Jump to content
.Buzz

Free Agent Tracker: News and Notes

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, .Buzz said:

No thanks.

Better then spending 10 million or so for schobert.  

Any thing over 2.5-3 and i pass. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LinderFournette said:

Better then spending 10 million or so for schobert.  

Any thing over 2.5-3 and i pass. 

Yeah, definitely prefer being cheap with no one on the horizon to spend on and instead get a bottom tier LB to throw out there and continue seeing trash rather than a potentially slightly overpaid yet good LB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d really like Nick Kwiatkoski. Should be cheaper than Schobert/Littleton and looked good filling in for Danny Trevathan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chops013 said:

I’d really like Nick Kwiatkoski. Should be cheaper than Schobert/Littleton and looked good filling in for Danny Trevathan.

Was very impressed. I was living in Chicago last year and he was always in the right spot. Crazy that Chicago would let him go unless he's wanting too much. The promise is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's one LB off the market...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2020 at 1:35 PM, .Buzz said:

Yeah, definitely prefer being cheap with no one on the horizon to spend on and instead get a bottom tier LB to throw out there and continue seeing trash rather than a potentially slightly overpaid yet good LB.

he was 13th in run defense per PFF.  all we need is a 2 down guy and we can sub in a guy like Quincy williams into the nickle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LinderFournette said:

he was 13th in run defense per PFF.  all we need is a 2 down guy and we can sub in a guy like Quincy williams into the nickle. 

If you think that's all we need at LB then I suggest you go back and watch the games.

Depending on Quincy would be dumb. You hope he takes a step forward but banking on that would be a terrible mistske.

We didn't have a single LB play even average last year. The hope is Jack turns it around/moves to WLB, but if all we do is pick up a pedestrian LB in FA I'm going to be pissed unless we take one on the first 2-3 rounds of the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, .Buzz said:

If you think that's all we need at LB then I suggest you go back and watch the games.

Depending on Quincy would be dumb. You hope he takes a step forward but banking on that would be a terrible mistske.

We didn't have a single LB play even average last year. The hope is Jack turns it around/moves to WLB, but if all we do is pick up a pedestrian LB in FA I'm going to be pissed unless we take one on the first 2-3 rounds of the draft.

It's one of those positions where just one decent patch can go a long ways.  At least...if it's someone good enough to settle the other two guys down.  Like...just having decent play around him, could really help Jack regain form.  It's weird, in that the LBer play was so brutal last year...but when your position group is basically just 2.5 players, just one "upgrade" can go a long ways.  It's just the reverse of how much worse things got when we lost 1.5 pieces of our best in the league LBer corps.

But yeah, i think we need more than just a Poz replacement basically.  We pretty much need to find a quality MLB to slot things in appropriately.  Or an absolute studly top notch WLB and that 2-down thumper might work.  Just can't rely on Quincy to miraculously become a stud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tugboat said:

It's one of those positions where just one decent patch can go a long ways.  At least...if it's someone good enough to settle the other two guys down.  Like...just having decent play around him, could really help Jack regain form.  It's weird, in that the LBer play was so brutal last year...but when your position group is basically just 2.5 players, just one "upgrade" can go a long ways.  It's just the reverse of how much worse things got when we lost 1.5 pieces of our best in the league LBer corps.

But yeah, i think we need more than just a Poz replacement basically.  We pretty much need to find a quality MLB to slot things in appropriately.  Or an absolute studly top notch WLB and that 2-down thumper might work.  Just can't rely on Quincy to miraculously become a stud.

Quincy has great talent and eventually he may become something. But right now he's just a project that can't be counted on.

I think Kwitkoski, Schobert, etc. need to be legit targets unless the plan is to get Queen/Murray or another high caliber LB in the draft.

Sounds like Martinez's market won't be robust with most teams trying to go with more fast LBs. Not ideal but he'd help with the interior run D problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

Quincy has great talent and eventually he may become something. But right now he's just a project that can't be counted on.

I think Kwitkoski, Schobert, etc. need to be legit targets unless the plan is to get Queen/Murray or another high caliber LB in the draft.

Sounds like Martinez's market won't be robust with most teams trying to go with more fast LBs. Not ideal but he'd help with the interior run D problems.

Yeah.  I think we saw in the past that we could probably get away with one of those more "limited" types that the league is going away from.  In a sorta tag-team rotation with Jack going back to that hybrid SAM/MIKE role.  Always tricky though, to make a significant signing or use a significant draft pick on a guy you only really intend to play 2 downs.  The optics can really get in the way, and lead to forcing them into a bigger role that exposes their limitations.  But there's also probably some nice "value" in that approach if you can sell it and stick to a plan.  Using a bit of a "specialist" niche player.  It's what the good teams often do.  Finding players who can make a disproportionate positive impact in a specialized role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tugboat said:

Yeah.  I think we saw in the past that we could probably get away with one of those more "limited" types that the league is going away from.  In a sorta tag-team rotation with Jack going back to that hybrid SAM/MIKE role.  Always tricky though, to make a significant signing or use a significant draft pick on a guy you only really intend to play 2 downs.  The optics can really get in the way, and lead to forcing them into a bigger role that exposes their limitations.  But there's also probably some nice "value" in that approach if you can sell it and stick to a plan.  Using a bit of a "specialist" niche player.  It's what the good teams often do.  Finding players who can make a disproportionate positive impact in a specialized role.

I think if we draft either of those LB I mentioned they play on 3rd down too. Very good speed/explosiveness from both. 

If we don't sign a guy of substance we will take a LB in first 3 rounds. Hopefully they're not from a small school that will have a big learning curve like Quincy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

I think if we draft either of those LB I mentioned they play on 3rd down too. Very good speed/explosiveness from both. 

If we don't sign a guy of substance we will take a LB in first 3 rounds. Hopefully they're not from a small school that will have a big learning curve like Quincy.

LBer also seems to be a position where there typically isn't as steep a learning curve compared to others.  We've seen a lot of guys around the league come in and make a major impact as rookies/sophomores lately.  Unless like you said, you're grabbing a small school guy like Quincy where the jump is a big one for anyone at any position.  But it does make it more attractive in some ways, to shop in the draft to potentially fill that hole.  Compared to other positions of need, where you generally can't expect a lot out of the gate...even with a top pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

🤔

Wasn't he like...not particularly good, and not very healthy for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×