View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:07 pm



Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Jonathan Martin 
Author Message
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Jonathan Martin
Is it just me, or did anyone else see improved play from the left tackle position once Martin took over??? I know he gave up one sack, but initially the protection was good, that was a pressure sack and Tannehill should have gotten the ball out or throw it away. In my opinion, Martin looks much more comfortable at LT than RT. Perhaps we should consider a shift??? Martin at LT and Long at RT?


Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:24 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
That's exactly why I'm not losing sleep over Long, and why you don't spend first round picks on lineman....


Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:29 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3823
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Phins Rock wrote:
That's exactly why I'm not losing sleep over Long, and why you don't spend first round picks on lineman....


Exactly right on.

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:48 pm
Profile
Phinfever Rookie
Phinfever Rookie

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 33
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
It makes it harder to hand Long a MEGA contract this offseason, even spending about $13 mil for the Franchise tag seems a waste when we could sign a couple skill players to help Tanny with that money. Finding a decent RT is less of an issue than a LT.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:00 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2435
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Agreed....I wanted them to trade Long early this year. Now I would be happy just to let him go. Save the cap money. Don't we also get a compensatory pick if that happens?

Martin is a natural LT. Bring in a RT with a mid round pick or free agency. This team needs a top WR, a cornerback, and a pass rusher. Might be nice to pick up another WR and a safety as well.

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:22 pm
Profile
Phinfever Rookie
Phinfever Rookie

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:25 pm
Posts: 85
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
It looks like martin will get a test run at left tackle for the rest of the year. Early reports are saying long might get shut down with a torn triceps.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:32 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6293
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
i think we saw today that we are OK without Jake Long. If he wants too much and there is a solid veteran right tackle, we could move Martin to his natural spot at left.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:39 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
My opinion of our left tackle position is this. Martin will get a five game tryout to see whether or not he is capable of being our long term answer at left tackle. He has a very good test next week against a strong 49ers front. If he's able to hold his own in that game, and play well the remainder of the season, then I see no reason to spend big money to keep Jake Long. I'd rather take the compensatory pick and move on. There are several good young tackle prospects in the draft that we could take and put over on the right side. But first we need to see if Martin can handle the responsibility for the remainder of the season.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 3:29 pm
Profile
Phinfever Draft Insider
Phinfever Draft Insider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pm
Posts: 3424
Location: Columbia, SC
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
My opinion of our left tackle position is this. Martin will get a five game tryout to see whether or not he is capable of being our long term answer at left tackle. He has a very good test next week against a strong 49ers front. If he's able to hold his own in that game, and play well the remainder of the season, then I see no reason to spend big money to keep Jake Long. I'd rather take the compensatory pick and move on. There are several good young tackle prospects in the draft that we could take and put over on the right side. But first we need to see if Martin can handle the responsibility for the remainder of the season.



Exactly. Martin looked much more comfortable on the left side today, and if he plays well at OLT the rest of the year, Jake is gone in my opinion.

_________________
Image


Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:16 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Jonathan Martin was playing against Chandler Jones's back-up.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

_________________
Image


Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:27 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
Jonathan Martin was playing against Chandler Jones's back-up.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.


True, that's why I said that the remainder of the season should be treated like a tryout if you will. Lets see what the kid can do against San Francisco next week as well as the remainder of the schedule. If he plays well, then we don't need to fork over a ton of money for Long. If he stinks it up, then we'll probably have to franchise Jake at the least.

What I saw today was a huge improvement. I saw a kid who looks much more comfortable on the left side than he does the right. The kid has looked a step slow all season long on the right side and the position just hasn't become natural for him yet. But there was no mistaking that he made the switch from right to left today with very little effort. A guy who hasn't played the left side all season long suddenly takes over and does very well, that isn't a fluke.

He looked very fluid and natural playing on the left side today. He was a step ahead of his guy every play and we were even able to run to his side with success at times. His technique, his attitude, everything about him looked better. Did his opponent play a part, sure, but you can't deny this was one of his best games all year.

He had a good game in my opinion.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:34 pm
Profile
Phinfever Draft Insider
Phinfever Draft Insider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pm
Posts: 3424
Location: Columbia, SC
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
As I mentioned on the show tonight, Tom Condom is Jake's agent. I don't see him taking less even though Jake's play warrant his contract reflecting this. I see Tom wanting to get in the range of OLT Joe Thomas of Cleveland.

At this point, Jake is not in that caliber of player, and he has been hurt now for 3 straight seasons. I also don't see Jake switching to RT and keeping Jonathan at OLT, thus I think Jake is gone if Martin plays well these last few games at OLT.

_________________
Image


Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:17 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5842
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
Jonathan Martin was playing against Chandler Jones's back-up.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.


He did a good job. Lets see if he can build on it. I agree its too soon to dub him the answer but I'd like to see if this potential has some legs.


Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:46 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
phinsfansc wrote:
As I mentioned on the show tonight, Tom Condom is Jake's agent. I don't see him taking less even though Jake's play warrant his contract reflecting this. I see Tom wanting to get in the range of OLT Joe Thomas of Cleveland.

At this point, Jake is not in that caliber of player, and he has been hurt now for 3 straight seasons. I also don't see Jake switching to RT and keeping Jonathan at OLT, thus I think Jake is gone if Martin plays well these last few games at OLT.


The 49ers will be a nice test for Martin, if he does well and finishes out the season strong, all bets are off.

I get what you're saying regarding Long's agent, but at the end of the day it isn't as if teams don't know that Long's play has declined and he has missed games the past two (not three) years. If he hits the open market, he isn't going to get Joe Thomas type money and I am sure he and his agent know that. They may try because there is no harm in trying, but he isn't going to get that type of deal.

And if he does, so be it. We let him walk. But if we can bring him back at a fair price, we should and let the positions sort themselves out later.

_________________
Image


Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:01 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6568
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
But if we can bring him back at a fair price, we should and let the positions sort themselves out later.

At this point, it's all about money regarding Long.


Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:50 am
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer
Phinfever Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:43 pm
Posts: 4582
Location: Wellington, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
dolfan91 wrote:
It looks like martin will get a test run at left tackle for the rest of the year. Early reports are saying long might get shut down with a torn triceps.


Sounds good to me, will give a better look at other options we already have going into the off season. If we can fill Jake's spot with a player we already have that would be great.

Need something to happen with the line...

_________________
Caveat: These are the opinions of this user, and may differ from your opinion. Please use common sense before taking offense.
Reply may contain sarcasm


Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:53 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
phinsfansc wrote:
As I mentioned on the show tonight, Tom Condom is Jake's agent. I don't see him taking less even though Jake's play warrant his contract reflecting this. I see Tom wanting to get in the range of OLT Joe Thomas of Cleveland.

At this point, Jake is not in that caliber of player, and he has been hurt now for 3 straight seasons. I also don't see Jake switching to RT and keeping Jonathan at OLT, thus I think Jake is gone if Martin plays well these last few games at OLT.


The 49ers will be a nice test for Martin, if he does well and finishes out the season strong, all bets are off.

I get what you're saying regarding Long's agent, but at the end of the day it isn't as if teams don't know that Long's play has declined and he has missed games the past two (not three) years. If he hits the open market, he isn't going to get Joe Thomas type money and I am sure he and his agent know that. They may try because there is no harm in trying, but he isn't going to get that type of deal.

And if he does, so be it. We let him walk. But if we can bring him back at a fair price, we should and let the positions sort themselves out later.


What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:26 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


League minimum with incentives.

But I'd rather get whatever type of compensatory pick we can get for him. It'll probably be a 6th round or later because I doubt anyone will give him much of a contract coming off of yet another injury


Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:16 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2435
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Quote:

The 49ers will be a nice test for Martin, if he does well and finishes out the season strong, all bets are off.

I get what you're saying regarding Long's agent, but at the end of the day it isn't as if teams don't know that Long's play has declined and he has missed games the past two (not three) years. If he hits the open market, he isn't going to get Joe Thomas type money and I am sure he and his agent know that. They may try because there is no harm in trying, but he isn't going to get that type of deal.

And if he does, so be it. We let him walk. But if we can bring him back at a fair price, we should and let the positions sort themselves out later.


The 49ers will be an even bigger test for our interior line and backs, they like to bring pressure up the middle often....

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:43 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
degs wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


League minimum with incentives.

But I'd rather get whatever type of compensatory pick we can get for him. It'll probably be a 6th round or later because I doubt anyone will give him much of a contract coming off of yet another injury


He's a former 1st overall pick and a perennial pro bowler, we'll get a 3rd, a 4th at the bare minimum. If we get a 3rd, then that will be fine with me. Getting a 3rd will allow us to use a 1st or 2nd round pick to find another offensive tackle. There are two offensive tackles coming out of Texas A&M (Sherman's Boys) and both look like legit 1st round prospects. If Martin shows that he's capable of playing LT long term, then we'll probably find ourselves in a good situation even if Long goes. Heck, we might even get better if things play out in our favor.


Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:34 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6293
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
I could see us signing Derek Sherrod to play right tackle and move Martin to left.


Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:26 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


A 5-year, $45 million deal with about $10-15 million in guarantees is reasonable, with clauses that protect the Dolphins against missing playing time due to injury.

The guaranteed money can be spread out as a signing bonus, which amortizes over the 5 years, as well as roster bonuses, which he gets paid if he is on the team. This way, you can literally have him count $6-7 million against the cap in 2013 and still have another $45+ million to spend.

_________________
Image


Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:17 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


A 5-year, $45 million deal with about $10-15 million in guarantees is reasonable, with clauses that protect the Dolphins against missing playing time due to injury.

The guaranteed money can be spread out as a signing bonus, which amortizes over the 5 years, as well as roster bonuses, which he gets paid if he is on the team. This way, you can literally have him count $6-7 million against the cap in 2013 and still have another $45+ million to spend.


Do you still make that move if Martin looks good the last four weeks?


Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:44 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
Do you still make that move if Martin looks good the last four weeks?


Possibly, it depends on what I see available in free agency and in the draft. The best scenario is one in which we are able to keep Long and draft a tackle in the middle rounds to develop. I just don't see too many tackles in free agency that immediately improve this offensive line.

_________________
Image


Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:16 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
degs wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
What is a fair price for a declining injury prone left tackle???


League minimum with incentives.

But I'd rather get whatever type of compensatory pick we can get for him. It'll probably be a 6th round or later because I doubt anyone will give him much of a contract coming off of yet another injury


He's a former 1st overall pick and a perennial pro bowler, we'll get a 3rd, a 4th at the bare minimum. If we get a 3rd, then that will be fine with me. Getting a 3rd will allow us to use a 1st or 2nd round pick to find another offensive tackle. There are two offensive tackles coming out of Texas A&M (Sherman's Boys) and both look like legit 1st round prospects. If Martin shows that he's capable of playing LT long term, then we'll probably find ourselves in a good situation even if Long goes. Heck, we might even get better if things play out in our favor.


A compensatory pick has nothing to do with where he was drafted and nothing to do with how many pro bowls he won earlier in his career.

It has to do with the average salary of the contract he signs minus the salaries of any free agents we sign.
If Jake gets a deal averaging $8m a year but we sign a FA for $8m a year, that nets out and there is no compensatory pick.

The NFL put the system in place to help create parity. If nobody thinks Jake is what he once was, we don't get any compensation. If we sign a marquee free agent, that makes up for losing a marquee free agent in te leagues eyes and we get no compensation.


Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:43 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
degs wrote:
A compensatory pick has nothing to do with where he was drafted and nothing to do with how many pro bowls he won earlier in his career.

It has to do with the average salary of the contract he signs minus the salaries of any free agents we sign.
If Jake gets a deal averaging $8m a year but we sign a FA for $8m a year, that nets out and there is no compensatory pick.

The NFL put the system in place to help create parity. If nobody thinks Jake is what he once was, we don't get any compensation. If we sign a marquee free agent, that makes up for losing a marquee free agent in te leagues eyes and we get no compensation.


But we probably won't sign a free agent. We'll probably just draft a replacement. I believe in that instance we would get a high compensatory pick right?


Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:00 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
Do you still make that move if Martin looks good the last four weeks?


Possibly, it depends on what I see available in free agency and in the draft. The best scenario is one in which we are able to keep Long and draft a tackle in the middle rounds to develop. I just don't see too many tackles in free agency that immediately improve this offensive line.


Luke Joeckel
6'6" 310
Tannehill's left tackle at A&M

Jake Matthews (Son of Tennessee Offensive Line Coach Bruce Matthews)
6'5" 305
Tannehill's right tackle at A&M

One or both of these guys are likely going to enter the draft this year. They're both graded out as 1st round prospects. Both guys know Sherman, Tannehill, and the offense very well. If Martin plays well, and both of these kids declare, then I think this is an easy decision.


Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:04 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
degs wrote:
A compensatory pick has nothing to do with where he was drafted and nothing to do with how many pro bowls he won earlier in his career.

It has to do with the average salary of the contract he signs minus the salaries of any free agents we sign.
If Jake gets a deal averaging $8m a year but we sign a FA for $8m a year, that nets out and there is no compensatory pick.

The NFL put the system in place to help create parity. If nobody thinks Jake is what he once was, we don't get any compensation. If we sign a marquee free agent, that makes up for losing a marquee free agent in te leagues eyes and we get no compensation.


But we probably won't sign a free agent. We'll probably just draft a replacement. I believe in that instance we would get a high compensatory pick right?


One thing to note, it doesn't matter if we sign or draft a replacement for him. It just matters what we do on the free agent market. In other words, if we sign a big $$$ contract for a WR, that is the same as if we sign a big $$$ Left Tackle.

Having said that, I agree that we probably won't sign any big free agents.

So then, it all comes down to how much is the average salary of the contract Jake Long signs.
If he gets a big contract, we can get a pick as high as a the end of the 3rd round. And compensatory picks cannot be traded.

I was screaming to trade Jake last offseason. I thought we could have at least gotten a 1st round pick and probably more. Now, we are hoping for a late 3rd, at best. Such a shame.


Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:19 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
One or both of these guys are likely going to enter the draft this year. They're both graded out as 1st round prospects. Both guys know Sherman, Tannehill, and the offense very well. If Martin plays well, and both of these kids declare, then I think this is an easy decision.


So with all the lack of playmakers on offense and on the back-end of the defense, you think drafting a tackle in round 1 is the right way to go?

Baffling...

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:34 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
One or both of these guys are likely going to enter the draft this year. They're both graded out as 1st round prospects. Both guys know Sherman, Tannehill, and the offense very well. If Martin plays well, and both of these kids declare, then I think this is an easy decision.


So with all the lack of playmakers on offense and on the back-end of the defense, you think drafting a tackle in round 1 is the right way to go?

Baffling...


I imagine our 1st pick will be a WR.
A tackle will probably be our 3rd pick, unless there is a bargain available at our 2nd pick.

Just IMO


Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:38 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
degs wrote:
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
One or both of these guys are likely going to enter the draft this year. They're both graded out as 1st round prospects. Both guys know Sherman, Tannehill, and the offense very well. If Martin plays well, and both of these kids declare, then I think this is an easy decision.


So with all the lack of playmakers on offense and on the back-end of the defense, you think drafting a tackle in round 1 is the right way to go?

Baffling...


I imagine our 1st pick will be a WR.
A tackle will probably be our 3rd pick, unless there is a bargain available at our 2nd pick.

Just IMO


There's no WR worth taking in the top 15. Not even close, to be honest.

At this point only a DE really makes sense to me.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:09 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Phins Rock wrote:
There's no WR worth taking in the top 15. Not even close, to be honest.

At this point only a DE really makes sense to me.


I'm not a draftnik. I'll take your word. Just going by needs and priorities.

I'm all up for making a terrifying front 7, then looking for WR help.
And there's always free agency.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:11 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
One or both of these guys are likely going to enter the draft this year. They're both graded out as 1st round prospects. Both guys know Sherman, Tannehill, and the offense very well. If Martin plays well, and both of these kids declare, then I think this is an easy decision.


So with all the lack of playmakers on offense and on the back-end of the defense, you think drafting a tackle in round 1 is the right way to go?

Baffling...


It depends. I consider o-line, wideout, and defensive backs to be our three biggest areas of need, and not in any particular order. If the right player lines up where we pick, I'd take whoever grades out the best at any one of those positions. We don't have to take a wideout round one, but I would think we'd need to take one in the first two rounds. Same thing goes for defensive backs and offensive linemen. We don't need to take one in the first round per say, but we probably should go after at least one in the first two rounds, and a pair in the first three to four rounds. If it were up to me, and thank god it isn't (wouldn't want the responsibility), I'd take two linemen, two receivers, and two defensive backs in the first four rounds (unless of course a steal came about). Then rounds five to seven I'd go best player available.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:41 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
degs wrote:
Phins Rock wrote:
There's no WR worth taking in the top 15. Not even close, to be honest.

At this point only a DE really makes sense to me.


I'm not a draftnik. I'll take your word. Just going by needs and priorities.

I'm all up for making a terrifying front 7, then looking for WR help.
And there's always free agency.


Here's the thing though. Widereceiver isn't our only major need. If Long goes, then offensive tackle becomes a big priority. Not only that, but we still have major needs in our defensive secondary. If the right wideout isn't there, maybe the right offensive tackle or defensive back is there.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:43 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2435
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
WR, DB and pass rusher in first two rounds. O-line in the 3rd....and maybe take another QB or TE in that round. I think we have two seconds and two thirds.

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:54 pm
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6568
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
I consider o-line

I believe a great QB makes the OL better ditto with RB. Just my opinion. Look at the Pats, they have a patch work line yet they are playing for the #1 seed right now, ditto with GB. WHen has an OL won a SB? Never....Long didn't. Everything, EVERYTHING starts with a QB.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:08 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Makchell wrote:
I consider o-line

I believe a great QB makes the OL better ditto with RB. Just my opinion. Look at the Pats, they have a patch work line yet they are playing for the #1 seed right now, ditto with GB. WHen has an OL won a SB? Never....Long didn't. Everything, EVERYTHING starts with a QB.


Football Outsiders has a great update in regards to O-line statistics this year ...

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

If you listen to some fans, you'd think we were at the bottom of the league in pass pro, when it's simply not the case.

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:00 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2436
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
Here's the thing though. Widereceiver isn't our only major need. If Long goes, then offensive tackle becomes a big priority. Not only that, but we still have major needs in our defensive secondary. If the right wideout isn't there, maybe the right offensive tackle or defensive back is there.


Filling these needs are interconnected, including not just the draft, but with free agency as well.

However, dealing with just the draft...

I would prioritize WR as the most important need. But if there aren't any top flight WR's in the draft, then yes, move on to BPA at another area of need. Personally, I prioritze having a terrifying pass rush over having shut down corners.

With the top picks I would be looking to grab a WR, a tackle, a pass rusher and some help in the secondary. With later picks I would be looking for development players, specifically a QB. I would say a WR, but Ireland hasn't exactly done well with late round QB's.


Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:26 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
wkloiber13 wrote:
It depends. I consider o-line, wideout, and defensive backs to be our three biggest areas of need, and not in any particular order.


You're more likely to find a serviceable offensive lineman later in the draft than you are to find a stud WR or CB.

_________________
Image


Thu Dec 06, 2012 5:30 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: Jonathan Martin
Rich wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
It depends. I consider o-line, wideout, and defensive backs to be our three biggest areas of need, and not in any particular order.


You're more likely to find a serviceable offensive lineman later in the draft than you are to find a stud WR or CB.


You can find stud WRs and CBs in the 2nd and 3rd round (where we have four picks, five if Long goes and we get a late 3rd compensatory). I get what you're saying, but if the right guy is there (even if he's a lineman), and he grades out the highest on your evaluation, then you pick the guy. Take the guy you like and think will best fit your system, don't reach based on need.


Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:18 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 55 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.