2023 1st round pick is #6 Paris Johnson

[TheCardFan]

Interesting facts in the debate about whether Paris will be a stud player or top end LT.

Paris gave up 8 sacks in his rookie year at a position he never played before.

Lane Johnson gave up 10 sacks his rookie year.
Andrew Thomas gave up 10 sacks his rookie year.
Trent Williams gave up 11 sacks his rookie year.

DJ Humphries gave up 9 sacks in his 2nd season (he didn't play at all as a rookie)

 

[CardNots]

Interesting facts in the debate about whether Paris will be a stud player or top end LT.

Paris gave up 8 sacks in his rookie year at a position he never played before.

Lane Johnson gave up 10 sacks his rookie year.
Andrew Thomas gave up 10 sacks his rookie year.
Trent Williams gave up 11 sacks his rookie year.

DJ Humphries gave up 9 sacks in his 2nd season (he didn't play at all as a rookie)

Based on what I’ve seen, it would be good to know how many false starts and holding calls they had seems like those are drive killers.

I imagine most sacks come in long down situations. A good punter negates the pain but those penalties suck the wind out of any momentum gained.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[QuebecCard]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

I take it that 55.1 is better than 84.4 or this conclusion makes no sense.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

I take it that 55.1 is better than 84.4 or this conclusion makes no sense.

Basically the only thing Johnson did better as a rookie was run block...but PJJ was higher in all other categories....and as he states Johnson had arguably the best ever rookie season at RT.

 

[Mulli]

Funny thread

 

[RON_IN_OC]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Jasper]

Its been a few years since we hit on our 1st rounder.

 

[Yuma]

Gambo was hinting that a strategy that the Cards may employ is drafting another OT this draft because there are so few elite OT in this draft, and taking WR with their second first round pick because WR is deep and will have quality guys all the way through the second round. You can't go wrong building a strong OL. Just look at Detroit. It's something to think about IF the Cards go that direction.

 

[kerouac9]

Just look at Detroit.

The issue is what happens in four years. Taylor Decker is a 30-year old veteran who likely won’t get top-of-market money on his next deal. They’ll be able to pay Penei Sewell a max contract and either keep Decker or draft another LT.

 

[TheCardFan]

The issue is what happens in four years.

Would be a great problem to have in 5 years! How can we give our great players 2nd contracts?

 

[Fitz4Ever]

Basically the only thing Johnson did better as a rookie was run block...but PJJ was higher in all other categories....and as he states Johnson had arguably the best ever rookie season at RT.

Hes saying Lane Johnson is currently the best RT...and he had a medicore to poor rookie year....the hope is PJJ will turn into something close to Lane Johnson in time.

Johnson is fine. IMO hes not going to be a top 10 OT in the NFL. If he can stay at RT and be Top 15 in that position....or move to LT and be better than DJ Humphries (which shouldnt be hard because DJ is terrible and massively overpaid)...then great. Alt and Fashanu are both far superior LT prospects than Paris.

 

[kerouac9]

Would be a great problem to have in 5 years! How can we give our great players 2nd contracts?

I guess. I mean, you should plan on your top six picks working out. Thats the long-term foundation of your franchise.

If you’re confident PJJ can be a top 10-ish player at the position, why would you opt into a contract problem?

 

[TheCardFan]

I guess. I mean, you should plan on your top six picks working out. Thats the long-term foundation of your franchise.

If you’re confident PJJ can be a top 10-ish player at the position, why would you opt into a contract problem?

I can't remember the last time this has happened to us. Has it?

Good problem to have for a change.

 

[daves]

If you’re confident PJJ can be a top 10-ish player at the position, why would you opt into a contract problem?

If your definition of a "contract problem" is having two great tackles for the next 5 years and then having to pay both of them or lose one... Opt me into that problem every single time.

 

[kerouac9]

I can't remember the last time this has happened to us. Has it?

Good problem to have for a change.

It happened with Fitz and Q. Smart teams don’t usually over invest at a single position, so it doesn’t happen often.

If your definition of a "contract problem" is having two great tackles for the next 5 years and then having to pay both of them or lose one... Opt me into that problem every single time.

It’s the best possible outcome. Okay.

 

[TheCardFan]

It happened with Fitz and Q. Smart teams don’t usually over invest at a single position, so it doesn’t happen often.

Sort of...

We signed Q to a 4 year contract extension and he played for 7 years with us.

Probably the closest we have had though and that was 14 years ago.

 

[kerouac9]

Sort of...

We signed Q to a 4 year contract extension and he played for 7 years with us.

Probably the closest we have had though and that was 14 years ago.

Cool. Not sure what your point is

 

[daves]

It happened with Fitz and Q. Smart teams don’t usually over invest at a single position, so it doesn’t happen often.

And having both of those guys at the same time helped the Cardinals to a Super Bowl.

It's the best possible outcome. Okay.

You're the one who called taking a tackle at the top of the draft "opting into a contract problem." The only way it's a contract problem is if both tackles perform so well that you can't afford to keep them in 5 years.

 

[Fitz4Ever]

Sort of...

We signed Q to a 4 year contract extension and he played for 7 years with us.

Probably the closest we have had though and that was 14 years ago.

We also made the SB with Fitz and Q....so can't really say we wasted any money

 

[Stout]

Gambo was hinting that a strategy that the Cards may employ is drafting another OT this draft because there are so few elite OT in this draft, and taking WR with their second first round pick because WR is deep and will have quality guys all the way through the second round. You can't go wrong building a strong OL. Just look at Detroit. It's something to think about IF the Cards go that direction.

If they do that, then Monti and Co. deserve what they get. Good luck with Cap Space and a "we hope he's as good as the first 5 WR off the board" pick battling to be WR1. I hope he's smarter than that.

 

[Stout]

If your definition of a "contract problem" is having two great tackles for the next 5 years and then having to pay both of them or lose one... Opt me into that problem every single time.

Good. I'll opt you into Michael Wilson as our WR1. I'll opt out, thanks much.

 

[daves]

Good. I'll opt you into Michael Wilson as our WR1. I'll opt out, thanks much.

I'm not advocating for drafting a tackle over MHJ. I'm saying that being worried about how you'll pay two great tackles 5 years from now is a poor argument against taking a tackle.

 

[kerouac9]

The only way it's a contract problem is if both tackles perform so well that you can't afford to keep them in 5 years.

And…?

 

[Krangodnzr]

Cool. Not sure what your point is

I think his point is obvious.

Having trouble understanding?