I know nobody likes Sorensen's cap number, but I think he's worth it -- he's starting-caliber. He picked off Brady and stopped a 4th and 1 in the AFCCG.
Armani Watts obviously is an injury concern but all safeties are injury concerns, and Watts showed well before he went down.
Jordan Lucas looks really solid.
I don't like Eric Murray so I don't care there, but we're pretty solid at safety, as much as we are any position on the defense. We don't need to spend $12m on Earl Thomas or burn a 1st or 2nd day pick on the position.
Remember the goal: the goal is to get the defense to be league-average while the offense destroys people.
Our safety position right now is league average.
Let's invest in the positions we are less than league average at: corner, passrusher, linebacker. Basically everywhere else on the defense except for safety. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
That's absolutely fair. I've never suggested Hitchens is an All-pro. For sure, I agree he's a "good starter". But then I have to ask - who do you want that is better than a "good starter"? I don't see any available free agents that are clear upgrades at this point and the two guys in the draft that are blue chip prospects are probably untouchable due to draft position.
I said he WAS a good starter in Dallas. He was anything but that in KC and im not willing to just dismiss his poor play and blame it on coaches. The NFL is a "What have you done for me lately" league and so far, he's a F/A bust. The Chiefs have to, and will, begin working on a contingency plan in the event the light bulb doesn't come on in year 2 of his KC stint.
Who that guy(s) is? idk. I'll defer to the Chiefs for that. I don't know if they'll be successful in finding better talent. But i expect them to try. Because they need it. And i expect they'll address LB with one of their first 4 picks.
And they could still use an undeniable upgrade at the other two LB spots.
It'd be foolish to think they won't address that group via draft/trade/remaining free agency.
They just don't have much talent there. And Hitchens isn't excluded in that. [Reply]
The thing is, a vast majority of players in the NFL are dependent on being in a good schematic situation to get the most out of them. Few are able to just play in anything and kick ass.
I would love to have a Kuechly in the middle. The problem is they're hard to find and usually you're gonna have to spend a premium pick on one.
Just go in the draft and stick to your board. If the BPA is a lb, great. If it's a C, great.
If it's a punter? Burn the building down and sell the land. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Where we part ways is whether or not said upgrades are even available, let alone feasible. I see a bunch of day 2-3 guys that might be decent and might end up being the next DOD. I don't see any 1st or 2nd round LB prospects that are for sure upgrades over what they have, barring the guys that won't even be there when the Chiefs pick. And it appears the Chiefs have no intention of signing a free agent starting LB, if there is even one available.
I don't know, i haven't studied the draft hard enough yet.
But, i find it hard to believe that DoD or Ragland can't be replaced by a 2nd round pick. Or maybe they surprise us and move up if a guy falls enough. We'll see.
I'm firmly in the BPA camp, and no matter what position they take i won't complain (so long as it wasn't some egregious reach).
But they have to address that position group in some form because it's not good. It's the weakest group on the team right now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
The thing is, a vast majority of players in the NFL are dependent on being in a good schematic situation to get the most out of them. Few are able to just play in anything and kick ass.
.
Good players play well. They just do. Not one person has said anything about Tyrann's switch from AZ to Houston and now to KC. Not a smiddget of discussion about his scheme switch.
People expect him to be good, and he has been, because...well...good players are good.
Hitchen's resume in Dallas wasn't all that impressive. It was POSITIVE. But even last year when they signed him i didn't think it was IMPRESSIVE. He's just not that caliber of player.
It's quite possible that he, like most, enjoyed a short run of success and now it's over. That happens more often than not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
I don't know, i haven't studied the draft hard enough yet.
But, i find it hard to believe that DoD or Ragland can't be replaced by a 2nd round pick. Or maybe they surprise us and move up if a guy falls enough. We'll see.
I'm firmly in the BPA camp, and no matter what position they take i won't complain (so long as it wasn't some egregious reach).
But they have to address that position group in some form because it's not good. It's the weakest group on the team right now.
Off-ball, 4-3 LB is a pit of !@#$ing despair in this draft. You can probably find a Will in the third but if you're looking for a Sam or even a MLB who isn't White or Bush, you're pretty much just sifting through scraps.
This isn't a great draft to be after 4-3 LBs. There are some solid stand-up edge types to be found (which could explain the tepid market for Houston), but Sam goes maybe 3 deep (I'm not shitting you there) and MLB doesn't look much better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Good players play well. They just do. Not one person has said anything about Tyrann's switch from AZ to Houston and now to KC. Not a smiddget of discussion about his scheme switch.
People expect him to be good, and he has been, because...well...good players are good.
Hitchen's resume in Dallas wasn't all that impressive. It was POSITIVE. But even last year when they signed him i didn't think it was IMPRESSIVE. He's just not that caliber of player.
It's quite possible that he, like most, enjoyed a short run of success and now it's over. That happens more often than not.
Nah, not really. Great players play well.
Good players need a lot of things to go right. I'm pretty sure you could drop a prime Justin Houston in any scheme and he'd be fine. I don't think anyone is arguing Hitchens is that.
I think in the right system he could be a good football player. I don't expect to get Ray Lewis. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Off-ball, 4-3 LB is a pit of !@#$ing despair in this draft. You can probably find a Will in the third but if you're looking for a Sam or even a MLB who isn't White or Bush, you're pretty much just sifting through scraps.
This isn't a great draft to be after 4-3 LBs. There are some solid stand-up edge types to be found (which could explain the tepid market for Houston), but Sam goes maybe 3 deep (I'm not shitting you there) and MLB doesn't look much better.
I still think you could piece together a better LB core with say, Collins and whoever as FA's.
They obviously don't want to go that way though. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Off-ball, 4-3 LB is a pit of !@#$ing despair in this draft. You can probably find a Will in the third but if you're looking for a Sam or even a MLB who isn't White or Bush, you're pretty much just sifting through scraps.
This isn't a great draft to be after 4-3 LBs. There are some solid stand-up edge types to be found (which could explain the tepid market for Houston), but Sam goes maybe 3 deep (I'm not shitting you there) and MLB doesn't look much better.
Welp, if that's the case then so be it. I'm a BPA guy so i don't want them reaching, but that's a baaad LB group we're looking at right now. We're essentially hoping that a non high-impact player pulls his head out of his ass, and the other two are massive ???? And then there's NOTHING behind them.
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Can you tell me why you think he's better than one and not the other?
Other than just pointing to stats?
What was he asked to do differently that he struggled so mightily with in the 34?
And i was told all last season that we play a hybrid front anyway and were in Nickel most of the time.
I argued for a switch to a 43 last season and was told it mattered not because we're rarely in a base 34.
What changed?
I'll take a swing.
Some wanted to give more credit to the defensive staff last year saying they were in different stuff than they were. He had guys all around him because the guys in front of him in the 34 on the DL weren't the best at taking on blocks.
The whole defense was just undisciplined in , well, basically everything.
I think playing the Will would take some of the responsibilities he had last year and make them easier as he's hopefully not having to sift thru the rift every run snap.
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Welp, if that's the case then so be it. I'm a BPA guy so i don't want them reaching, but that's a baaad LB group we're looking at right now. We're essentially hoping that a non high-impact player pulls his head out of his ass, and the other two are massive ???? And then there's NOTHING behind them.
That's not good.
Sadly though, you're gonna have to do that somewhere on the defense. The coaching staff is gonna have to be better.
I don't know how else to go about it.
It's just so much about scheme and situation and those types of factors. Look at how the Jags d just fell ass apart. They're talented as hell, but just, sucked.
I know I'm in the minority but I like Eric Murray. I think he just lacks confidence in his abilities and needs better instincts but with new coaching I think he is coachable. [Reply]