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]
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.
Or he could be washed.
Alright. I agree that the unit as a whole was undisciplined and maybe that affected him. There's no doubt that they were undisciplined.
And even if Hitchens returns to being the player he was in Dallas, that group STILL sucks. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Alright. I agree that the unit as a whole was undisciplined and maybe that affected him. There's no doubt that they were undisciplined.
And even if Hitchens returns to being the player he was in Dallas, that group STILL sucks.
I don't think it sucks. It's not elite.
Looking around the league though, who would you consider to have the best LB group?
Dallas probably would be up there and they've got a first rounder there and a 2nd that would have been a top 5 pick if not for injury. Seattle has 2 good ones.
Mostly, the teams that have good ones have actually put some resources into it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
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.
So you're not willing to dismiss one year of bad play but you're willing overlook multiple good years of play prior just because of that one year?
Surely have have a reason he "was" a good player, right? I mean, he's what 26? He isn't unhealthy, he's young. So the only real explanation is that he just forgot how to play football overnight? I'm sorry if I suggest that just doesn't make sense.
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
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.
If you can't identify WHO how can you just skip to how? You think they should throw picks at the position regardless of talent? That's how you end up with guys like KPass that can't even get on the field. That's silly. Sorry. [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.
Exactly. This is important. They can't just throw picks at it. This is a horrible draft to throw picks at LB's because the position is just flat out poor this year. [Reply]
IMO, the issue I have with the safety position is that while Mathieu is a solid safety, he lacks the size (5' 9" 190 lbs) to consistently cover the bigger TEs and WRs in the league, and he does have a history with injury. I'd really like to have a Earl Thomas type/size guy back there to off-set any short-comings Tyrann might have in those situations.
And the guys we currently have just seem to lack the aggressiveness/football savvy I'd like to see at the position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC Tattoo:
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.
I think he lacks aggression and physicality. [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.
For the record, I absolutely did say something about Mathieu's move from Arizona to Houston. He wasn't nearly as good last year as he was previously. Maybe some of that was the injuries. Maybe some of it was Houston's scheme - the whole back end of that defense was bad. I offered up both of those explanations previously when coming to terms with them signing him.
But I was against signing Mathieu since the beginning of the offseason. The simple fact is that they can't sign all-pros at every position. Sometimes you have to settle. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
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.
I won't close the book on it.
I still think they'll add another LB.
But again, I think this team's gonna lean so heavily into sub-packages that we're gonna see 2 or fewer LBs on the field for probably 70% of the snaps. They're going to do a TON in terms of personnel groups and scheme to protect Ragland and Wilson, IMO. And for that matter, DoD, as they'll try to keep him out of obvious run situations.
Our ideal is 3 guys we can send out there for 3-downs and smile contently but I think we all recognize that this just isn't a realistic goal right now. So we're gonna try to make due with matchups. There are shittier ideas.
But I sure wouldn't mind seeing a steadier throughput for those personnel groups. Brown would be my top pick right now as I think they want to see if they can develop Wilson a bit (and there's maybe some merit to that) and Collins is on the backside of his career. I think you can squeeze another solid season out of him or Brown, but it's possible that neither guy is willing to take a 1-year deal just yet.
Once you do that and you're on the other side of 30, that's pretty much what you do for the rest of your career. Before they go taking 1-year deals, they're gonna see how the draft goes, IMO, and see if desperation has somebody offering them another 2-3 year contract. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
So you're not willing to dismiss one year of bad play but you're willing overlook multiple good years of play prior just because of that one year?
Surely have have a reason he "was" a good player, right? I mean, he's what 26? He isn't unhealthy, he's young. So the only real explanation is that he just forgot how to play football overnight? I'm sorry if I suggest that just doesn't make sense.
No, what im saying is that Hitchens being what everyone hoped he would be is no sure thing. It's a 50/50 proposition at this point and he was trending in the wrong direction. I have no idea why all of a sudden he couldn't cover a back out of the backfield or hit the correct gap, or not over shoot on a RB. I'm entertaining the idea that maybe he wasn't quite that good as initially thought. It's not like he was a beast in Dallas. He did his job more or less.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
If you can't identify WHO how can you just skip to how? You think they should throw picks at the position regardless of talent? That's how you end up with guys like KPass that can't even get on the field. That's silly. Sorry.
I never identified Tyreek Hill. Or Travis Kecle. Or Chris Jones. Most here didn't expect any of those guys to become what they are. Everyone here liked Kareem Hunt, but even he exceeded expectations.
But it happens every year. It's the Chief's job to find those guys. I have faith that they can.
I don't buy this idea that there's only 3 LB's in this entire class worth a shit.
Most likely, as fans, we simply don't have all the information.
It's a position group that can be upgraded. And will be upgraded. It needs to be. It's the weakest group we have.
Maybe it doesn't even come through the draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC Tattoo:
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.
I think you are, in fact, in the minority.
I wanted to like Murray. Man I wanted to see him take a step forward because the physical tools are there.
But what you see as a lack of confidence I see as a lack of savvy/awareness. The guy just doesn't look like this game comes naturally to him at all. At this stage in the game, if you're still thinking through the snaps, I think it's fairly unlikely that a light bulb just turns on.
I wouldn't be crushed to see them give him another shot, but with a $3 million cap savings from cutting him, I wouldn't be upset to see him let go either. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I won't close the book on it.
I still think they'll add another LB.
But again, I think this team's gonna lean so heavily into sub-packages that we're gonna see 2 or fewer LBs on the field for probably 70% of the snaps. They're going to do a TON in terms of personnel groups and scheme to protect Ragland and Wilson, IMO. And for that matter, DoD, as they'll try to keep him out of obvious run situations.
Our ideal is 3 guys we can send out there for 3-downs and smile contently but I think we all recognize that this just isn't a realistic goal right now. So we're gonna try to make due with matchups. There are shittier ideas.
But I sure wouldn't mind seeing a steadier throughput for those personnel groups. Brown would be my top pick right now as I think they want to see if they can develop Wilson a bit (and there's maybe some merit to that) and Collins is on the backside of his career. I think you can squeeze another solid season out of him or Brown, but it's possible that neither guy is willing to take a 1-year deal just yet.
Once you do that and you're on the other side of 30, that's pretty much what you do for the rest of your career. Before they go taking 1-year deals, they're gonna see how the draft goes, IMO, and see if desperation has somebody offering them another 2-3 year contract.
I forgot Brown is out there. He'd not be bad.
I'd love to be able to have one of these MLB's in the draft and just be set there for the next 5 years. There's just no way they're gonna be able to do it. [Reply]