Superhorn

Prior to his last run, Chris Johnson had rushed for 18 yards on 9 carries.  His success rate (using FO's metric) to that point was 22%.

 

His final run can't just be dismissed, of course.  It was important to the outcome of the game.  But, using YPC when discussing CJ doesn't tell the whole story (never has).

 

It's also at least worth pointing out that the Jets have suffered only one injury on their line, and have the benefit of working with arguably the best center in football (Mangold).  

 

This season for the Titans, statistics won't tell us much as it relates to our RBs.  The line play has just been atrocious.   Performance needs to be assessed through tape study.  Just my opinion, but I don't see Sankey leaving many plays on the field.

I find it hilarious some people are convinced Dalton has reached his ceiling, while Locker's ceiling is supposedly higher.

 

Exactly what is the ceiling for a guy who had major accuracy issues in college and 4 years into his pro career he's shown no sign they have been corrected for good?

I'll have a post up in the next couple of weeks on Locker.  I'm basically through all his "healthy" games.

 

I think Locker's accuracy "issues" are grossly overstated.  Through 3.5 games, the only "red flag" accuracy throws I found were a missed flag route to Delanie Walker, a poor decision (read: late) to throw to Kenny on a stick route, the missed throw to Kenny on the quick slant against Houston, and a poorly placed ball to Washington on a quick out.  There are a handful of others where ball placement might have influenced the play.  The rest of the accuracy problems were generally tied to poor line play.  The Houston game (JJ Watt put on a clinic against Warmack) was particularly bad.

 

I'd qualify his throws outside the hashmarks as special.  Almost all thrown in rhythm when defense shows coverage with inside leverage.  Great anticipation and ball placement.  Basically uncoverable (no hyperbole.  Pete Carroll is in agreement.)

 

 

 

Locker has his problems.  I just don't think accuracy is one of them.  The first red flag that jumps out when I read a national article is when accuracy as an issue is highlighted.  It tells me the writer hasn't spent much time really digging into the tape.

 

Edit:  So, I'm not seeing that this is in response to a comment that is weeks old.  My opinion still stands, but this thread my no longer be relevant.

If this trade was straight up you do that then (we are changing systems anyway), see how he performs then resign him or release him... which wouldn't be the case.

Maybe some would then. I don't know.

I just thought their divide was interesting more than anything else. You don't see that kind of divide with other up and coming QBs like, say, Russell Wilson or Andrew Luck among their fanbases.

Someone go create an account at cincyjungle.com

Post this same question in reverse and ask them if they would trade away Dalton for Locker.

Come back here and post the link so us "yes" voters can laugh our asses off.

So we're clear, I'm not saying they would.

But, there's definitely a contingency there that wants to release Dalton after this year and move on.

Go check out Cincyjungle.com. That fan base is more divided about Dalton and the pending contract than you might expect.

Both, I guess.

More in general that the fanbase isn't universally sold on him as the long term future.

Don't mean as it relates to the trade.

Two thoughts on this from today:

1. If the Titans had Dalton, however average you may think he is, and they traded for a guy with Locker's history, however much you still hold out hope, I have zero doubt every single person would freak out. Every single person... and this belief of mine is unshakable. For whatever reason that means something to me in this analysis.

2. Dalton won't get Flacco money unless he pulls a Flacco and miraculously plays well in some playoff games en route to a fluky Super Bowl title. He'll get QB money, which is always large, but not Flacco money.

Go check out Cincyjungle.com. That fan base is more divided about Dalton and the pending contract than you might expect.

If Locker plays very well this year, though fairly unlikely, we could be shocked how big a contract he could get. The FA QB market is literally barren every year, guys like Fitz are usually the big prize, the decent ones just don't make it to FA. So believe me, if Jake puts up the year Dalton had last year, he'll be awfully close to Flacco money. 26 year old former top 10 picks with awesome athletic ability coming off 4300/32 year's don't hit FA. Ever.

If Jake Locker puts up one year of Dalton's numbers and gets Flacco money, how much money does Dalton, who's done it for 3 years, get then?

I'm not sure Dalton even gets apples=apples Flacco type deal. Is guess it's somewhere between Flacco and Kaep. Speculation among Bengals writers is the $15-17 mm cap range.

There is a large gap between what they got and a "middle of the road contract". Give me an example of a QB making a middle of the road deal.

 

If he signs some cheap deal for a QB it's because he had a pretty mediocre 2014 season

I think his situation is unique given that he's had so much trouble making it on the field.  So, I'm not sure I can give you a good example.

You'd pay Russell Wilson a monster deal but wouldn't pay someone like Rivers, Big Ben or Romo?

Rivers is a tough one for me.  It would depend on how big the deal came out to be.

 

I wouldn't pay Big Ben a monster deal.

 

I'd pay Romo at a top 10 level, but not as the #1 guy in the league (which is where his cap number sits next year).

Agreed.

For Christ sake Arizona has to pay like $8M for shitty Carson Palmer.

Comparatively, that is middle of the road.  I don't think Locker would command quite that much money.  

If Locker plays well enough to be kept I do not think he'll get a "middle of the road contract". They'll have to either franchise him or pony up to keep him off the market

I don't see a scenario where he commands the same kind of contract that Kaep and Flacco have received.  I think it would be far less.

I get your theory but who are these adequate QB's not making money?

And when they do break out and become "good enough to win with" then they are only cheap for a season or two before they become highly paid.

I just don't see how you are going to pay a QB better than Dalton less money unless you get lucky in the draft.

It's an opportunity cost thing.

 

And, it's an insanely difficult situation for me if I'm the GM of the Bengals.  He's just good enough to keep them consistently competitive for as long as he plays.  Jeff Fisher competitive.  But, between him and the money that AJ Green is about to command...it's the Lions all over again.

 

People want to win now, and Dalton would help with that, but I don't think he'd ever get us to the highest levels.

 

I like the Seahawks method.  Build without a QB.  And, you're right, you do have to get lucky to an extent in the draft.  But, the Seahawks would be really good without Wilson too.  I think the same could be said for the 49ers (we saw this pre-Kaep).  Build from the inside out.  Become excellent at the fundamentals and create an environment where you're a QB away from competing for the whole thing.

 

Now, were my opinion that Dalton could become upper echelon (Brees, Manning, Rodgers, etc), then I would gladly pay him that money.  I'd give Wilson a monster contract.  I think he's worth it.

 

I'm kind of in the minority, but I love what Webster's doing.  HIs approach is the right one, IMO.  

Having your QB suck up 10% of the cap is nothing. NFL contracts favor the teams in every possible way. Come up with a better argument.

It's not really an argument.  It's my opinion and how I'd handle the situation.

 

I can't on board with paying an above average QB the most money of any player on the team.  

Here's an interesting stat.

If you look at the top 100 players in terms of cap hit next season, 16 of the top 50 are QB's.

Then there are zero QB's from 51-100.

In other words, if you have a solid QB you pay him because otherwise you have no shot at winning a Super Bowl.

Sure, you could draft a rookie and pay him less but he most likely won't win you a Super Bowl until year 4 or 5 when you've gotta start paying him those dollars anyway.

Seahawks just managed to win the Super Bowl with a QB on his rookie deal.  49ers have been Nationally competitive with a QB on his rookie deal.

 

This is a relatively new phenomenon, too.  New rookie wage scale is only a few years old.  

Basically you don't think either guy is worth a second deal, so you'd rather keep the worse player since he gives you the best shot at drafting a new one?

Eh.  Not really.

 

For Dalton, yes.  I don't think he'll be worth the money he'll command.

 

For Locker, it's different because he won't command that kind of money.

 

My position is basically that if you want to be in contention to win the league you either need:

a) an elite QB

or

a great team with at least an adequate quarterback.

 

I think it's very challenging to build a great team with above average QB that's being paid 10-15+% of the cap space.  

 

Sticking with Locker one of two things happen.  Either he fizzles and you go back to the drawing board.  Or, he plays well enough to get paid a middle of the road contract.  Both these situations allow you to keep rebuilding this team from the inside out, which is the way I'd prefer to build a team.

 

At the end of the day, we do need a QB that's at least above average to be meaningfully competitive.  That's not lost on me.   

As of right now, Kaep's cap hit next season is #10 at the QB position. Chances are it will be closer to #15 once some other deals get redone.

In other words, his cap hit is middle of the road for his position.

True.

 

But, of those guys above him (in order - Romo, Brees, P. Manning, E. Manning, Ryan, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Stafford, Rivers), only Brees, Manning and Rodgers are capable of carrying their teams while they are burdened with their contracts.

 

Making a player that - again, in my opinion - is only above average the highest paid player on the team isn't something I'd do as a GM.  

Yes, only because they chose to structure it that way.

I was talking cash, not funny money.

Funny money or not, it will impact their ability to pursue other free agents and resign other players.

From our perspective, it would really jeopardize our ability to resign Casey. We have ~$18 mm in cap room now.

And look, I get your position. Out disagreement lies in a subjective opinion of what Dalton can or can't do. For me, it almost has nothing to do with Locker. That is, I'd prefer to just redraft before I'd want to sign Dalton to a Kaep like deal.

Once again, the contract nonsense is a red herring. The market has been set. Non elite QBs are going to get big money however good teams know how to guard against it killing the cap. Kaepernick's contract comes to mind. it's also absurd to suggest Locker has flashed some sort of incredible skill that Dalton can only dream about having himself.

A red herring that accounts for 10% of cap allocation!

Kapernick's new deal costs about only $13M per year for the first 3 years. It doesn't escalate until year 4 and it doesn't hit $20M until year 7.

The team also has the option to cut him and move on without penalty on a year by year basis.

It's not a big money deal by any means in today's game. Heck, it's close to what we were paying CJ.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/colin-kaepernick/

$17 mm cap hit next year.

I don't really agree but even if I did I'dtake a guy who needs a solid supporting cast to win over a guy who can't play.

Let's assume Locker stays healthy and puts up Dalton like numbers. He's not going to play for peanuts.

I don't see anything that shows Locker has the potential to become a guy who can win without a strong supporting cast.

If Locker plays like Dalton, I wouldn't pay him either.

He would need to play better than Dalton has to date, which is unlikely to happen. I don't think it's probable, but it is possible.

I think Dalton is above average. It's my opinion that he won't elevate to the top teir. That's subjective. But, given that position, I think it's tough to build around a QB that isn't good enough to carry a team unless you can do so on their rookie deal.

Dalton's play is far superior to VY's, it's not like Dalton compiled his record the same way VY did, it's not even close.

Meant it tongue in cheek. I don't think wins are a good way to evaluate QB play.

You think 96 experts looking at film of these guys results in a mixed bag?

I think it's pretty clear Dalton wins the film contest in a landslide.

I meant that when combined with the cap liability it is a mixed bag.

I'm a huge Dalton fan, but he isn't worth the cap number that will be associated with his play.

As I said before, all things being equal contractually, I'd take Dalton over Locker.

Dalton has publicly said he does not want a big contract and is willing to sign for something similar to what Keapernick got (basically a year by year deal).

So the whole contract argument is not a valid one.

Kaepernicks deal may not have the same liability as Flaccos, but it still does cost $17 mm- $21 mm/ year against the cap depending on the year.

Numbers like that would really limit our ability to resign players like Casey and Wright. And, I'm not sure Dalton can win without a solid supporting cast.

1. No he hasn't. He's shown flashes that he can possibly be above average if you hide him well enough. That's not special. The few games in which Locker looked decent were instances where the coaches put him in "stick and move" situations. They never allowed him to try and out-swing his opponent. Just jab, move, duck the headshots and hope the other guy tires himself out. That's Lockerball. Too bad it's getting you no where in today's NFL.

 

2. Name me ONE QB that has done as well as Dalton's done, yet completely hitting his ceiling in year 3. 

Eh.  I did say flashes.  

 

I only somewhat disagree about the "Lockerball" bit.  I didn't think they hid him against San Diego or the Jets.  

 

As for #2 - Drew Bledsoe?  Jeff Garcia?  *Edit:  Should have included Carson Palmer here too.  

 

I'll leave it at that.  I generally don't like those sorts of comparisons because (like team wins) they have far to many variables, and the game has changed dramatically in even just the past 10 years.

 

I like Dalton.  Let me be clear about that.  I'm not disputing that he's clearly better than Locker at this point.  I just don't see enough talent from him to warrant the money that he's going to command (ie. an average of $20mm against the cap each year and a long term commitment).

If you had all 96 current NFL head coaches, offensive coordinators and defensive coordinators watch all of the tape on Locker and Dalton, how many do you think would trade away Locker for Dalton?

Shit, I don't know.

 

I think it's kind of a mixed bag.  

 

Locker remains a total question mark.  An unknown to me for the most part, though one that has at least shown glimpses of something special.

 

Alternatively, I think Dalton is a known quantity.  I don't think his ceiling get much higher.  He's limited in what he can do, but he's more than capable of winning with the right people around him.

 

Problem is that Dalton is going to command stupid money soon.  Flacco money.  And, you can't build around a QB that way.  That monster contract will limit them.  Only the elite can elevate teams that are burdened with those sort of contracts (Brees, Brady, Manning, Rodgers).  

 

I mean, if we were just talking re-draft, then sure.  Take Dalton.  I think with this team as constructed now he would fit nicely into a team with a Horton run defense that runs the ball 50+% of the time.  But, I absolutely would not make that trade today with the future contract looming.

 

From my perspective, I'd rather take a shot on Locker.  If he succeeds, you're not looking at the same sort of mega deal.  If he fails, you reboot.

 

I prefer this - more or less - binary result.  I realize that preference may not be for everybody.