The offseason - The reality. The plan. And what would you do?

[Krangodnzr]

How about Kelvin Beachum from the Jets? He had a higher PFF grade than Humprhies this year, and would probably cost around 8 million a year. He is 30 years old.

In the 2nd round, obviously I don't know who will be there, but the most realistic candidates are someone like Trey Adams or Prince Wanogho...both talented guys that need to be brought along. Either one might beat out Murray at RT as a rookie, but the plan could be to switch them to LT in a year or two.

We also have no idea what OT's might be cap casualties, might be available for trade, or might slip into the 2nd round at this point.

Saying there is not a LT available for 8 million that is better than Humprhies is pre-mature.

And if we are going to pay 15 million for a LT...why not wait and see if Costanzo makes it to FA? He is 10X better than DJ and would apparently cost around the same money

Nope, not premature.

It's called being realistic.

Castonzo is not 10 times better. You do realize he sucked for years before becoming a decent player?

 

[GuernseyCard]

Do you disagree that Costanzo is not significantly better than DJ?

If significantly = 10 times better, my answer is, in all sanity - NO!

 

[Solar7]

Murray and the #8 pick is as good as you can get unless Conklin hits the market.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

If we only re-sign Murray, and leave this offensive line as it was at the end of the season last year, I'll riot. But I think you're open for Thomas/Wirfs, so I'm fine with that.

 

[DVontel]

You’d think DJ is Bradley Sowell reading these posts.

 

[AZman5103]

You’d think DJ is Bradley Sowell reading these posts.

And Johnathan Ogden by reading others!

 

[BritCard]

So, after reading the posts, the plan is to have Jason Peters or Andrew Whitworth to play LT and then Justin Murray to play RT, and then draft our future at one of those spots in the 2nd round. And we think that is better than re-signing Humphries...again, wrong-minded thinking.

People get so wrapped up in the mindset of overpaying for average production at premium positions which is a viable concern when you have a Pro Bowl or Hall of Fame QB. We don't. We are trying to develop one. And you don't develop one by trying to save 6 mil on your LT while your young QB is on his rookie contract and Justin Murray is starting at the RT spot.

No, the plan is to draft a top LT at #8. Save $10m and use that $10m to strengthen the defense.

 

[BritCard]

When Kevin Beechum has a higher PFF grade than Hump and people want to pay him $14m....

For all those saying "But he only gave up 2 sacks" may I remind you how many quick out 5 yard passes we made this season precisely because Kliff had no faith in the O line protecting Kyler for anything deeper?

The 2 sacks thing is a red herring.

Kylers aDot went 10.6 > 8.2 > 5.9 > 5.3 through the first 4 games as Kliff had to adjust to a line that couldn't do what he wanted it to do. He had to start playing more 11 and 12 personnel.

I very much doubt Kliff is saying he is happy with the O line as it is. The O line statistical performance is a result of scheme, not talent. It's why the whole line has average grades yet relatively few attributed sacks.

 

[GuernseyCard]

When Kevin Beechum has a higher PFF grade than Hump and people want to pay him $14m....

For all those saying "But he only gave up 2 sacks" may I remind you how many quick out 5 yard passes we made this season precisely because Kliff had no faith in the O line protecting Kyler for anything deeper?

The 2 sacks thing is a red herring.

Kylers aDot went 10.6 > 8.2 > 5.9 > 5.3 through the first 4 games as Kliff had to adjust to a line that couldn't do what he wanted it to do. He had to start playing more 11 and 12 personnel.

I very much doubt Kliff is saying he is happy with the O line as it is. The O line statistical performance is a result of scheme, not talent. It's why the whole line has average grades yet relatively few attributed sacks.

So we have a line increasingly comfortable with the KK scheme and you somehow turn this into a negative.

If Hump's two sacks is a red herring, may I purchase 8 more to be shared with Mister's Pugh, AQ, Sweezy and Murray?

 

[BritCard]

So we have a line increasingly comfortable with the KK scheme and you somehow turn this into a negative.

If Hump's two sacks is a red herring, may I purchase 8 more to be shared with Mister's Pugh, AQ, Sweezy and Murray?

But it's not the scheme he wants to run. More importantly its not a scheme we want to watch.

Kliff had to move off the scheme he wants to use for one that the O line could cope with. That's not learning the scheme, that hampering the scheme.

Lets set this 2 sacks thing on fire. That comes from PFF and is directly attributable sacks.

The whole O line gave up 13 sacks according to PFF. Does this strike you as a 13 sack O line? That sack number is flawed.

 

[Jetstream Green]

When Kevin Beechum has a higher PFF grade than Hump and people want to pay him $14m....

For all those saying "But he only gave up 2 sacks" may I remind you how many quick out 5 yard passes we made this season precisely because Kliff had no faith in the O line protecting Kyler for anything deeper?

The 2 sacks thing is a red herring.

Kylers aDot went 10.6 > 8.2 > 5.9 > 5.3 through the first 4 games as Kliff had to adjust to a line that couldn't do what he wanted it to do. He had to start playing more 11 and 12 personnel.

I very much doubt Kliff is saying he is happy with the O line as it is. The O line statistical performance is a result of scheme, not talent. It's why the whole line has average grades yet relatively few attributed sacks.

I will agree we did use use a lot of quick out 5ers (I just made a word, which actually sounds sorta British haha), some of it was protection but I would also say a majority of them is because that is what the scheme is for Kliff's type of offense which relies on a lot of run after the catch yards... well in a perfect world, our WRs are suppose to get yards after the catch lol

 

[BritCard]

I will agree we did use use a lot of quick out 5ers (I just made a word, which actually sounds sorta British haha), some of it was protection but I would also say a majority of them is because that is what the scheme is for Kliff's type of offense which relies on a lot of run after the catch yards... well in a perfect world, our WRs are suppose to get yards after the catch lol

Some of it is but you only have to look at those aDot numbers to see what Kliff would like to do. In his very first game running the scheme how he would like the aDot is over 10. I think we finished the season with something like 6.3 if I recall.

There's going to be a short passing game in every scheme to some extent, but for big stretches of the season we completely abandoned anything over 15 yards.

I think our line did pretty well this year. I was pleasantly surprised. But I don't think it was good and I can see how much it effected our passing game. We need to improve it.

 

[Chopper0080]

When Kevin Beechum has a higher PFF grade than Hump and people want to pay him $14m....

For all those saying "But he only gave up 2 sacks" may I remind you how many quick out 5 yard passes we made this season precisely because Kliff had no faith in the O line protecting Kyler for anything deeper?

The 2 sacks thing is a red herring.

Kylers aDot went 10.6 > 8.2 > 5.9 > 5.3 through the first 4 games as Kliff had to adjust to a line that couldn't do what he wanted it to do. He had to start playing more 11 and 12 personnel.

I very much doubt Kliff is saying he is happy with the O line as it is. The O line statistical performance is a result of scheme, not talent. It's why the whole line has average grades yet relatively few attributed sacks.

The idea that scheme and production are not related is funny.

Why do you think the Saints and the Patriots line is always so good? Maybe because the scheme tasks the QB with getting the ball out quick.

Why is Arians always struggling to protect his QB? Because his scheme asks the QB to hold the ball.

Come on with this argument.

 

[slanidrac16]

And to think we only have 3 months to go before the draft! Lol

 

[Chopper0080]

No, the plan is to draft a top LT at #8. Save $10m and use that $10m to strengthen the defense.

So the new plan is to start

LT - Rookie / Joshua Miles
LG - Pugh (injury history)
C - Shipley
RG - Sweezy
RT - Murray

...can't imagine what could go wrong with that group and how it might impact Kyler Murray's development...

 

[BritCard]

The idea that scheme and production are not related is funny.

Why do you think the Saints and the Patriots line is always so good? Maybe because the scheme tasks the QB with getting the ball out quick.

Why is Arians always struggling to protect his QB? Because his scheme asks the QB to hold the ball.

Come on with this argument.

None of that is what I said.

I said we had to change scheme to accommodate the O line. In other words Kliff had to abandon what he wanted to do for what a the O line could cope with.

Do you think this O line is good?

 

[BritCard]

So the new plan is to start

LT - Rookie / Joshua Miles
LG - Pugh (injury history)
C - Shipley
RG - Sweezy
RT - Murray

...can't imagine what could go wrong with that group and how it might impact Kyler Murray's development...

You say that as if Hump is the bedrock of this O line. He's a JAG. He's not a top 20 tackle in the league. If you are bottom 3rd at your position in the league than you are just a guy.

You could put a sack of badgers at LT and not know the difference. Except the Badger's would be on the field more.

Hump is not good. Let's stop talking about him like he's peak Joe Thomas.

 

[GuernseyCard]

But it's not the scheme he wants to run. More importantly its not a scheme we want to watch.

Kliff had to move off the scheme he wants to use for one that the O line could cope with. That's not learning the scheme, that hampering the scheme.

Lets set this 2 sacks thing on fire. That comes from PFF and is directly attributable sacks.

The whole O line gave up 13 sacks according to PFF. Does this strike you as a 13 sack O line? That sack number is flawed.

What you want to see will never be more important than KK chooses to run.

And there isn't an NFL O-line that could survive the pure version of KK's college system and that's why he tweaked and tweaked and will tweak again.

 

[GuernseyCard]

You say that as if Hump is the bedrock of this O line. He's a JAG. He's not a top 20 tackle in the league. If you are bottom 3rd at your position in the league than you are just a guy.

You could put a sack of badgers at LT and not know the difference. Except the Badger's would be on the field more.

Hump is not good. Let's stop talking about him like he's peak Joe Thomas.

You're getting a bit unhinged.

 

[BritCard]

What you want to see will never be more important than KK chooses to run.

And there isn't an NFL O-line that could survive the pure version of KK's college system and that's why he tweaked and tweaked and will tweak again.

Let's be clear here. Those people arguing that we should extend Hump answer this very simple question.

Do you think this O line is good?

 

[Solar7]

Let's be clear here. Those people arguing that we should extend Hump answer this very simple question.

Do you think this O line is good?

Man, that's the question I've been asking people but as it pertains to Justin Murray.

But I am in the "extend Hump" camp. Or at least tag him. I don't know what other pathway we have available to us.

 

[Ronin]

I don't know how good the oline is but I do know that Kyler Murray makes it look better than it actually is. And at times Kyler Murray can make the oline look worse by holding onto the ball too long. So I am undecided about the oline

 

[BritCard]

Man, that's the question I've been asking people but as it pertains to Justin Murray.

But I am in the "extend Hump" camp. Or at least tag him. I don't know what other pathway we have available to us.

I think it's quite clear its not good and nobody round the league thinks it is

 

[football karma]

I don't know how good the oline is but I do know that Kyler Murray makes it look better than it actually is. And at times Kyler Murray can make the oline look worse by holding onto the ball too long. So I am undecided about the oline

you evaluate the pieces of the o-line one by one and you kinda go …. ok. Everyone is...… just ok.

Kinda true for the entire offense: is there any one player where you say "this is a top 5 in the NFL at his position player" on offense? no way.

Yet (depending on how you measure it) -- a NFL average offense, that is a top 10 rushing offense, with two different RBs who averaged over 5 yards a carry.

Oddly, from PFF: "the Cardinals were one of the worst run-blocking teams in the NFL by PFF grade."

 

[GuernseyCard]

Let's be clear here. Those people arguing that we should extend Hump answer this very simple question.

Do you think this O line is good?

Hi Brit Card...

My name is Bosa, Nick Bosa - and I play football for the SF 49ers. May have heard of me, I'm the consensus defensive rookie of the Year. I appreciate your passion for the game and don't let what I'm about to say quell that in any way, but as someone who goes head to head against DJ, I suggest you get your head out of your nether region Cheers, mate.

 

[BritCard]

Hi Brit Card...

My name is Bosa, Nick Bosa - and I play football for the SF 49ers. May have heard of me, I'm the consensus defensive rookie of the Year. I appreciate your passion for the game and don't let what I'm about to say quell that in any way, but as someone who goes head to head against DJ, I suggest you get your head out of your nether region Cheers, mate.

If we are paying players based on select performances then Drake is getting $15m