisal. A new coach on a new team is expected to win right out of the gate, so "building a team over time" really isn't an option. Most coaches and regimes will have to win right away to keep their jobs. One of the current ways to do that is to win a SB (or at least get to one) with a stud QB on a rookie contract. That's been the recipe these days. Once the QB shoots up to top of the market pay, those teams generally fall back to the pack. The Chiefs will bear monitoring once they have to pay Mahomes $40 million a year (in addition to paying a lot of other players that will want top dollar).

The Ravens seemed to have excelled at the binge and purge model. They have been very good for a few seasons, do a one year salary dump, and then get after it right away again. One of the issues for bad teams with cap money is the siren song of free agents. Too many players get huge contracts that on their best day are above average, yet some teams will pay them like they are HOFers. Having money to spend doesn't mean you should spend it like a drunken sailor.

The Rams almost got there and certainly going for it is a commendable strategy. Some teams can't even get in position to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

NE has done better than any team in managing the salary cap by far, but their situation is so unique that it is really not a consideration for most teams. Many of the other franchises did not have the draw of Brady. The other reason it would be tough to copy is BB has been around for so long and has been so successful that he can do whatever he wants without fear of reprisal. A new coach on a new team is expected to win right out of the gate, so "building a team over time" really isn't an option. Most coaches and regimes will have to win right away to keep their jobs. One of the current ways to do that is to win a SB (or at least get to one) with a stud QB on a rookie contract. That's been the recipe these days. Once the QB shoots up to top of the market pay, those teams generally fall back to the pack. The Chiefs will bear monitoring once they have to pay Mahomes $40 million a year (in addition to paying a lot of other players that will want top dollar).

The Ravens seemed to have excelled at the binge and purge model. They have been very good for a few seasons, do a one year salary dump, and then get after it right away again. One of the issues for bad teams with cap money is the siren song of free agents. Too many players get huge contracts that on their best day are above average, yet some teams will pay them like they are HOFers. Having money to spend doesn't mean you should spend it like a drunken sailor.

The Rams almost got there and certainly going for it is a commendable strategy. Some teams can't even get in position to do that.

Solid post as usual. I agree that the NE use case is really unique for a lot of reasons -- BB, not all GOAT QBs are going to take such team-friendly contracts, etc. But the basics of what they did -- be willing to walk away instead of overextending with key expensive players later in their career as they got more expensive; plan around their cap well; build a core unit with a few essential pieces and build/shuffle pieces around them; etc; -- have been done well by teams like PIT, DEN, and most recently, to your point, BAL (among others) really well. 

Rams went about it the right way -- if you are going to go all out to win now, go all out and burn out if you have to. IT got them to the championship, they just couldn't get that done. They are paying for it now, but this hurt is just the mortgage coming due, as expected.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dr. Dan said:

Need a title refresh...take out the "5" :lol:

many questionable moves being made 

Yeah, we should probably make it a top 10 list by now. And change it to top 50 once the draft is over.

I thought for sure someone would mention Ereck Flowers 3yr/$30mil deal. That was on the cusp of my list when the thread was started. It's a nice story for a 25yo draft bust. He was put in a terrible situation not of his doing and went from the scrap heap of the league to life changing money in less than a year. Still, I found that deal to be absolutely shocking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2020 at 4:58 PM, Andy Dufresne said:

Stan Kroenke's net worth is $10 BILLION and growing.

$10 Million to him is approximately like $100 is to someone that makes $100k.

They didn't make this move for Stan Kroenke.

Well, Kroenke may be worth $10 BILLION but he seems unwilling to spend the $5Million that he legally owes Todd Gurley.....

"Profootballtalk's Mike Florio reports the Rams "clearly" owe Todd Gurley $5.05 million in unpaid bonus money. 

Gurley is owed a $7.55 million bonus, with only $2.5 million of it subject to offset language. “It’s pretty clear the Rams are in the wrong,” were the words of a source with knowledge of Gurley's pact. “Even if you take the theory they are waiting on the offset they are in the wrong.” Florio reports the matter is less certain with a similarly-disgruntled Clay Matthews. The Rams have yet to publicly comment, but have leaked they believe they are in the right. One way or another, Gurley is going to get paid. Owner Stan Kroenke needs to get it over with. The matter figures to come to a head once Gurley officially passes his Falcons physical."

Where are all the people that said the Rams were cutting Gurley to MAKE salary cap space this season? They cut Matthews at a very reasonable contract and now trade Cooks for less than a 2nd rounder since the Gurley move. I guess it's POSSIBLE the Rams are better off without Gurley/Cooks/Matthews on the roster..... I just don't see it. 

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Snorkelson said:

Bill o brien strikes again

Hey now, Barnwell at ESPN gave Houston a D+ grade on the trade.  So evidently O'Brien is getting better at it!

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this needs to be updated now that the draft is over because the draft is really where you build a SB team.....

1. Still the HOU debacle. It's right up there with the Hershel Walker trade as one of the worst I can remember.

2. The rolling, staggering, drunken mess the Rams have become. I guess it's not really a "MOVE" as much as it is a car wreck happening in slow motion. A little over a year ago this team was in the SB. Had a terrible season last year in large part because the OL was horrid. So they dump Gurley and Cooks which handcuffs the team financially BUT everyone tells me they did to avoid financial pain down the line. But then it comes out they also moved some of Goffs money down the road in large part because the Gurley/Cooks moves cost them so much money.... so maybe they won't be in great financial shape down the road either. Is this a snake eating it's tale or the next sequal to "the Human Centipede"? Then they use all their draft capital to replace Gurley/Cooks/Fowler with Akers/Jefferson/Lewis. <Scratches head> That's an UPGRADE? Oh, and the entire reason they missed the playoffs last season and everyone had an off year in the first place was the OL.... I guess they "fixed" it with Tremayne Anchrum with the #250 pick in the draft. Your read that correctly, the 6th to last pick in the draft. Is this supposed to be a comedy or a tragedy? They could very well go from SB to last in their division very, very quickly.

3. CHI jumps up these rankings a bit after they double down on the Jimmy Graham contract by drafting Cole Kmet with their top pick in the draft in round 2. CHI loves TE's(for a short time) the same way the chargers love MLB's. It's like they have a crack habit and one bad decision just leads to their next bad decision. They washed their hands of the Trey Burton decision this year to make room for their next round of bad decisions. Rumors are that Shaheen is on his way out of town next. He still may have the highest upside of any TE on their roster...... so I fully expect him to move on and excel somewhere else. He hasn't had a 100yd SEAON(not game but SEASON) in two years but I just trust CHI to make the wrong call here. I'll bet on whatever they aren't doing with regard to TE. The Foles move and contract changes somehow gets overshadowed by the black hole of misdirection and intrigue at the end of the OL. But it's close and Foles might have got them to #3 by himself.

4. Speaking of the chargers, how do you trade up that much draft capital to move up for a MLB?! Manti Te'o, Denzel Perryman, now Kenneth Murray. How much draft capital are you going to spend at the MLB position in a league that passes 2/3rd the time? They aren't just chasing the ghost of Junior Seau anymore, they are chasing their memories of what was important in 1990's defenses. It's unreal. Another draft where telesco desperately needs a LT/G/C so he moves heaven and earth to overpay so much draft capital for a MLB. Is dementia contagious?

5. Still can't get passed Tannehill for $30Mil/yr for multiple years. I don't think anyone else in the league would give him even $20Mil. Still Foles 2.0 if you ask me. Bidding against yourself for a player all based on a small window of the best play in his life.

Honorable Mention - I love Andy Reid, but ANY of these RB's in the FIRST ROUND!? It would be one thing if this was an '84 Bears situation where they just won a SB and really had no weaknesses on the roster...... but this Chiefs team has PLENTY of holes that could have been filled on defense. Plenty. I really like the Chiefs, Chief fans, and the city of KC and I was hoping they would have done more(although I really loved the Niang pick and think the idea of just piling depth at OL and blocking for Mahomes is a great idea. Just keep Mahomes healthy at all costs.)

NOTABLE OMISSIONS:

People seem to be losing their minds over GB and PHI drafting QB's and I don't get it. Those two franchises pretty much always value depth at QB more than most so it's not surprising. Developing QB's and depth at QB is just a smart thing and you have to spend draft capital to do that. They just seem like GB/PHI type moves to me and they have been very successful doing it that way over the years.

I also don't understand all the criticism las vegas is getting. Their problem is they couldn't cover anybody and they didn't have a WR that could beat coverage last year. I think they went a long way toward fixing that, although I'll agree I have my doubts about Carr/Mariota attacking down field with speedsters. People are giving bad grades because they think Ruggs/Arnett too high but they aren't factoring in the Bowden/Edwards/Robertson picks highly enough imo. All five of those guys will have instant positive impacts on that team in the positions where they need it most.

I don't understand the NE/SEA picks anymore than the next guy but they both have the track record of making silk purses out of sows ears. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, BoltBacker said:

Honorable Mention - I love Andy Reid, but ANY of these RB's in the FIRST ROUND!? It would be one thing if this was an '84 Bears situation where they just won a SB and really had no weaknesses on the roster...... but this Chiefs team has PLENTY of holes that could have been filled on defense. Plenty. I really like the Chiefs, Chief fans, and the city of KC and I was hoping they would have done more(although I really loved the Niang pick and think the idea of just piling depth at OL and blocking for Mahomes is a great idea. Just keep Mahomes healthy at all costs.)

 

The Chiefs really need LB and CB. Four of the five picks immediately preceding the Chiefs were LB and CB. Perhaps they didn't see the value there. Too bad there wasn't a QB worth taking there so they could trade down.

As a Chiefs fan, before the draft, I thought they might take an RB with the 32nd pick. People talk about how good the Chiefs O-line is, but Mahomes was always scrambling. By the time the Super Bowl rolled around, he seemed to reflexively scramble sometimes. I remember a couple of times after he quickly resorted to scramble that he glanced back, saw nobody was actually there, and shook his head. Perhaps with CEH we'll see Mahomes scrambling a bit less and slinging it downfield (with great success). CEH is a tremendous outlet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BoltBacker said:

Speaking of the chargers, how do you trade up that much draft capital to move up for a MLB?

Murray will start at WLB, not MLB. Not sure if that changes your opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts paying rivers is just stupid

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arizona not taking Wirfs at #8 was a huge mistake. Need to protect Kyler at all cost. When they do their offense is unstoppable. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Arizona not taking Wirfs at #8 was a huge mistake. Need to protect Kyler at all cost. When they do their offense is unstoppable. 

Wirfs is better than Josh Jones but the latter is no slouch.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Wirfs is better than Josh Jones but the latter is no slouch.

Yeah Josh Jones was a life saver but should have taken them both imo. Kyler can't be stopped when you give him time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BoltBacker said:

NOTABLE OMISSIONS:

People seem to be losing their minds over GB and PHI drafting QB's and I don't get it. Those two franchises pretty much always value depth at QB more than most so it's not surprising. Developing QB's and depth at QB is just a smart thing and you have to spend draft capital to do that. They just seem like GB/PHI type moves to me and they have been very successful doing it that way over the years.

Eagles fan here. It's hard to argue that Philly is overvaluing the backup QB position when the last one of note literally has a freaking STATUE outside the stadium.

But it's a matter of opportunity cost. I'm rarely a fan of trading up, but top-15ish drafted WRs have a remarkably low bust rate compared to most other positions. By the time Jeudy / Lamb dropped into the mid-teens, it wouldn't have even cost the full value of their 2nd to go get one of them (i.e. they could have moved up and still gotten a pick back). You have to wonder if it was worth missing out on one of the two clear consensus elite talents at your single biggest position of need just so you could get (and potentially reach for!) a guy whom, in the best-case scenario, will never start a game for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

Eagles fan here. It's hard to argue that Philly is overvaluing the backup QB position when the last one of note literally has a freaking STATUE outside the stadium.

But it's a matter of opportunity cost. I'm rarely a fan of trading up, but top-15ish drafted WRs have a remarkably low bust rate compared to most other positions. By the time Jeudy / Lamb dropped into the mid-teens, it wouldn't have even cost the full value of their 2nd to go get one of them (i.e. they could have moved up and still gotten a pick back). You have to wonder if it was worth missing out on one of the two clear consensus elite talents at your single biggest position of need just so you could get (and potentially reach for!) a guy whom, in the best-case scenario, will never start a game for you.

That's fair as I agree with you getting either of those two guys would have made a HUGE difference. It's just hard for me to ever criticize a team for not trading up because it's impossible to know what the cost would have been to trade up. We know what the pick/value chart is if BOTH teams are motivated to make a move.... but as we have seen in the past when only one of the teams is motivated and the other really doesn't want to trade but needs to be convinced then the motivated side can get completely fleeced in a trade.

Your best bet to move up was likely SF at #14 as they were rumored to be looking to trade down to acquire more draft capital. The trade value chart would suggest #21 and #53 should have gotten it done but it's also possible that's just where the negotiations would have started. Would you have been willing to add a 2021 2nd rounder to make that happen? Or a 1st? Or a 2nd and a 3rd? It's hard to guess what SF was asking for but since Kinlaw was highly thought of and replacing Buckner who they wanted to keep but just couldn't pay SF could have been asking for a great deal in return. If you look how the draft fell the next DT player taken was Blacklock at #40 so SF would have had to use pick #25 to get him. The next was Davis at pick #56 who a lot of people are saying was a one dimensional reach by MIA. Both of those alternatives are big drop off from Kinlaw, and Kinlaw himself may be quite a drop off from Buckner. Not saying it couldn't be done, just stating reasons SF could have been asking for more than one might expect just looking at the trade chart.

But I take your point either Lamb or Jeudy would have changed the offense in a way Reagor likely will not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

Murray will start at WLB, not MLB. Not sure if that changes your opinion.

I was just going off a depth chart I had seen here at FBG, but no it doesn't change it all that much. 

This was one of the deepest drafts at OT that I have seen in a long time, they just invested the #6 on a rookie QB.... and telesco in his infinite wisdom has a depth chart of Trent Scott and Trey Pipkins for the LT position to start the season. That's my overall point. I don't know how good Murray will be but he'll have to be AMAZING to be worth what the chargers gave up to go get him.

He just seems to make the same mistakes over and over and over again. As you have pointed out in other threads maybe it does come down to the ownership that makes mistakes over and over again, including keeping telesco around. People at this time of year like to say how talented this charger team is but then are shocked, SHOCKED when any injury sends the franchise in a season ending spiral. If Bulaga at RT gets an injury this will once again probably be a bottom 5 OL in the NFL. I don't know what other people are watching but I don't see many teams win a lot of playoff games with a bottom 5 OL no matter who else they have. Once again a single injury will make this entire offense grind to a halt and the football world will be surprised that all this talent is going unrealized with the chargers. Poor chargers, it's always "injuries" that kills them. Well, one way you build depth is by NOT trading multiple picks in the top half of the draft for yet another LB pick. Injuries just expose bad depth on a roster and bad depth on a roster just exposes a GM well beyond his depth in the draft at least imo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, need2know said:

Colts paying rivers is just stupid

What do you think they should have done at QB instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BoltBacker said:

What do you think they should have done at QB instead?

Not sure.  Only thing I know is that was not a good move.

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, need2know said:

Not sure.  Only thing I know is that was not a good move.

It was a great move, and they will be a high seed in the AFC as a result, assuming there is a season. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, need2know said:

Colts paying rivers is just stupid

Are you joking?  The Colts signed him to  ONE YEAR contract at 25M and they had 85M (second only to Miami).  Rivers was signed as a stop gap QB that can help them this year.  He will play for the Colts at most 2 years and could signed a similar deal next year, which is still a good move by the Colts.  Not to mention Eason in the 4th was cheap and can sit for 2 years.  Even if Eason isn't their QB of the future they can play Rivers for 2 years and work on getting their QB of the future in the next two drafts, or via trade.

Edited by JohnnyU
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So refreshing to not see anything the Cowboys have done on this list. 🤠

Amazing what firing Clappa Red and having the best draft in the league can do for a team for once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

Oh defense was a need but Kyler is by far AZ most valuable asset. His protection should be the #1 priority. Their OL was atrocious last year. 

I wonder how good they'll be if they are the #1 defense against TE but Kyler is lost for the season week 4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Oh defense was a need but Kyler is by far AZ most valuable asset. His protection should be the #1 priority. Their OL was atrocious last year. 

I wonder how good they'll be if they are the #1 defense against TE but Kyler is lost for the season week 4?

Don't disagree, but I understand why they made that pick. Simmons is a potentially transformative prospect. I think they were quite fortunate to have Jones fall into their lap, but him falling so far does put some weight behind the motivation criticisms rumored this offseason - pun slightly intended.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Oh defense was a need but Kyler is by far AZ most valuable asset. His protection should be the #1 priority. Their OL was atrocious last year. 

I wonder how good they'll be if they are the #1 defense against TE but Kyler is lost for the season week 4?

They re-signed the improving Humphries and drafted Jones. The tackles are fine.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

Don't disagree, but I understand why they made that pick. Simmons is a potentially transformative prospect. I think they were quite fortunate to have Jones fall into their lap, but him falling so far does put some weight behind the motivation criticisms rumored this offseason - pun slightly intended.

I would also just add that one of the reasons they drafted Kyler in the first place is he was such a dynamic passer on the move.

You will never find anyone on this board that is more OL-centric than myself because I think it helps ALL the offensive production and you really need depth at the position because your top 5 guys are unlikely to play in 85/85 games. But in this case maybe only because Jones fell into their laps in round 3, I think they made a good decision. I agree with @Milkman in general that if you give me a choice between an elite LB or an elite LT I'll take the LT almost every time especially when you have a significant investment in the QB which most teams due. Had they not signed Humphries then I would agree with Milkman that you have drafted both Wirfs and Jones.

As @Andy Dufresne points out because they just committed themselves to Humphries they can't really move on from him until 2022 at the earliest. He represents a staggering $29mil in dead cap space in 2020, and nearly $17mil in dead cap space in 2021 so like it or not he will be your starting OT for the next two years. Not saying that was a bad move on the way of ARZ btw, just that it's a Commitment with a capital "C".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

They re-signed the improving Humphries and drafted Jones. The tackles are fine.

I hope you're right. They did luck out with Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BoltBacker said:

I would also just add that one of the reasons they drafted Kyler in the first place is he was such a dynamic passer on the move.

You will never find anyone on this board that is more OL-centric than myself because I think it helps ALL the offensive production and you really need depth at the position because your top 5 guys are unlikely to play in 85/85 games. But in this case maybe only because Jones fell into their laps in round 3, I think they made a good decision. I agree with @Milkman in general that if you give me a choice between an elite LB or an elite LT I'll take the LT almost every time especially when you have a significant investment in the QB which most teams due. Had they not signed Humphries then I would agree with Milkman that you have drafted both Wirfs and Jones.

As @Andy Dufresne points out because they just committed themselves to Humphries they can't really move on from him until 2022 at the earliest. He represents a staggering $29mil in dead cap space in 2020, and nearly $17mil in dead cap space in 2021 so like it or not he will be your starting OT for the next two years. Not saying that was a bad move on the way of ARZ btw, just that it's a Commitment with a capital "C".

Great post. I agree with all that. If they hadn't got Jones the draft would have been a disaster imo. It had 4-5 OT with 1st round grades. You can't pass on that with how bad their OL was last year and Kyler Murray as your QB. Reminds me of when Indy ignored the position and forced an elite QB to retire early. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, need2know said:

Not sure.  Only thing I know is that was not a good move.

While I disagree in general with your assessment of a Rivers led Colts team, if they had waited for QB to shake out I can see that Dalton for.... half(?) the price.... would make some sense for a team that really just needs Brissett+ out there. A guy that has a little more upside but still doesn't turn the ball over. This has never been the case more-so now that they have an even improved RB depth chart of Taylor, Mack, Hines, and even Wilkes. For a team that is making a playoff push I wouldn't even be surprised if they sign one more vet to perhaps replace Wilkes with Lamar Miller or Devnonta Freeman.

We will see how Rivers reacts to having the best OL of his career in front of him. If nothing else I expect him to be much more efficient than in the past when he was pulling the entire offense on his back and throwing up jump balls and anticipation "should be open by the time the ball gets there" throws because he had no time to wait for his receivers to actually get open. It's only a one year investment for a team that had and still has a ton of cap space anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Reminds me of when Indy ignored the position and forced an elite QB to retire early. 

This is so true. So many people are going to pat themselves on the back for calling Herbert a "bust" but how many guys would look good with Trey Pipkins protecting their blindside? Would Brady still be playing into his 40's if he played his entire career with the line the chargers have assembled for Rivers year after year? Brees? I don't think so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BoltBacker said:

This is so true. So many people are going to pat themselves on the back for calling Herbert a "bust" but how many guys would look good with Trey Pipkins protecting their blindside? Would Brady still be playing into his 40's if he played his entire career with the line the chargers have assembled for Rivers year after year? Brees? I don't think so.

Not only that but elite OT almost never bust. If they can't play T you can normally kick them inside and you have at least a starting G. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2020 at 4:58 PM, Andy Dufresne said:

Stan Kroenke's net worth is $10 BILLION and growing.

$10 Million to him is approximately like $100 is to someone that makes $100k.

They didn't make this move for Stan Kroenke.

I don't take Pat McAfee all that seriously BUT..... it is pretty odd they didn't send any scouts to the combine and they didn't send scouts to all-star games. What is that about? I thought even the Bengals send scouts to both of those.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV-PZ_doXOo

It's still a mystery why Clay Matthews says that he's owed money, the Rams say Matthews is owed money, and they are making Matthews file and official grievance to get it because the Rams don't want to release the money until as late as possible?

https://sports.yahoo.com/report-clay-matthews-filing-grievance-against-rams-claims-hes-owed-2-million-in-unpaid-guarantees-225637359.html

If Kroenke's worth ~$10 Billion that's fine, but it sounds like he's spending upwards of ~$7 Billion(and counting) on the new stadium and this may not be the best time to own multiple sports teams from a revenue generating perspective. I am old enough to remember when it was the pro athletes making the, "we make a lot of money, but we also spend a lot of money" defense. Maybe now it's the owners? I'm not saying they are making moves to just to save the owner some real world money(as opposed to cap money) but these moves all seem like cost cutting measures that have suddenly arisen. It genuinely will be interesting how the la fan base will react if the Rams do fall into last place in the division with the Cardinals making huge strides in the past few months(Hopkins, Simmons, Jones), the Seahawks still having the best QB in the division by about a mile, and SF reloading for another SB run. In la a new logo isn't going to sell a lot of merch if you are a last place team. For the sake of STL fans I'm kind of hoping to see both those teams tank and see that stadium about 1/3rd full for about a decade. I have all the confidence that telesco will make that happen for the chargers but I used to think the Rams were run much better than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2020 at 9:17 AM, BoltBacker said:

I also don't understand all the criticism las vegas is getting. Their problem is they couldn't cover anybody and they didn't have a WR that could beat coverage last year. I think they went a long way toward fixing that, although I'll agree I have my doubts about Carr/Mariota attacking down field with speedsters. People are giving bad grades because they think Ruggs/Arnett too high but they aren't factoring in the Bowden/Edwards/Robertson picks highly enough imo. All five of those guys will have instant positive impacts on that team in the positions where they need it most.

I actually haven't seen tons of criticism, as opposed to the general meh the Raiders usually get from the likes of Kiper and the rest of the talking heads.

Raiders drafted impact players at all positions of need -- you can debate that their board might be different than yours, but there are no positional holes any more after FA and this draft.

But they also made their offense one thing it hasn't been in a long time -- dynamic. Arnette's only fault was a slower than expected 40 time. They got key rotational depth for the base nickel they play in with Muse and Robertson. Bryan Edwards looks like he has the tools and can let us move on from Ty Williams if he remains hobbled or simply doesn't perform. Simpson has the size and power to potentially develop into a force -- and at the very least will help succeed Incognito or Jackson, both of whom are no spring chickens.

I question going Bowden where he did in that round as opposed to BPA D but after last year's draft, Mayock gets more than the benefit of my doubt in picking sleepers that fit this system. At worst he's a ST force and 3rd down passing back to succeed Richard. At best he could be a dangerous Sproles-type joker.

On 4/29/2020 at 5:49 PM, Milkman said:

Arizona not taking Wirfs at #8 was a huge mistake. Need to protect Kyler at all cost. When they do their offense is unstoppable. 

Huge mistake? They got a generational talent in Simmons, then got a blue chip prospect at OT in the third round.

This draft had a lot of talent at tackle, and sure, the Cards needed one, but the drop between Simmons and the next LB was waaaaaay bigger than the incremental difference between tackles, and quite honestly, I think they got a gigantic steal in both Simmons at 8 overall and Jones at 72.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Stompin' Tom Connors said:

 

Huge mistake? They got a generational talent in Simmons, then got a blue chip prospect at OT in the third round.

This draft had a lot of talent at tackle, and sure, the Cards needed one, but the drop between Simmons and the next LB was waaaaaay bigger than the incremental difference between tackles, and quite honestly, I think they got a gigantic steal in both Simmons at 8 overall and Jones at 72.

 

If you're right about Jones and you might be then they are fine. I like Jones too and I understand your logic. 

 

I see Simmons as more of a tweener than blue chip prospect. I'm not saying his bad or a bust but he doesn't really have a position. I see a scenario where he is good at a lot of things but not great at anything. They definitely had a need for defensive help. So I understand your thinking but Kyler Murray is literally one of the most valuable assets in the NFL. If Simmons hits his absolute ceiling but they get Kyler Murray killed this year was it worth it? 

I also had Wirfs as the 3rd best prospect in this draft behind Young and Burrow. If Wirfs ends up being an All Pro LT for the next decade, Jones can't play LT and gets kicked inside, and Simmons becomes an All Pro LB for the next decade I think they'll regret their decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.