Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The question of Jake Long...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Miami Dolphins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dolphan9954


Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 6960
Location: Miami
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ProudDolphan47 wrote:


Are you in the locker room? Are you there every day at practice? Do you stand on the sideline and watch the interactions between all the players?

Or are you just feeding off a 30 second clip off of Hard Knocks and one play in the Raiders game?

There is ZERO quantitative value to what you're saying. That is totally objective.


I watched the first two episodes of Hard Knocks, and that's it. Am I in the locker room? No, but if you take a look at the Miami Dolphins and mainly the offensive side of the ball, I see an offensive line that REGARDLESS OF RANKINGS (PFF is accurate, but it doesn't tell the whole story) that is finally dominating the line of scrimmage for the most part, I see a unit that is keeping Tannehill clean. I see a player in Jake Long that if you judge him on 4 games he is struggling per his standards, but he is definitely improving. He is playing injured right now.

On the leadership thing: who is the Miami Dolphins player that speaks up when something isn't right? Who is the "head honcho" of the teams leadership council? That notably is Jake Long. He is the most respected player on the team, and he is the only player on this team that when he talks everyone listens. Is Tannehill going to take that role? I mean it'd be nice but he doesn't seem like he is that type of player, I see him more of a lead by example/quiet leader type. Maybe I am off base, but Long has the most 'intangibles' on the team. I'm sorry that I refuse to throw out 4 seasons of mostly exceptional football, for 4 games of subpar play. Talk to me after 10 games.

Quote:

No one is saying that. But the fact of the matter is Long is rated as the 62nd tackle in run blocking this year, 13th in pass blocking and 33rd overall. Sorry, but that's not 12-14 million dollar money right there.


5 games in a new system is tough to make that judgement. Again I like PFF, it's pretty accurate, but at the same time the eye test he is passing. The entire unit is passing. Incognito has a terrible grade, but he is also a starter on a top 5 OL this season.



Quote:
I feel like you proved our point when you said, verbatim: "YOU DON'T NEED ALL PROS ON YOUR OFFENSIVE LINE (see new york giants / green bay packers) TO PLAY WINNING FOOTBALL IN THE NFL."

Read that again and tell me how exactly you didn't just prove our point?


While you don't need all pro's on your offensive line, you need continuity, chemistry, and luck. While those teams may not have all pro's by definition, TJ Lang and Josh Sitton are two of the best OG's in the league. Last season Scott Wells was a top 7 center for the Packers. Bryan Bulaga was a first round pick. Jeff Saturday is one of the best centers in the NFL (for his ENTIRE career, he is older now).

The Saints for example, had Jahri Evans and Carl Nicks at OG last season, perhaps the two best guards in the NFL. They used to have Jamal Brown at LT and he was also one of the better OT in the game, they got lucky that they found Jermon Bushrod to replace him. They lost Carl Nicks in the off season and replaced him with Ben Grubbs, probably a top 6 OG in the game.

A good OL isn't made of a bunch of 'Average Joe's,' a good OL has 6-7 solid pieces that have chemistry and ability. The Dolphins right now have 3 guys with noticeable talent (Long, Pouncey, Martin). Jerry and Incognito have good chemistry and they are playing per PFF poorly, but yet the running game is excelling and Tannehill for the most part is being kept clean.

Bad organizations let their elite talent get away, bad organizations develop draft picks and let them go. Maybe I'm looking at this to simply, but when you have a good thing you CANNOT let it walk away. Before the season I never thought I would say resign all of these guys, but there are 6 guys that are FA this season that are playing on a team playing above their potential, and are key reasons why. (Long, Hartline, Bush, Smith, Starks, Clemons)
_________________


Phinisher on the Avatar
MDolphins2399 on the sig


Go Canes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ProudDolphan47


Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2007
Posts: 5532
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dolphan9954 wrote:
ProudDolphan47 wrote:


Are you in the locker room? Are you there every day at practice? Do you stand on the sideline and watch the interactions between all the players?

Or are you just feeding off a 30 second clip off of Hard Knocks and one play in the Raiders game?

There is ZERO quantitative value to what you're saying. That is totally objective.


I watched the first two episodes of Hard Knocks, and that's it. Am I in the locker room? No, but if you take a look at the Miami Dolphins and mainly the offensive side of the ball, I see an offensive line that REGARDLESS OF RANKINGS (PFF is accurate, but it doesn't tell the whole story) that is finally dominating the line of scrimmage for the most part, I see a unit that is keeping Tannehill clean. I see a player in Jake Long that if you judge him on 4 games he is struggling per his standards, but he is definitely improving. He is playing injured right now.

On the leadership thing: who is the Miami Dolphins player that speaks up when something isn't right? Who is the "head honcho" of the teams leadership council? That notably is Jake Long. He is the most respected player on the team, and he is the only player on this team that when he talks everyone listens. Is Tannehill going to take that role? I mean it'd be nice but he doesn't seem like he is that type of player, I see him more of a lead by example/quiet leader type. Maybe I am off base, but Long has the most 'intangibles' on the team. I'm sorry that I refuse to throw out 4 seasons of mostly exceptional football, for 4 games of subpar play. Talk to me after 10 games.

Quote:

No one is saying that. But the fact of the matter is Long is rated as the 62nd tackle in run blocking this year, 13th in pass blocking and 33rd overall. Sorry, but that's not 12-14 million dollar money right there.


5 games in a new system is tough to make that judgement. Again I like PFF, it's pretty accurate, but at the same time the eye test he is passing. The entire unit is passing. Incognito has a terrible grade, but he is also a starter on a top 5 OL this season.



Quote:
I feel like you proved our point when you said, verbatim: "YOU DON'T NEED ALL PROS ON YOUR OFFENSIVE LINE (see new york giants / green bay packers) TO PLAY WINNING FOOTBALL IN THE NFL."

Read that again and tell me how exactly you didn't just prove our point?


While you don't need all pro's on your offensive line, you need continuity, chemistry, and luck. While those teams may not have all pro's by definition, TJ Lang and Josh Sitton are two of the best OG's in the league. Last season Scott Wells was a top 7 center for the Packers. Bryan Bulaga was a first round pick. Jeff Saturday is one of the best centers in the NFL (for his ENTIRE career, he is older now).

The Saints for example, had Jahri Evans and Carl Nicks at OG last season, perhaps the two best guards in the NFL. They used to have Jamal Brown at LT and he was also one of the better OT in the game, they got lucky that they found Jermon Bushrod to replace him. They lost Carl Nicks in the off season and replaced him with Ben Grubbs, probably a top 6 OG in the game.

A good OL isn't made of a bunch of 'Average Joe's,' a good OL has 6-7 solid pieces that have chemistry and ability. The Dolphins right now have 3 guys with noticeable talent (Long, Pouncey, Martin). Jerry and Incognito have good chemistry and they are playing per PFF poorly, but yet the running game is excelling and Tannehill for the most part is being kept clean.

Bad organizations let their elite talent get away, bad organizations develop draft picks and let them go. Maybe I'm looking at this to simply, but when you have a good thing you CANNOT let it walk away. Before the season I never thought I would say resign all of these guys, but there are 6 guys that are FA this season that are playing on a team playing above their potential, and are key reasons why. (Long, Hartline, Bush, Smith, Starks, Clemons)


First of all...great post.

But my issues with Jake Long go beyond the first 5 games of this season. I've been disappointed with Jake Long's performance going back to the start of 2011. He has NOT been the same guy he was in 2008 and 2009, period. And a large part of that issue is because, as you said...he can't stay healthy. He hasn't been healthy since November 2010. And we want to pony up cash for this guy? Just as I said before...you won't pay an injury prone skill player big bucks, so why would we pay an injury prone T the big bucks? Because he's not hurt bad enough to be off the field?

I will agree with you that the offensive line as a whole is passing the eye test. They're doing very well as a unit. However in individual situations, particularly in pass pro, I think Jake Long has been overrated this year, both by PFF and by the fans in general. He is conceding a LOT of ground. He isn't anchoring in his set. He is long enough to extend guys past the QB but he isn't moving his feet and he IS getting beat off the end and letting guys get underneath his pads.

And finally, I was deadset against Miami letting Brandon Marshall go for the same reason you applied at the end, that you CANNOT let elite talent walk away. If a team is going to pay us a premium for Jake Long, I would absolutely move him. I wouldn't be against a tag and trade. Or I wouldn't ABSOLUTELY be against a tag and play situation (although it's not ideal). But giving this guy 100 M over 8-9 years is just BEGGING to be a let down because the injuries are already piling up, the chemistry with the scheme isn't a perfect fit and I think its a waste of resources.
_________________
-Proud 2011 Inductee to FF's Miami Dolphins RoH

Warpticon wrote:
I think Mike Wallace made a mistake because *throws turd at wall*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mountainpd


Joined: 21 Mar 2010
Posts: 2591
Location: Fareham, UK
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is Jake Long one of my favourite players... Yes.

Do i want him to depart...NO

I do understand both sides of the argument and the good thing is we should be in no rush to re sign him yet. Concentrate on Smith,Starks and Hartline whos risk reward maybe greater at the price and who are earning their contracts by my reconing.

Jake long in my opinion is not currently worth top tackle money in the region of Thomas but if he stays injury free i see no reason we cant keep him for less based on a lower performance level and would love to see a home town discount. Worse case we could tag and trade to a needy team to avoid losing him for nothing. IM not saying i expect to sign him for less but i dont think anyone will offer him the 12-14 million money.

If we decide that resigning him is not a priority be it system, injury or performance then my theory of swapping him and Martin round must become valid a some pint during this season. Martin gets put now where he may well end up next year anyway and you get your mauler at right tackle. If nothing else this may send a message to him that he doesn't hold all the bargaining tools. My two questions would be 1.Would it be straight forward a switch for Long (dont want Tannehill on his back for both tackles struggling) ? 2. If Martin couldn't transfer back would this put his development as a long term RT in jeopardy?

One thing this swap would allow us to evaluate is whether Martin can be a LT in this system and if successful allow to look for a RT in the off season which may be alot cheaper and easier. I do not want to be using one of our top 5 picks on a tackle this year. Playmakers please.
_________________


^^^Kempes^^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
dolphan9954


Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 6960
Location: Miami
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ProudDolphan47 wrote:
dolphan9954 wrote:
ProudDolphan47 wrote:


Are you in the locker room? Are you there every day at practice? Do you stand on the sideline and watch the interactions between all the players?

Or are you just feeding off a 30 second clip off of Hard Knocks and one play in the Raiders game?

There is ZERO quantitative value to what you're saying. That is totally objective.


I watched the first two episodes of Hard Knocks, and that's it. Am I in the locker room? No, but if you take a look at the Miami Dolphins and mainly the offensive side of the ball, I see an offensive line that REGARDLESS OF RANKINGS (PFF is accurate, but it doesn't tell the whole story) that is finally dominating the line of scrimmage for the most part, I see a unit that is keeping Tannehill clean. I see a player in Jake Long that if you judge him on 4 games he is struggling per his standards, but he is definitely improving. He is playing injured right now.

On the leadership thing: who is the Miami Dolphins player that speaks up when something isn't right? Who is the "head honcho" of the teams leadership council? That notably is Jake Long. He is the most respected player on the team, and he is the only player on this team that when he talks everyone listens. Is Tannehill going to take that role? I mean it'd be nice but he doesn't seem like he is that type of player, I see him more of a lead by example/quiet leader type. Maybe I am off base, but Long has the most 'intangibles' on the team. I'm sorry that I refuse to throw out 4 seasons of mostly exceptional football, for 4 games of subpar play. Talk to me after 10 games.

Quote:

No one is saying that. But the fact of the matter is Long is rated as the 62nd tackle in run blocking this year, 13th in pass blocking and 33rd overall. Sorry, but that's not 12-14 million dollar money right there.


5 games in a new system is tough to make that judgement. Again I like PFF, it's pretty accurate, but at the same time the eye test he is passing. The entire unit is passing. Incognito has a terrible grade, but he is also a starter on a top 5 OL this season.



Quote:
I feel like you proved our point when you said, verbatim: "YOU DON'T NEED ALL PROS ON YOUR OFFENSIVE LINE (see new york giants / green bay packers) TO PLAY WINNING FOOTBALL IN THE NFL."

Read that again and tell me how exactly you didn't just prove our point?


While you don't need all pro's on your offensive line, you need continuity, chemistry, and luck. While those teams may not have all pro's by definition, TJ Lang and Josh Sitton are two of the best OG's in the league. Last season Scott Wells was a top 7 center for the Packers. Bryan Bulaga was a first round pick. Jeff Saturday is one of the best centers in the NFL (for his ENTIRE career, he is older now).

The Saints for example, had Jahri Evans and Carl Nicks at OG last season, perhaps the two best guards in the NFL. They used to have Jamal Brown at LT and he was also one of the better OT in the game, they got lucky that they found Jermon Bushrod to replace him. They lost Carl Nicks in the off season and replaced him with Ben Grubbs, probably a top 6 OG in the game.

A good OL isn't made of a bunch of 'Average Joe's,' a good OL has 6-7 solid pieces that have chemistry and ability. The Dolphins right now have 3 guys with noticeable talent (Long, Pouncey, Martin). Jerry and Incognito have good chemistry and they are playing per PFF poorly, but yet the running game is excelling and Tannehill for the most part is being kept clean.

Bad organizations let their elite talent get away, bad organizations develop draft picks and let them go. Maybe I'm looking at this to simply, but when you have a good thing you CANNOT let it walk away. Before the season I never thought I would say resign all of these guys, but there are 6 guys that are FA this season that are playing on a team playing above their potential, and are key reasons why. (Long, Hartline, Bush, Smith, Starks, Clemons)


First of all...great post.

But my issues with Jake Long go beyond the first 5 games of this season. I've been disappointed with Jake Long's performance going back to the start of 2011. He has NOT been the same guy he was in 2008 and 2009, period. And a large part of that issue is because, as you said...he can't stay healthy. He hasn't been healthy since November 2010. And we want to pony up cash for this guy? Just as I said before...you won't pay an injury prone skill player big bucks, so why would we pay an injury prone T the big bucks? Because he's not hurt bad enough to be off the field?

I will agree with you that the offensive line as a whole is passing the eye test. They're doing very well as a unit. However in individual situations, particularly in pass pro, I think Jake Long has been overrated this year, both by PFF and by the fans in general. He is conceding a LOT of ground. He isn't anchoring in his set. He is long enough to extend guys past the QB but he isn't moving his feet and he IS getting beat off the end and letting guys get underneath his pads.

And finally, I was deadset against Miami letting Brandon Marshall go for the same reason you applied at the end, that you CANNOT let elite talent walk away. If a team is going to pay us a premium for Jake Long, I would absolutely move him. I wouldn't be against a tag and trade. Or I wouldn't ABSOLUTELY be against a tag and play situation (although it's not ideal). But giving this guy 100 M over 8-9 years is just BEGGING to be a let down because the injuries are already piling up, the chemistry with the scheme isn't a perfect fit and I think its a waste of resources.


At this point in time, I would tag and play. I think it is to soon to judge him on his play in a new system. The easiest way for Tannehill to have a sophomore slump is for the line to awful. That's my fear so even if we lose him after this year, whatever the tag cost is worth it. Maybe by year 3 Martin will show enough to move to LT, or we'll pick a mid round tackle that shows he can play. At this juncture I don't want to lose our franchise LT with no proven tackle to replace him. A rookie LT or a stop gap with a young QB is dangerous business. We have waited 13 years for a QB, I'm in the "Do WHATEVER it takes to make him successful," boat.
_________________


Phinisher on the Avatar
MDolphins2399 on the sig


Go Canes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ProudDolphan47


Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2007
Posts: 5532
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone know what the upcoming T free agent class looks like?
_________________
-Proud 2011 Inductee to FF's Miami Dolphins RoH

Warpticon wrote:
I think Mike Wallace made a mistake because *throws turd at wall*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dolphan9954


Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 6960
Location: Miami
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jake Long, Duane Brown, Sebastien Vollmer, Ryan Clady, Jermon Bushrod, Andre Smith, Will Svitek.

I'd be shocked if Brown, Clady, Bushrod hit the market. Vollmer leaves a lot to be desired, Andre Smith is fat.
_________________


Phinisher on the Avatar
MDolphins2399 on the sig


Go Canes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Russ57


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 681
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It really comes down to one thing only.

Do you want to HAVE to draft a LT next year in order to save cap money?

Since it isn't my money, I'd rather pay Jake and draft someone who might make a difference in number of games won.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishfan4life


Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 1920
Location: santa rosa california
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thats been my whole problem about these rankings is that after 4 games because this ranking thing was after week 4 is that we decided he no longer is good. His play was solid vs cinn. If jake long doesnt rate out good by years end this argument has more merrit to me. Every LT has bad game or gives up sack from time to time but in here if he does it people freak out. Let the season play out
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phinmun


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 2231
Location: South Carolina
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm telling you guys...


...this is not about 1 guy's performance alone. It's about whether someone can propose a long-term plan for building up an offense that still needs a RG, LG, TE and WR.

This team has needs at RG, LG, TE, WR, CB, FS, DE and potentially now a LT, too!? Remember guys, we're a relatively crappy team still. We need a lot of help still.

You guys can say what you want but if I need all those things and I'm not banking on getting any starter beyond round 3 opening a huge hole at LT is a weight I'm not sure I can bear. We have 5 picks this year and if we hit on every one (which we won't) we'll still be looking at next years draft to answer those questions.

Losing Long not only forces a high pick to be used on a LT but also stops you from replacing your bad, bad Guards and stops you from grabbing something you will probably wish you had at WR or S later. Losing a high draft selection to a massive void is something that hurt us before with CB (Davis/Smith) and O-line (Pouncey). We spent picks on those positions because we had to, not because we didn't prefer something else.


There are 2 sides of the argument fundamentally but they both have important drawbacks for which they must answer.

If you support letting Long walk (like Doc & PD), you have to back that up with reasonable evidence to support that you can amply replace him while still taking care of the Guard spots and all those other positions of need listed above. In my view, this is the challenge that I haven't heard Doc and PD address enough to sway me although there is merit to their argument against Jake Long individually.

I tried to get Doc to realize in the other thread that it's a long-term and all-encompassing solution that I wanted from him, not analysis of whether or not Jake Long was the perfect LT for this scheme. We all agree he's not give or take a few inches on that front. Smile


Now, if you support Long staying, you have to show how his staying makes sense in terms of helping the team despite the high financial burden. Not a lot of players in this league get paid $12M/yr for average production! Now remember, Long's never going to be a bad LT in this scheme, just not one worthy of the price he'll inevitably command in FA.


Quite frankly, this franchise has let so many of its best players go on to success with other teams and missed on so many chances to land great players that it's high time we all start carefully weighing this stuff and stop acting like there's a simple and elegant solution when there's clearly not. Is it purely a "talent acquisition business?" That's cute, but I don't think so. There's too many average players on great teams. It requires we be smarter than such declarations.

It's a business about acquiring the talent that makes you competitive enough to accomplish your goals. It's not about having the best players, it's about having the right players. Jake Long might not perform in this ZBS as well as Joe Thomas or Dwayne Brown, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's not the right player for this team which needs talent quite badly and quite frankly is probably still in a bit of a position to overpay for it.



I don't think anyone here minds spending Ross' cash to conserve continuity and keep good players around--even Doc and PD. That much we can agree on as a group. But we need more games to evaluate Long's potential in this new ZBS as well as time to consider how costly losing him would really be.

Until we know more, I'll stand in one spot and say that I've yet to hear a great plan concerning how we can replace a LT, a LG and a RG quickly and effectively while keeping Tannehill well-protected and still able to add talent at the half-dozen other positions where we need it.

As anecdotal evidence, just look at Matt Ryan. He doesn't have an elite O-line but he's had ample protection from which he's been able to develop. Our primary goal is still developing Tannehill--not this running game. He's the single most important part of this team and will continue to be until he's gone as far as I'm concerned. We wouldn't be the worst sinners if we kept Jake Long for another 3 or 4 seasons just to keep this train moving. Maybe then we afford to draft a LT in the 1st or 2nd round without worrying about all the other needs.

Maybe we can afford losing Jake Long down the road but I think right now the most complete evaluation of this still-struggling team indicates that Long be kept and signed. Maybe it's too much in dollars but it keeps us moving forwards in our development of other players and allows us to address Jake's shortcomings later.

I'm sick of having bad QBs and quite frankly so are all of you. I want to make sure Tannehill has protection. I'm not throwing away 'decent' just for the hope of getting something better. You've got to show me how we're definitely going to get better and that argument has not effectively been made by anyone thus far.

His personality, work ethic and leadership can all be icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.


Last edited by phinmun on Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:58 pm; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clutch


Joined: 04 Nov 2004
Posts: 2239
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

These PFF rankings have Bess (#8WR or #11, I believe) and Hartline below him. Now I have never been a Hartline guy, but seriously??

They also have Reshad Jones as a top 2 safety.

Pouncey is the #2 Center, behind SF's center.

Now I am not sure what the categories are for grading a player. I think Pouncey has done a great job to this point. But Jones as a top 3 safety is a little questionable, and Bess over Hartline is very confusing.

I have heard this PFF ranking system for a while now. Is this the new norm?

Two things: If line play is so important, and ours seems to be doing well. Is it a coincidence that Hartline and Smith are having great years?

Smith used to be a Forum Whipping Boy candidate and now the tune has changed. Is it him or is it the pressure we are getting. Hartline is now due a raise after 5 games? And how much should he get?
_________________
- "Who, I love Rich Camarillo." Quote from the Fish's play by play crew.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phinmun


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 2231
Location: South Carolina
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clutch wrote:
These PFF rankings have Bess (#8WR or #11, I believe) and Hartline below him. Now I have never been a Hartline guy, but seriously??

They also have Reshad Jones as a top 2 safety.

Pouncey is the #2 Center, behind SF's center.

Now I am not sure what the categories are for grading a player. I think Pouncey has done a great job to this point. But Jones as a top 3 safety is a little questionable, and Bess over Hartline is very confusing.

I have heard this PFF ranking system for a while now. Is this the new norm?

Two things: If line play is so important, and ours seems to be doing well. Is it a coincidence that Hartline and Smith are having great years?

Smith used to be a Forum Whipping Boy candidate and now the tune has changed. Is it him or is it the pressure we are getting. Hartline is now due a raise after 5 games? And how much should he get?



We're talking about 5 games through which players have been vastly up and down.

PFF rankings are quite highly accurate and telling as far as I know but over 5 games I'd throw most stats in the garbage and use the eye test.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dolphinologist


Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 5562
Location: New York
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

phinmun wrote:
I'm telling you guys...


...this is not about 1 guy's performance alone. It's about whether someone can propose a long-term plan for building up an offense that still needs a RG, LG, TE and WR.

This team has needs at RG, LG, TE, WR, CB, FS, DE and potentially now a LT, too!? Remember guys, we're a relatively crappy team still. We need a lot of help still.

You guys can say what you want but if I need all those things and I'm not banking on getting any starter beyond round 3 opening a huge hole at LT is a weight I'm not sure I can bear. We have 5 picks this year and if we hit on every one (which we won't) we'll still be looking at next years draft to answer those questions.

Losing Long not only forces a high pick to be used on a LT but also stops you from replacing your bad, bad Guards and stops you from grabbing something you will probably wish you had at WR or S later. Losing a high draft selection to a massive void is something that hurt us before with CB (Davis/Smith) and O-line (Pouncey). We spent picks on those positions because we had to, not because we didn't prefer something else.


There are 2 sides of the argument fundamentally but they both have important drawbacks for which they must answer.

If you support letting Long walk (like Doc & PD), you have to back that up with reasonable evidence to support that you can amply replace him while still taking care of the Guard spots and all those other positions of need listed above. In my view, this is the challenge that I haven't heard Doc and PD address enough to sway me although there is merit to their argument against Jake Long individually.

I tried to get Doc to realize in the other thread that it's a long-term and all-encompassing solution that I wanted from him, not analysis of whether or not Jake Long was the perfect LT for this scheme. We all agree he's not give or take a few inches on that front. Smile


Now, if you support Long staying, you have to show how his staying makes sense in terms of helping the team despite the high financial burden. Not a lot of players in this league get paid $12M/yr for average production! Now remember, Long's never going to be a bad LT in this scheme, just not one worthy of the price he'll inevitably command in FA.


Quite frankly, this franchise has let so many of its best players go on to success with other teams and missed on so many chances to land great players that it's high time we all start carefully weighing this stuff and stop acting like there's a simple and elegant solution when there's clearly not. Is it purely a "talent acquisition business?" That's cute, but I don't think so. There's too many average players on great teams. It requires we be smarter than such declarations.

It's a business about acquiring the talent that makes you competitive enough to accomplish your goals. It's not about having the best players, it's about having the right players. Jake Long might not perform in this ZBS as well as Joe Thomas or Dwayne Brown, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's not the right player for this team which needs talent quite badly and quite frankly is probably still in a bit of a position to overpay for it.



I don't think anyone here minds spending Ross' cash to conserve continuity and keep good players around--even Doc and PD. That much we can agree on as a group. But we need more games to evaluate Long's potential in this new ZBS as well as time to consider how costly losing him would really be.

Until we know more, I'll stand in one spot and say that I've yet to hear a great plan concerning how we can replace a LT, a LG and a RG quickly and effectively while keeping Tannehill well-protected and still able to add talent at the half-dozen other positions where we need it.

As anecdotal evidence, just look at Matt Ryan. He doesn't have an elite O-line but he's had ample protection from which he's been able to develop. Our primary goal is still developing Tannehill--not this running game. He's the single most important part of this team and will continue to be until he's gone as far as I'm concerned. We wouldn't be the worst sinners if we kept Jake Long for another 3 or 4 seasons just to keep this train moving. Maybe then we afford to draft a LT in the 1st or 2nd round without worrying about all the other needs.

Maybe we can afford losing Jake Long down the road but I think right now the most complete evaluation of this still-struggling team indicates that Long be kept and signed. Maybe it's too much in dollars but it keeps us moving forwards in our development of other players and allows us to address Jake's shortcomings later.

I'm sick of having bad QBs and quite frankly so are all of you. I want to make sure Tannehill has protection. I'm not throwing away 'decent' just for the hope of getting something better. You've got to show me how we're definitely going to get better and that argument has not effectively been made by anyone thus far.

His personality, work ethic and leadership can all be icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.


Jonathan Martin played more LT than RT in his life in the west coast offense. Moving him back over there would do two things:

1. We would kind of avoid having to put a green rookie over there.
2. I'm of the opinion that LTs go higher in the draft than RTs and by moving Martin to LT instead of drafting one, takes the pressure off to take one high.

When Draft time comes around you have two possibilities from Texas A&M who are familiar with Sherman and his version of the west coast offense. They are Jake Matthews and Luke Joeckel. We can get one of those guys without ignoring needs or BPA at other positions. And we won't be forced into any 1st round choices. A mock site I trust has us at the 6th spot. Unless the next Lawrence Taylor or Bruce Smith is available at 6 we are in a great position to trade down.

The point it all is not lost. It is possible, between the draft and FA to get a RT and two Gs.
_________________


Fellow Posters: I beg that you not misunderstand my level of arrogance. My handle is an implication of Dolphin study not necessarily Dolphin expertise.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ProudDolphan47


Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2007
Posts: 5532
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clutch wrote:
These PFF rankings have Bess (#8WR or #11, I believe) and Hartline below him. Now I have never been a Hartline guy, but seriously??

They also have Reshad Jones as a top 2 safety.

Pouncey is the #2 Center, behind SF's center.

Now I am not sure what the categories are for grading a player. I think Pouncey has done a great job to this point. But Jones as a top 3 safety is a little questionable, and Bess over Hartline is very confusing.

I have heard this PFF ranking system for a while now. Is this the new norm?

Two things: If line play is so important, and ours seems to be doing well. Is it a coincidence that Hartline and Smith are having great years?

Smith used to be a Forum Whipping Boy candidate and now the tune has changed. Is it him or is it the pressure we are getting. Hartline is now due a raise after 5 games? And how much should he get?


A lot of good questions in this post. I'm working from my iPhone at work so I can't post too in depth but I can explain the PFF scoring for you Clutch. PFF gets the all 22 coaches film from every game and grades out every player on every snap of every team on a weekly basis. If you are highly successful at your responsibility on a given a plus. If you miss your assignment, you get a minus. Having no effect on a play yields no score. So after each game they tally your pluses and minuses and you get an overall composite score for the game.
_________________
-Proud 2011 Inductee to FF's Miami Dolphins RoH

Warpticon wrote:
I think Mike Wallace made a mistake because *throws turd at wall*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phinmun


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 2231
Location: South Carolina
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dolphinologist wrote:

Jonathan Martin played more LT than RT in his life in the west coast offense. Moving him back over there would do two things:

1. We would kind of avoid having to put a green rookie over there.
2. I'm of the opinion that LTs go higher in the draft than RTs and by moving Martin to LT instead of drafting one, takes the pressure off to take one high.

When Draft time comes around you have two possibilities from Texas A&M who are familiar with Sherman and his version of the west coast offense. They are Jake Matthews and Luke Joeckel. We can get one of those guys without ignoring needs or BPA at other positions. And we won't be forced into any 1st round choices. A mock site I trust has us at the 6th spot. Unless the next Lawrence Taylor or Bruce Smith is available at 6 we are in a great position to trade down.

The point it all is not lost. It is possible, between the draft and FA to get a RT and two Gs.



You might be right but is Martin so set that he can already handle a position swap? Is he even good enough to play LT? What about the rookie or FA that will come in an play at LG? That's going to be some serious discontinuity there even if the rookie RT doesn't play badly.

Martin - Stop Gap FA - Pouncey - Rookie - Rookie

The idea of 2 new Guards, a 2nd-year guy swapping places and a rookie at RT is way out there. Spread that out over 2 or 3 seasons and I think you have a strong argument but then you'd be faced with temporarily leaving Incognito and/or Jerry in place.

I'd like to see Columbo, woops I mean Incognito, go this season. The whole Jake Long thing is just getting in the way of that happening. Maybe we could draft a LT and bring in a FA LG and keep Jerry in place with the coaches riding his a$$ so he's not 20 lbs fatter than necessary next year. Either way, one thing you sure as hell won't be reading in my posts is me saying I'm okay with starting Incognito at LG next year. He's 10x worse than Long will ever be in this offense and is the primary reason we can't run effectively in short-yardage situations off the left side and why we can't run screens.

A&M Rookie - Stop Gap FA - Pouncey - Jerry - Martin

I mean, if I have to ride with Incognito or Jerry, I'd MUCH prefer it be Jerry. Incognito is as bad a fit as you could draw up for the ZBS. Jerry at least, on a good day, looks alright. Incognito is this years Columbo. Watch him. He proves on every play to be a liability holding us back.

One thing to consider too, and I know this won't sway your view, is how much playing beside Incognito is hurting Jake Long. Long might not be ideal but he's playing next to a guy who might be the worst fit of all 32 starting LGs across the league, especially those in ZBSs.

Incognito can't run block effectively. He can't pass block effectively. He can't get to the second level effectively. He can't block on screens. Everything he does, he does at a level that hurts the offense. I'm serious. He sucks that bad. Every screen we run to the left side I've seen him out of place and lost. Against better fronts we generate very little push off the line and the one guy who's definitely, always, and forever killing us is Incognito.

That's not making Jake Long look any better. If you forced me to put 2 new guys on this line next year (a dangerous thing) I'd put 2 competent rookie Guards between the 3 guys we know can play. I'd re-sign Jake Long and vow not to touch the damn O-line for as long as humanly possible. At least that way we're maybe spending both 3rd we have on the guards and preserving the highest picks we have as well as putting help on both sides of each rookie once they start. That at least makes sense from all directions if you don't consider it too bold.

Would I have traded Brandon Marshall for 2 really good Guards? Yeah, probably! Smile It'll hurt, but it won't hurt as much as having rookies on the edges and/or having a complete half of the line being made up of new faces.

Long - Rookie - Pouncey - Rookie - Martin


Last edited by phinmun on Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:05 pm; edited 9 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cddolphin


Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Posts: 6179
Location: Gainesville, FL
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is my favorite thread so far this season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Miami Dolphins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group