Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
My thought process is shift to a heavy nickel as your base.
That puts Sorensen down in the box and Thornhill in at FS. It then frees Mathieu up to play rover (as he's been playing about 50% of his snaps as a true FS this season).
It takes Nieman off the field, who's no better than Sorensen in run support, so you're about even there. Meanwhile you've now given Mathieu a little more run to go out there in support and maybe funnel things back to the middle where you at least have a couple of large bodies in Nnadi and Reed/Saunders.
Additionally, with Mathieu out there with a little more freedom, you don't have to sell out quite as badly to defend the flats. He's more capable of reading/reacting than Sorensen is. At that point he doesn't have to commit quite as quickly to still be involved in the play, so you're less prone to misdirection and backs breaking into the pattern late.
And most of all, it's a package you're going to stay in most of the time so they can't catch you mid-change and/or confuse your subs as they're trying to set up.
Essentially what you're doing is converting to a 4-2-5 base defense by swapping Niemann out for Sorensen and thus allowing Mathieu a bit more of a robber role. Is your run defense going to be better? Eh...maybe not...but I think it will be different. I think it will be less confused and I think it will be less susceptible to big plays. I don't think it will be appreciably worse between the tackles.
Perfectly said.
I didn't come in here to try and 'fix the defense,' at all, was just going to drop a one-liner for fun, but that's pretty much what I've been thinking. DD is a downhill safety, and as such he just plays better in or very near the box. He just isn't that comfortable playing more than 10 yards from the line. Thornhill looks healthy to me, so drop Sorenson in the box to help defend a flat and clean up vs. run plays, and get Thorny back on the field full-time already. Then HB can hunt, which is what the secondary is designed around in the first place.
The Jones thing is probably going to revert back to him mostly being inside anyway pretty soon, so I don't have anything to say about that.
But the sub-package issue has been glaringly bad so far. They need to probably go big nickel or some damn thing and make things simpler for these new guys. Every team has keyed on this problem and making the defense look a lot worse than it really is. I mean it's really bad when Jalen hurts and the mediocre Eagles can effectively take advantage of our communication issues.
I think Spags will address it this week, but it could get ugly for the defense anyway. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
What would it take to get Barnett? Would he need a deal soon?
Yeah, he has those silly 'void' years on his deal as part of a restructure for 2021.
I'm not actually sure how the dead cap figures work on void years. I think they trigger when the trade is made and thus end up as dead cap on the trading teams figures the following season. Mostly because they're fake years - he's already been paid the amounts 'due' in those seasons, they exist solely for the purpose of pro-rating the deal out. If he's already been paid the money, then the cap hit falls to the team dealing him.
But it's not impossible that they follow the player to the acquiring team and then hit that teams cap the following season. In which case I'm disinclined to trade for Barnett and carry a $7 million dead cap charge next season due to the voided years.
But I think for that to be the case, those amounts will need to have not been paid yet - in which case it's not a 'voided years' situation but rather a situation with guaranteed salary still due.
So I'm fairly confident the Eagles would take the cap hit if they traded him, but not 100% positive.
EDIT: The 'career earnings' tab on Spotrac says he made $10.1 million this year, which means he got all that in a lump sum with the void years there for pro-rating purposes, in which case it's on the Eagles cap, not the Chiefs if they trade for him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Yeah, he has those silly 'void' years on his deal as part of a restructure for 2021.
I'm not actually sure how the dead cap figures work on void years. I think they trigger when the trade is made and thus end up as dead cap on the trading teams figures the following season. Mostly because they're fake years - he's already been paid the amounts 'due' in those seasons, they exist solely for the purpose of pro-rating the deal out. If he's already been paid the money, then the cap hit falls to the team dealing him.
But it's not impossible that they follow the player to the acquiring team and then hit that teams cap the following season. In which case I'm disinclined to trade for Barnett and carry a $7 million dead cap charge next season due to the voided years.
But I think for that to be the case, those amounts will need to have not been paid yet - in which case it's not a 'voided years' situation but rather a situation with guaranteed salary still due.
So I'm fairly confident the Eagles would take the cap hit if they traded him, but not 100% positive.
EDIT: The 'career earnings' tab on Spotrac says he made $10.1 million this year, which means he got all that in a lump sum with the void years there for pro-rating purposes, in which case it's on the Eagles cap, not the Chiefs if they trade for him.
So would you think we're talking like, a 3rd or 4th ish? [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
So would you think we're talking like, a 3rd or 4th ish?
{shrug}
5th year option is only guaranteed for injury - they could've walked away from him in the offseason and instead decided to pay him $10 million in a way that hurts their cap next season.
So they clearly put some value on him.
I still say you peddle LDT, but that ship may have sailed at this point - just too far into the season to get up to speed on the offense. But the Eagles are having OL issues right now and might just listen. [Reply]
5th year option is only guaranteed for injury - they could've walked away from him in the offseason and instead decided to pay him $10 million in a way that hurts their cap next season.
So they clearly put some value on him.
I still say you peddle LDT, but that ship may have sailed at this point - just too far into the season to get up to speed on the offense. But the Eagles are having OL issues right now and might just listen.
Like a straight up trade? I mean thats an easy one.
I'm figuring Howie eventually figures out its' time to tear it down and starts selling off pieces. If so, I would be interested in Barnett for sure. Maybe Kerrigan for a late pick but they could have signed him off the street.
It's wild to me that we're at this point at DE. [Reply]
I mean ultimately his 2019 season is easily better than anything Ogbah ever had before coming to KC. And Charlton, even if Taco didn't work out as well.
For that matter it is probably better than anything Okafor managed prior to coming to KC. And he's a high-pedigree player given his college career and draft status.
If you think he's a genuine 'change of scenery' candidate, I don't think it would hurt to see if you could get him for a 4th. A 3rd seems an overpay unless you think you can get him re-signed without breaking the bank.
He has ability even if he's been fairly disappointing at times. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I mean ultimately his 2019 season is easily better than anything Ogbah ever had before coming to KC. And Charlton, even if Taco didn't work out as well.
For that matter it is probably better than anything Okafor managed prior to coming to KC. And he's a high-pedigree player given his college career and draft status.
If you think he's a genuine 'change of scenery' candidate, I don't think it would hurt to see if you could get him for a 4th. A 3rd seems an overpay unless you think you can get him re-signed without breaking the bank.
He has ability even if he's been fairly disappointing at times.
If they're committed to Jones at DE, Barnett opposite would be nice especially if you could get him for a decent deal and not a monster one. [Reply]
I can definitely be on board with the masses that there are issues with the Chiefs running more of a 4-3 base scheme than the 4-2-5 they've had some success with. That, of course, doesn't address the big elephant in the room of lacking talent in the front 7. That said, it would be beneficial to have Thornhill on the field more, effectively taking Niemann off of it while also limiting the amount we're seeing our atrocious coverage LBs fail at picking up underneath routes or having 5'10" DBs trying to cover 6'5" TEs in space.
And the front 7 really is the big issue. They don't communicate well and they can't cover at the 2nd level. Bolton, Niemann, Hitchens, and Sorensen are all pretty bad at picking up coverages and it's the achilles heal of the defense. This team needs more athleticism at LB. Does Gay help? Probably, whenever he is available. Does it fix the issue? Not entirely. Bolton will continue to develop into a solid strong-side, run-defending, downhill LB but he's always going to be weak in coverage. You have to get players that can run all over the field at the other two spots. We don't even know yet IF Gay is one of the solutions. He has the athletic pedigree but we have to see it.
After that, the Chiefs have zero pass rush. Chris Jones at DE is an abomination and Jarran Reed has provided nothing. The Chiefs are relying, at this point, on Frank Clark returning healthy for the year and being the savior. They can't.
If you want to try to do something to fix the issues this year then you have to add talent to the front 7 somehow and you have to move Jones back inside. I'd also look to add another safety. I don't know who those players can be for sure, but I have a couple ideas.
100% on board with an attempt to trade PHI for ER Derek Barnett. I thought he'd be a good get if that was on the table in the offseason. Barnett has a void year in 2022 so its something for nothing for the Eagles who don't seem poised to compete for a division title this year. He's young and productive enough to throw a bit of money at next offseason without breaking the bank for a #2 pass rusher, which the Chiefs are going to have to do anyhow in conjunction with burning some picks there.
Sign Jamie Collins at LB if he's cheap. He's not a great coverage option anymore but he can still generate pressure as a rusher from the LB spot and he's solid against the run. He could help Bolton's development and keep Niemann off the field. I don't think I'd do it if he's not cheap and wanting to compete. Again, nothing here fixes the glaring lack of athletic talent at LB, but if you get some guys that can pressure the QB, maybe it masks a little. The 49ers were hosting Mychal Kendricks so we'll see what happens there, but I wouldn't mind a look at him if Collins isn't the guy you want.
Other than that, I'd look seriously at poaching HaHa Clinton-Dix off the Raiders' PS. I really don't think there are many options out there that will scream out at you when you look at other teams' practice squads, but he's one option that could help more immediately. Jordan Lucas is also sitting on the Colts' PS and he's familiar with the system. At least you have someone if Thornhill isn't going to be your guy.
I know alot of people are screaming for Olivier Vernon. I'm sure Veach is keeping an eye on that situation. I'd be all about it too, but he tore his Achilles late in the year much like Fisher. I wouldn't hold out hope, but he's a guy that could be a prime pickup late in the year. [Reply]
Here's a name I started thinking about this morning:
Dante Fowler, Jr.
His production doesn't quite match his rush success rate, but he's still young, has some left in the tank, and wouldn't be prohibitively expensive.
His deal has an out after this year, so if he doesn't want to pick it up, he can walk. Chiefs also could cut him/walk if they want, as they wouldn't be on the hook for signing bonuses.
But if he does work, it would give KC someone they can use as part of the unit next year, when the DL needs to be rebuilt. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Here's a name I started thinking about this morning:
Dante Fowler, Jr.
His production doesn't quite match his rush success rate, but he's still young, has some left in the tank, and wouldn't be prohibitively expensive.
His deal has an out after this year, so if he doesn't want to pick it up, he can walk. Chiefs also could cut him/walk if they want, as they wouldn't be on the hook for signing bonuses.
But if he does work, it would give KC someone they can use as part of the unit next year, when the DL needs to be rebuilt.
Fair or otherwise, it's hard to disassociate Fowler and the absolutely horrific Falcons defense/pass rush last season.
He was considered their lead dog last season and he was trash. And it came right after getting paid.
I mean...that's not great.
Seems like he's generally struggled with his hand on the ground and needs to be more of a stand-up rusher to be effective. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Fair or otherwise, it's hard to disassociate Fowler and the absolutely horrific Falcons defense/pass rush last season.
He was considered their lead dog last season and he was trash. And it came right after getting paid.
I mean...that's not great.
Seems like he's generally struggled with his hand on the ground and needs to be more of a stand-up rusher to be effective.
Yeah, that's the rub. His win rate has been pretty good this year. I think it was a Brandon Thorn tweet that showed a true pass rush win rate. Not sure how he's calculating it, but it piqued my interest.
The Falcons stink and should be hitting full rebuild. Getting out of that deal and getting even a 4th or 5th for him should be a win. No idea if that's actually a high-enough price for him, though. [Reply]
Also Cant Jew running this group of linebackers out there and Willie gay may be going the way of previous mental issues so gotta find something [Reply]