skinny21

Let’s not, lol. … unless you’re lumping that scenario, us trading up, or Chicago (or another team) passing on Williams at 1 into that 20%

Oh man, I so hope some team lands those last two offensive guys listed and they wind up lining up next to each other at LG and C…. Yes, I’m talking about Puni Johnson

Ah, gotcha - I should have read his post more carefully. And yes, I agree about making that trade.

I get where you’re coming from, but that’s a whole different ballgame. It’s like me saying “you’d trade away two 2nds to move down from 7th to 10th*?” *(Where Allen and Mahomes were picked IIRC, in case that wasn’t clear) edit: I’ll add that I’m not necessarily against trading up for Williams

I think there are legitimate parallels between Rivera/Quinn. I think there are substantial differences too, perhaps the biggest being the outside factor of having a true GM. For example, one of Rivera’s (many) main issues was how he dealt with the qb spot… I don’t see Peters allowing us to trade for Garappolo, Wilson, etc over bringing in a quality, young prospect. I could be wrong of course. Along with personnel power, Ron also had to deal with Snyder, struggled with putting his foot in his mouth, got wrapped up in caring about perceptions, and relied on (mostly) bringing in guys he was close with. I also wonder if the focus on “yes sir, no sir” type of prospects tended to weed out the fiery, passionate, vocal, leader type of players. One argument I don’t get… those upset because of the Rivera/Quinn parallels of - leaders of men, culture builders, well respected… are y’all saying you’d prefer a guy that’s not respected? That isn’t a culture builder? That’s not seen as a high end leader? There are other arguments I get, but that one’s a head scratcher to me. With that said, I do get not wanting a retread or a defensive minded HC, even if I don’t believe those should be seen as deal breakers.

Jesus, I thought that was a ransom note for a second.

Wasn’t his contract this past year like 2mil? Maybe I have that wrong. Either way, you bring up the personnel philosophy for a team in our position… it’s an interesting topic, IMO. 1 year deals help open up the draft to an extent, don’t tie you down in terms of cap, and allow you to develop guys to take over from the rentals. OTOH, you’re probably not getting high end players with 1 year deals (though there are exceptions w/ prove-it deals, such as if Connor Williams has to prove he’s healthy), something our team desperately needs. You also mess with continuity to some extent. And of course, if we sign bigger names, are they going to still be around by the time we’re (hopefullly) competing for a title? Added to all of that you have factors like 1) not blocking a path for a young guy to get into the starting lineup, 2) saving cap for the future when you need to add guys that are the “final piece” types, 3) having proven vets that can show the young guys the ropes, and 4) wanting to instill the winning culture and faith in the staff - ie. wanting to get out of the gates quickly, and so on. That’s not to mention the need to surround our young qb in the best way possible to aid their development. With a plethora of picks, ample cap, and a new GM/coaching staff, it’s going to be fascinating to see the path they take. Ironically, having more options provides both more chances to get it right, and more chances to get it wrong. The silver lining to having a pretty terrible roster is that improvement shouldn’t be difficult, no matter what type of plan they have/moves they make. And there are quite a few positions that even if we address them in FA with long term investments, it shouldn’t (inherently) preclude us from double dipping via the draft.

I get the appeal of giving a young qb both a receiving weapon and a quality running game, but a rebuilding team signing a running back to a monster deal is probably a terrible move. I say probably because it’s possible he’s one of the outliers from what the analytics say.

Don’t forget Forrest.

Man, I’m with you on every piece here. I’ll add that I think returning players are going to be seriously excited about landing the top GM candidate and (potentially) top HC candidate. I think we’ll see serious player buy-in.

Yeah, the fact that “sonic rings” hit above was after picking up a first down while up by 20? I mean, have some awareness man.

Yeah, I didn’t put a reasoning to ILB because it’s a special case. If we land a top ILB in FA, I agree that I’d likely veer away from using a 2nd there. Davis going into his 4th year though, along with the potential to play with 3 backers (as you noted), I’m still looking at linebacker from the 3rd on. I’ll add that adding a FA corner or TE wouldn’t prevent me from hitting those spots again in the draft. I too would prioritize offense, but again, it depends on FA. As of now, FA could solidify our defense (mostly), fix our oline (mostly), and/or add a couple quality pass catchers. Or a blend of those. I assume we’ll add at least a capable corner and edge rusher. If we go hard after one side of the ball or the other in FA, I’m good with going heavier to the other side of the ball in the draft. I’m generally a proponent of addressing holes so you can let the draft come to you, but in our case, I think I prefer a few high end FAs and some bandaids/stopgaps/prove-it deals. Especially since (as I said) several positions, if we address them in FA with quality signings, shouldn’t inherently preclude us from still drafting a guy. There are so many options with our cap space (and the available FAs), draft picks, and considering we need significant help on both O and D, that it’s making it more difficult for us to come up with a preferred plan (for me anyways). FO is going to have a chance to earn their money for sure and I think it’ll be fascinating to see their approach.

There should be some intriguing OTs and WRs still available with our 2nd rounders, but at the same time, I could see that being the sweet spot for landing one of the top IOLs and ILBs. Perhaps a trade back with our second 2nd rounder can still land us one of those 4 positions, or a TE or corner (PFF’s big board has 9 corners in the top 40). Edge would be in play for me as well. IMO, free agency might help inform our draft, but at the same time, it’s surprising how many positions I wouldn’t mind double dipping on - hitting it in FA and the draft - ILB, OT (need a RT, swing tackle and replacement for Leno), IOL (need LG, C and depth), Edge (need 2), corner (I’m not sold on St Juste or Forbes), TE (don’t think a FA “solves” the position).

Wonder if we might bring back Samuel. I get those wanting the big wr addition (and no reason returning Samuel rules out drafting that type of guy), but a speedy, gadget player is surely appealing to a guy like Ben Johnson… I’d lean towards it not happening - deep draft and lots of higher priority FA needs - but maybe?

I haven’t watched him, but I like the idea of Coleman Shelton from the Rams. Probably on the cheaper end, can play both C and RG, and can be used in both zone/gap run schemes. Cheap(er) means it doesn’t feel a waste if Stromberg beats him out, ability to play RG gives us insurance for a Cosmi injury, and I believe Ben Johnson (if we land him) ran both gap and zone in Detroit. Now, I’m not looking to just add decent talent or guys with position flex, we need quality. But as the 2nd of two FA olineman (say, Jackson or Onwenwu as their bigger signing), I think that works to keep draft options open, still allows an opportunity for Stromberg to earn a job, while improving the unit (even if he wound up as the next man off the bench). With all of that said, I don’t know how different/better Shelton is from/than Gates.

WAR. What is it good for?

Funny, was just reading about Lewis. Has played on left and right. PFF says Seahawks use both zone and gap blocking, which Ben Johnson also blended in Detroit. But of course, we have to see who they bring in as HC/OC, what kind of scheme they like to run, and then there’s the chance that someone like Johnson, who likes to scheme around his olinemen’s strengths, throws a wrench in the thinking. Lot of interesting options at guard though in FA. I’d still look hard at Williams. The prospect of getting a player of his caliber, at a discount, even if he misses the first part of the year, is pretty appealing… assuming his surgery went well of course. I’d also understand if they go for more stopgap types just to open up the draft (and not necessarily block off a guy like Stromberg from earning a starting gig).

It’s going to be interesting to see their process. I believe Harris said we’re going to turn this around in a hurry, and Peters said it’s not a rebuild. I think Harris understands the fans need/want to see serious progress, though of course none of those factors necessarily mean we’ll be aggressive in FA. I’m with you in that I wouldn’t expect to see trades of picks for players initially, but not so sure about FA. We’ll see. We don’t really have many big time re-signings coming due in the near future beyond Cosmi (I suppose Fuller and Curl are possibilities though), so signing bigger FAs might not really affect our cap future much, particularly w/ a rookie qb salary. Perhaps those FAs are gone by the time we’re contending (if we get to that point), but they could open up the draft, allow guys to develop behind them, and for the most part they wouldn’t stop me from drafting that same position (I’d still look at T, ILB, corner, edge in the draft, maybe not LG or S though…). I also see the appeal of short term contracts - as stopgaps, as tryouts for longer contracts, and/or to (potentially) gain comp picks, and leaves future cap space available. No idea how this plays out, but I think I lean toward them being fairly aggressive. And generally speaking, I prefer quality over quantity, particularly for this team that’s been lacking high end talent. Both approaches have some logic to them IMO.

Pre-draft, I could see signing a higher end RT and then a swing tackle type like Lucas, or maybe a guy like Brown that can play on both sides, so if Leno goes down, Brown moves to the left and Wylie can step in at RT. You could throw Daniels in the mix, or a tackle in the 3rd or later. Not ideal obviously, but it’s better than feeling forced into landing an OT in the draft.

If target separation is how close a defender was when the receiver caught the ball… couldn’t that actually be (potentially) heavily affected by the qb? Seems to me scheme (spacing, predictability, etc), route running (which covers a lot of factors of course), and the qb (timing, processing, reading the D) could all play a significant role? Not to mention pass pro giving time for routes to develop… I’m not blaming Howell or absolving Terry, I’m just pondering what factors can actually play into that number. I actually used the separation numbers in a defense of Howell, but always wondered why two guys (Terry and Jahan) seen as good route runners couldn’t get open. I landed mostly on defenses knowing we had to get the ball out early (due to pass pro issues), leading to our receivers not getting many chances on longer developing routes, though that was purely speculative on my part. Edit: to be clear, I totally agree with trying to take advantage of a deep wr class (even if I think the top priority is improving protection for whoever our qb will be)

Plus two DEs and a corner or two… we’re so close, lol. In all seriousness though, I think coaching is huge. Well, that or I have to give a ton of credit to Bobby McCain for our defensive play in 2022, and that doesn’t really sit right with me.

Would be pretty wild if Ben Johnson were hired and firmly believes in Howell… (Whether that’s Howell compared with the other available qbs, or Howell plus draft ammo - possibly w/ a trade back - over the other guys) I say Ben Johnson due to the UNC connections of course

I tend to agree here, but worth mentioning that we now have a GM known for finding diamonds in later rounds, so maybe (hopefully) our past isn’t prologue…

Thanks, and yeah, that would not be ideal of course. I’d pencil in Stromberg and the rook over Gates, but if Gates looks a lot more polished, particularly in setting protections? Oh well. At least he’d (hopefully) have a better LG next to him and we have young guys developing to take over for him. I didn’t spell it out, but my main goal in FA would be to add a blend of high end players and short contracts for either younger guys trying to break through, or vets that help 1) up the competition level for positions and 2) fill holes while we draft/develop young guys. In other words, no Wylie’s or Gates’… I’m curious how market values will shake out. I’m expecting some pretty wild contracts. We have the benefit of lots of cap space and a cheap qb room, but I’m thinking our cap space can thin out in a hurry.

I don’t mind still going after Connor Williams, assuming his surgery went well. With that said, we could look to the draft instead, hope a rookie or Stromberg can become our long term center, and put that money toward TE/ILB/db instead. I share the concerns of pairing a rookie center with a rookie qb, but 1) you can alleviate that a bit by having quality veteran guards next to the rookie center, and 2) we’re almost certainly not competing for a title next year, so you can let them take their lumps a bit and grow together. And of course, Stromberg (or even Gates) could play until the rook is deemed ready if necessary. Brown’s ability to play LT/RT is appealing, particularly in how it opens up the draft a bit. As for edge, I’d look to add a top guy (Hunter) and then maybe a 1 year deal for either a Clowney to Toohill type (a decent enough guy that can compete with Henry/Jones/a draft pick and/or rotate in) or an up-and-coming guy that maybe hasn’t put it all together yet. Feel like Uche is going to want a lot more than 7.5mil… Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to add 2 good defensive ends, but again, we still ought to address ILB/TE/db and the above costs will add up quickly. I’m super torn on receiver. Feels like costs have skyrocketed since Kirk signed. Yet it’s not hard to think that giving a rookie qb a high end weapon to pair with McLaurin might be worth more than a decent DE (a second one), good ILB and a db. Given the relative depth of the draft class at receiver though, I think I lean toward a more marginal FA receiver (a-la Pringle/Crowder). DB is going to be interesting. My guess is they go for a high end safety and a 1 year deal on a good corner (like Gilmore). Intrigued to see how it all plays out. Wonder how we’ll be perceived by free agents given the contrast of us feeling like a project, vs the excitement of potential with a good FO, hopefully good coaching staff and top drafted qb.