Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 76
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by beastlyskronk View Post
    In regards to Gordon not having more 1k yard seasons, the oline while not 100% the issue is a big factor in it. Gordon in 2018 averaged 2.3 yards before contact, that same season Lindsay averaged 3.7 yards before contact. Gordon would have had an absurd 6.5 ypc if he averaged what Lindsay did. Last season Gordon averaged 1.9 yards before contact while Lindsay averaged 2.7 yards before contact. Freeman averaged an abysmal 1.5 and 1.8 showcasing that he lacks the explosion to get through the holes. Booker had 2.7 in 2018.

    Now thereís more to that than just the oline as I alluded to. Lindsay is a lot smaller and it does benefit him in that heís hard to find and easy to slip through lanes. Gordon is a much bigger RB so he probably wonít match what Lindsay does in yards before contact. But I do expect his number to fall in line around what Booker got in 2018. Also I canít help but feel the ultra low squatty stance Gordon likes hurts his explosion. Itís fine for short yardage situations as it allows him to get under defenders and drive but Adrian Peterson is the only RB that can pull that off consistently.

    Whatís more astonishing is that last season Lindsay broke a tackle every 7.7 carries, in comparison Derrick Henry broke a tackle every 10.4.
    Great insight. Overall, Gordon should be complimentary with his skills/size. I donít think it would be realistic for Lindsay to carry the workload. The main concern I had was the opportunity cost with cap used for the RB position compared with other needs. Heís on the roster now so at this point hopefully Gordonís best season is 2020.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    the gulf of mexico
    Posts
    16,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    Great insight. Overall, Gordon should be complimentary with his skills/size. I donít think it would be realistic for Lindsay to carry the workload. The main concern I had was the opportunity cost with cap used for the RB position compared with other needs. Heís on the roster now so at this point hopefully Gordonís best season is 2020.
    Normally Iíd agree with not spending big (relatively speaking) on a RB but for only 2 years it isnít bad at all. Iím not sure who is scheduled to be a FA next season but I donít think it will be a factor in resigning our own guys which is the most important aspect to success IMO. Another solid draft class likely minimizes the need to be big spenders in FA next season and the majority of our deals this offseason have been short and easy to move off of giving us ample room to fit in extensions for guys like Sutton, Chubb, and Lock down the line. Glasgow was an ideal FA signing IMO, young, durable, and a very solid player that still has room to develop. I believe this should and will ultimately be the norm for us as long as Lock is here, signing one or two bigger names to reasonable deals. Setting the market every offseason (see James) is a recipe for disaster and is more likely to set you up to be a feeder team than a contender.

    Ultimately though everything depends on the development of Lock so signing Gordon, Glasgow, and even Vannett gets an A+ for me. Giving him weapons that can contribute in a variety of ways will only speed up his development and the better he gets, the better the guys around him will play because heís a genuine leader that guys respond positively to. After the draft I fully expect us to have a dynamic WR and a quality interior olineman whether at C or RG as well as a high upside OT to sit and develop this year. This draft should net us the core of our offense for the foreseeable future.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,174
    I don't really like the Gordon signing.

    That said, it's only a 2 year sentence. And he does provide a lot of optionality for Shurmur with his receiving ability. And having the ability to punch the ball in from 1st and goal is something we've been painfully bad at the last 4 years. So I'm glad to finally have someone in the building who can do that.

    I hate paying big money for running back. If you do it, though, keep the commitment short. We at least did that so I'm happy.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,512
    For a back or Gordon's value this is a deal. When run cmc Barkley and Kamara hit the market this will look like a great deal for a very good maybe not elite rb

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyousukeneko View Post
    For a back or Gordon's value this is a deal. When run cmc Barkley and Kamara hit the market this will look like a great deal for a very good maybe not elite rb
    One 1000 yard season and only once exceeding 4.0 yards/rush in five seasons is not elite. Just a bit ridiculous, eh?

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    One 1000 yard season and only once exceeding 4.0 yards/rush in five seasons is not elite. Just a bit ridiculous, eh?
    no offense but we are not gonna see eye to eye on this. so you should move on and just ignore what i say. i am probably gonna do that moving forward. that was my final statement and you can think of it what you want.

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by beastlyskronk View Post
    Normally Iíd agree with not spending big (relatively speaking) on a RB but for only 2 years it isnít bad at all. Iím not sure who is scheduled to be a FA next season but I donít think it will be a factor in resigning our own guys which is the most important aspect to success IMO. Another solid draft class likely minimizes the need to be big spenders in FA next season and the majority of our deals this offseason have been short and easy to move off of giving us ample room to fit in extensions for guys like Sutton, Chubb, and Lock down the line. Glasgow was an ideal FA signing IMO, young, durable, and a very solid player that still has room to develop. I believe this should and will ultimately be the norm for us as long as Lock is here, signing one or two bigger names to reasonable deals. Setting the market every offseason (see James) is a recipe for disaster and is more likely to set you up to be a feeder team than a contender.

    Ultimately though everything depends on the development of Lock so signing Gordon, Glasgow, and even Vannett gets an A+ for me. Giving him weapons that can contribute in a variety of ways will only speed up his development and the better he gets, the better the guys around him will play because heís a genuine leader that guys respond positively to. After the draft I fully expect us to have a dynamic WR and a quality interior olineman whether at C or RG as well as a high upside OT to sit and develop this year. This draft should net us the core of our offense for the foreseeable future.
    I agree overall. Where I would differ slightly is the impact this season vs next. Signing Gordon, Glasgow and Vannett should help Lock. We still donít have the necessary talent and/or depth at OT. Sure James is supposed to be the guy at RT but heís a high risk given his inability to stay on the field. Bolles hasnít proven he can consistently protect the blind slide. The plan could be for Vannett to help Bolles, which would say a lot about Bolles. Poor play at tackle on either side could equally impact Lockís development in the wrong direction. While itís hopeful to think weíll draft the talent to shore up the tackles on both sides, itís not like having veteran experience. There are some solid veteran tackles out there - maybe Elway is waiting for the right time to use remaining cap space.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyousukeneko View Post
    no offense but we are not gonna see eye to eye on this. so you should move on and just ignore what i say. i am probably gonna do that moving forward. that was my final statement and you can think of it what you want.
    I donít take offense from anything said here by you or anyone. People agree and disagree on topics which is good, it makes the board interesting. Everyone needs to adhere to the CoC - I would encourage you to check your posts and ask yourself if you were truly honoring the CoC.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Pittsburg, KS :(
    Posts
    3,468
    Ronald Darby is still available, I imagine he could be gotten for cheap? I know he has had some injury issues of late but could still bring starting caliber to the CB room. Cheap is ~2M, 1-2 year deal with incentives.
    The Broncos should get Wolfe re-signed still too... I hope.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    I agree overall. Where I would differ slightly is the impact this season vs next. Signing Gordon, Glasgow and Vannett should help Lock. We still don’t have the necessary talent and/or depth at OT. Sure James is supposed to be the guy at RT but he’s a high risk given his inability to stay on the field. Bolles hasn’t proven he can consistently protect the blind slide. The plan could be for Vannett to help Bolles, which would say a lot about Bolles. Poor play at tackle on either side could equally impact Lock’s development in the wrong direction. While it’s hopeful to think we’ll draft the talent to shore up the tackles on both sides, it’s not like having veteran experience. There are some solid veteran tackles out there - maybe Elway is waiting for the right time to use remaining cap space.
    Agree with this and the comments about adding weapons for Lock. An aspect of line play that's often not talked about in terms of helping the QB is having an effective running game to set up reasonable conversions. Lock can extend plays, get faster at reading defenses, and have weapons at WR, TE, and RB, but if he's constantly in 3rd and 8+, those weapons aren't going to matter. We need the line to open holes for RBs consistently to create opportunities for Lock. I'm not convinced we have the talent to do that now. I like the Glasgow signing, and hopefully we come out of the draft with another interior starter and some developmental players. Relying on Bolles and James as it seems we are, I think we have to expect an uneven run game that will put Lock into some bad situations. We're just not going to get all the way there upgrading the oline in one offseason.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by brianmcfarlane View Post
    Ronald Darby is still available, I imagine he could be gotten for cheap? I know he has had some injury issues of late but could still bring starting caliber to the CB room. Cheap is ~2M, 1-2 year deal with incentives.
    The Broncos should get Wolfe re-signed still too... I hope.
    If heís still available, a 1-year prove it deal might be a fit.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Personally I think the comparison of Booker to Gordon is silly and degraded the real discussion points. I don't agree that Booker is even in the same league as Gordon, but I don't like the signing.

    I think it was a waste of money, but I hope to be proven wrong. I saw one expert give the signing a D+ and another give it an F. I agree with that analysis. Reminds me, to a smaller degree, of what Elway did last year with Flacco. Personally I think he is putting too much stock in his memories of aging veterans. I am happy it was only 2 years and would hope to be surprised. We need a strong running game, but I believe that requires a bit more investment in our OL. Like many others I am hoping we use an early draft pick or two on OL. We will get a stronger running game by improving the line faster than we will by upgrading at RB, IMO.

    And for the record, I am not overly critical of Elway. I like many things he has done. He seems to have learned to draft better and some of his moves this year seem really solid. I am just not a fan of this one, but it isn't a lot of money or a long term contract.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    If he’s still available, a 1-year prove it deal might be a fit.
    Love the idea of Darby on a 1 year deal. I think he has significant potential. I am actually a little surprised the Eagles haven't brought him back on a short term contract. Even with Slay they could use another CB.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by dgobronco View Post
    Agree with this and the comments about adding weapons for Lock. An aspect of line play that's often not talked about in terms of helping the QB is having an effective running game to set up reasonable conversions. Lock can extend plays, get faster at reading defenses, and have weapons at WR, TE, and RB, but if he's constantly in 3rd and 8+, those weapons aren't going to matter. We need the line to open holes for RBs consistently to create opportunities for Lock. I'm not convinced we have the talent to do that now. I like the Glasgow signing, and hopefully we come out of the draft with another interior starter and some developmental players. Relying on Bolles and James as it seems we are, I think we have to expect an uneven run game that will put Lock into some bad situations. We're just not going to get all the way there upgrading the oline in one offseason.
    Agree. With Munchak I still believe Wilkinson can develop into a starter at OT. I know he struggled at times last season however heís coachable. Glasgow and Risner should be a force on the interior. I wonder if weíll see Wilkinson end up at RG with Glasgow at C, depending on how things shake out. Still time in free agency and cap to work with, so I wouldnít be surprised to see a veteran tackle signed.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by myoung View Post
    Personally I think the comparison of Booker to Gordon is silly and degraded the real discussion points. I don't agree that Booker is even in the same league as Gordon, but I don't like the signing.

    I think it was a waste of money, but I hope to be proven wrong. I saw one expert give the signing a D+ and another give it an F. I agree with that analysis. Reminds me, to a smaller degree, of what Elway did last year with Flacco. Personally I think he is putting too much stock in his memories of aging veterans. I am happy it was only 2 years and would hope to be surprised. We need a strong running game, but I believe that requires a bit more investment in our OL. Like many others I am hoping we use an early draft pick or two on OL. We will get a stronger running game by improving the line faster than we will by upgrading at RB, IMO.

    And for the record, I am not overly critical of Elway. I like many things he has done. He seems to have learned to draft better and some of his moves this year seem really solid. I am just not a fan of this one, but it isn't a lot of money or a long term contract.
    I picked the wrong example with Booker. It was the thought of spending a lot at the position when you should be able to find similar skills at a lower price.

    As far as Booker goes, his receiving and blocking skills are as good as Gordon, even with fewer reps. His yards after contact rushing are right there with Gordon.
    Last edited by Fantaztic7; 03-26-2020 at 04:32 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •