Moretti's Post SB Mock

[pacman5252]

12 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

RT is still a downgrade for this year. We need to be playing for this year. 

Graham was still the best TE on the team last year. Sternberger hasn't shown a damn thing that should convince anybody that he's anything.

Speed that sucks at football doesn't help us and every single one of those LBs that you have listed sucks at football. Martinez isn't the one that needed to be replaced with more speed this year, that was Goodson. ILBs are still predominantly run defense players.

He drafted a guy to play slot corner that has never played slot corner. 

This off-season barely move the needle on the DL. How anybody could watch that Superbowl and conclude that the modern NFL calls for non pass rushing defensive lineman is beyond me. 

This off-season significantly worsens the ILB group.

Martinez was not a significant issue this year. Why is everybody acting like he was? What the hell are you going to tell your safeties when you have Reddick and Burks as your ILBs against a Shanahan defense. We would die.

 

RT- The argument for not resigning Bulaga is the classic, move off a year early than a year late. He legitimately could fall of a cliff. What ever option we pursue (resigning an older Bulaga, going elsewhere) is a downgrade to 2019 Bulaga

Grahm still wasn't good. TE's historically take more time. Grahm wasn't much better than in prime Richard Rodgers.

ILB- Literally the entire argument that people are making for not resigning Blake is "we need a guy who isn't a whole in coverage." Goodson was also fine for his 20 snaps a game roll.  The big point is if we want, with our current options, we have athletic ability to put a guy in who can cover.

DL- he has us signing/drafting 2. Considering resources, you can't really do much more than that realistically.

 

 

 

[AlexGreen#20]

6 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

RT- The argument for not resigning Bulaga is the classic, move off a year early than a year late. He legitimately could fall of a cliff. What ever option we pursue (resigning an older Bulaga, going elsewhere) is a downgrade to 2019 Bulaga

Grahm still wasn't good. TE's historically take more time. Grahm wasn't much better than in prime Richard Rodgers.

ILB- Literally the entire argument that people are making for not resigning Blake is "we need a guy who isn't a whole in coverage." Goodson was also fine for his 20 snaps a game roll.  The big point is if we want, with our current options, we have athletic ability to put a guy in who can cover.

DL- he has us signing/drafting 2. Considering resources, you can't really do much more than that realistically.

Is there any reason to conclude Bulaga can't have the same year in 2020 as he did in 2019? The days of moving on a year early need to be over. There's a strong argument to be made that next year is the last opportunity in the Aaron Rodgers era to win before his salary gets out of control. 

That is fine with Graham. It's still a downgrade.

The argument against Blake shouldn't have anything to do with coverage and should be based around not paying ILBs 10 per year. What on Earth makes you think any of these guys you have up there will be better cover guys than Martinez? That certainly isn't the case with Burks. Speed doesn't equate to coverage ability. This isn't ******* Madden.

Goodson is dreadful in coverage. Him giving up that 30 yarder against the 49ers was the classic example of why he was being kept off the field. 

Which two guys on the DL? Adding one run plug isn't fixing this thing.

[moretti19]

The statement alone that Odell Beckham won’t draw double coverage says enough about your football IQ to me. 

[AlexGreen#20]

12 minutes ago, moretti19 said:

The statement alone that Odell Beckham won’t draw double coverage says enough about your football IQ to me. 

Can you even define Double Coverage?

[Norm]

14 minutes ago, moretti19 said:

The statement alone that Odell Beckham won’t draw double coverage says enough about your football IQ to me. 

lol

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Can you even define Double Coverage?

This is OBJ every play

If you can't see that then I really don't think you have a low football IQ

[Joe]

Just saw this for the first time. Major no on Vaitai. Dude's a turnstile. Hate the trade for Beckham because you're giving up way too much and if anything goes wrong he becomes a drama queen. Plus, where do you put him? He's not a slot and in an offense that's becoming more run heavy, he'd get very frustrated, very quickly. No way Epenesa gets to pick 30 either. 

[mikemike778]

The big issue with trades like this is that you paying the salary and the draft picks.

Whilst we desperately need weapons on offence, we also need to get younger on offence. Most of the better offensive players are old due to the draft strategy of basically ignoring the offence. This is another draft where you don't touch offence until round 5.

With OBJ's salary you could probably get Bulaga and sign the three draft picks so you are giving up 4 players making that trade. If you are making that commitment to the offence I would rather sign Bulaga and draft receivers with the 2nd and 4th picks you gave up. With the way the draft is set up that gives you a great chance of really revitalising the receiving group with young talent, balance the age profile of the offence much better and you get to keep Bulaga. Plus you get your 6th to throw at someone. 

[Joe]

5 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

The big issue with trades like this is that you paying the salary and the draft picks.

Whilst we desperately need weapons on offence, we also need to get younger on offence. Most of the better offensive players are old due to the draft strategy of basically ignoring the offence. This is another draft where you don't touch offence until round 5.

With OBJ's salary you could probably get Bulaga and sign the three draft picks so you are giving up 4 players making that trade. If you are making that commitment to the offence I would rather sign Bulaga and draft receivers with the 2nd and 4th picks you gave up. With the way the draft is set up that gives you a great chance of really revitalising the receiving group with young talent, balance the age profile of the offence much better and you get to keep Bulaga. Plus you get your 6th to throw at someone. 

This...

You're actually downgrading the OL with letting Bulaga and Veldheer walk creating a massive hole at RT that's not addressed anywhere in the draft and, to reiterate, Vaitai is a turnstile who is HORRIBLE at Tackle. Not that you remember this, but I live in East Central PA and get all the Iggles games. Dude's a flat out liability when he's in the game and the sports radio stations eat him up regularly. 

So, given @mikemike778's suggestion, you resign Bulaga and could go IDL/ILB/OT at 30, WR at 62 and wherever we're picking in the 4th and still have a good draft haul in this scenario. Granted, I don't like Hassan Reddick, but I don't think we're going to like anyone at ILB this year...

[moretti19]

4 hours ago, pacman5252 said:

RT- The argument for not resigning Bulaga is the classic, move off a year early than a year late. He legitimately could fall of a cliff. What ever option we pursue (resigning an older Bulaga, going elsewhere) is a downgrade to 2019 Bulaga

Grahm still wasn't good. TE's historically take more time. Grahm wasn't much better than in prime Richard Rodgers.

ILB- Literally the entire argument that people are making for not resigning Blake is "we need a guy who isn't a whole in coverage." Goodson was also fine for his 20 snaps a game roll.  The big point is if we want, with our current options, we have athletic ability to put a guy in who can cover.

DL- he has us signing/drafting 2. Considering resources, you can't really do much more than that realistically.

 

 

 

Thank you!

[moretti19]

Bulaga scares me with his injury history. I think we are really downplaying the difference Odell could make for this offense but I fully understand why some would not want him.

[pacman5252]

7 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Is there any reason to conclude Bulaga can't have the same year in 2020 as he did in 2019? The days of moving on a year early need to be over. There's a strong argument to be made that next year is the last opportunity in the Aaron Rodgers era to win before his salary gets out of control. 

That is fine with Graham. It's still a downgrade.

The argument against Blake shouldn't have anything to do with coverage and should be based around not paying ILBs 10 per year. What on Earth makes you think any of these guys you have up there will be better cover guys than Martinez? That certainly isn't the case with Burks. Speed doesn't equate to coverage ability. This isn't ******* Madden.

Goodson is dreadful in coverage. Him giving up that 30 yarder against the 49ers was the classic example of why he was being kept off the field. 

Which two guys on the DL? Adding one run plug isn't fixing this thing.

Bulaga- He could have a similar year as 2019. He is also at the age where it is undeniable a year to year serious gamble.

Blake- The argument against Blake is two fold. He is too deficient in coverage to pay. If he was a legit 3 down LB, this board would be all over resigning him.

Goodson- Yes he does suck in coverage. That isn't his job though. He literally only played in base D and to take on blocks. Most teams have one of these guys. In 2018 this guy for us was Morrison.

DL- Run Plug guy and first round pick. 1+1=2

[AlexGreen#20]

10 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

Bulaga- He could have a similar year as 2019. He is also at the age where it is undeniable a year to year serious gamble.

Blake- The argument against Blake is two fold. He is too deficient in coverage to pay. If he was a legit 3 down LB, this board would be all over resigning him.

Goodson- Yes he does suck in coverage. That isn't his job though. He literally only played in base D and to take on blocks. Most teams have one of these guys. In 2018 this guy for us was Morrison.

DL- Run Plug guy and first round pick. 1+1=2

Blake Martinez played every 3rd down this season with the exception of like 2. If he was so bad in coverage surely Pettine would have pulled him for Burks, or Campbell, or Greene, or Sullivan, or somebody, at some point?

Blake Martinez supposedly being terrible in coverage is the most confusing seemingly universally accepted point that I have ever seen. What are people basing this on? That he looks white and doesn't run a 4.4? Surely if he was so bad somebody would be able to meet the challenge of giving me one example? 37 yards per game per PFR. He was just fine in coverage.

Goodson as the 3rd linebacker is fine. But he was the second linebacker last year. Goodson being awful in coverage is one of the reasons we played so light this year. His lack of ability (or more accurately managements inability to find a second ILB) really damaged this defense.

The first round pick is an edge rusher. Not a defensive lineman.

[pacman5252]

22 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Blake Martinez played every 3rd down this season with the exception of like 2. If he was so bad in coverage surely Pettine would have pulled him for Burks, or Campbell, or Greene, or Sullivan, or somebody, at some point?

Blake Martinez supposedly being terrible in coverage is the most confusing seemingly universally accepted point that I have ever seen. What are people basing this on? That he looks white and doesn't run a 4.4? Surely if he was so bad somebody would be able to meet the challenge of giving me one example? 37 yards per game per PFR. He was just fine in coverage.

Goodson as the 3rd linebacker is fine. But he was the second linebacker last year. Goodson being awful in coverage is one of the reasons we played so light this year. His lack of ability (or more accurately managements inability to find a second ILB) really damaged this defense.

The first round pick is an edge rusher. Not a defensive lineman.

Martinez- was kept in on third down as he was the green dot guy on our defense. Literally all the grading sites had him as subpar in coverage.

Goodson- He was a block absorbing thumper we only used vim certain matchups. In that role he’s fine. In our defense and against most team, we only need 1 ILB 

AJ would play end for us

[AlexGreen#20]

22 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

Martinez- was kept in on third down as he was the green dot guy on our defense. Literally all the grading sites had him as subpar in coverage.

Goodson- He was a block absorbing thumper we only used vim certain matchups. In that role he’s fine. In our defense and against most team, we only need 1 ILB 

AJ would play end for us

Which sites? PFR has him just fine. PFF is the only one that doesn't like Martinez. 

Goodson was just fine in his ideal roles, but every loss we had this year involved us playing really light and getting run over because we didn't want to play Goodson. Goodson isn't in his ideal role on this roster.