PFF Grades vs Titans

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 01:25 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Let’s see if Stone can do it against quarterbacks who aren’t complete dog crap before we anoint him, ok?

ridiculous

No one is "anointing" Stone. We are simply pointing out that he is playing better...which he has. 

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 01:21 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Stone pretty much said as much after the Titans game. I believe he specifically cited the game plan finally being simplified or something to that effect.

(Yesterday, 01:22 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Stone made a comment that they simplified the defense a bit recently and it suits him better. Not sure why it took until week 13. 

Not encouraging for Lou and his scheme. Seems to be way over our players heads sometimes. 

There you have it, for some guys you just have to dumb it down a bit.

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 01:27 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: It’s really not. At all

So we'd rather them just give up and tank? Show no effort out there? 

[*bfine32*]

(Yesterday, 01:27 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: It’s really not. At all

I'm with you. We need more dudes like De'Vondre Campbell. 

[Frank Booth]

(Yesterday, 01:28 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: So we'd rather them just give up and tank? Show no effort out there? 

Guys who play like crap all season on bad teams but pick it up at the end is fool’s gold the majority of the time

I presume you’re going to give me a few exceptions and treat it as the rule. Go ahead

[Nicomo Cosca]

For all of his faults in coverage this season, Cam Taylor-Britt is now grading out at the same level he has his entire career (PFF). pic.twitter.com/Xk6PujI0dZ

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) December 17, 2024

He could honestly probably be a hell of a CB2 if we had any kind of pass rush and a true shutdown guy on the other side. Good to see him bouncing back even if it’s been against bad QB’s.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(Yesterday, 01:27 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: No one is "anointing" Stone. We are simply pointing out that he is playing better...which he has. 

Since the Bengals Week 12 bye, Geno Stone has emerged as the player they'd greatly needed in their defensive backfield.

Over the last 3 weeks among qualified safeties, Stone ranks:

? 1st - Interceptions (2)
? 2nd - PFF Defensive Grade (86.3)
? 2nd - PFF Coverage Grade… pic.twitter.com/z3tGxQRhXU

— Willie Lutz (@willie_lutz) December 17, 2024

Yep. It’s that simple. I’ve gone from for sure wanting him cut to at least being open to the idea of seeing if a different DC can do something with him. He certainly thrived in Mike Macdonald’s system.

[*bfine32*]

(Yesterday, 01:37 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote:

For all of his faults in coverage this season, Cam Taylor-Britt is now grading out at the same level he has his entire career (PFF). pic.twitter.com/Xk6PujI0dZ

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) December 17, 2024

He could honestly probably be a hell of a CB2 if we had any kind of pass rush and a true shutdown guy on the other side. Good to see him bouncing back even if it’s been against bad QB’s.

I've mentioned it a few times. Benching him may have saved his career. IMO, being humbled was what he needed. We get Dax and Dj back and CB falls to the bottom of the needs list. Hopefully it's clicked for Stone here and Battle continues to improve. We need as many as we can but/draft for the front 6-7

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 01:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've mentioned it a few times. Benching him may have saved his career. IMO, being humbled was what he needed. We get Dax and Dj back and CB falls to the bottom of the needs list. Hopefully it's clicked for Stone here and Battle continues to improve. We need as many as we can but/draft for the front 6-7

IMO they still need a solid veteran CB. Dax, CTB, and Turner aren't good enough. 

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 02:40 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: IMO they still need a solid veteran CB. Dax, CTB, and Turner aren't good enough. 

The premise of riding with those 3 as the primary CB unit is based upon Battle and Stone doing a proper job at their Safety positions. I know that I joked earlier about Stone needing it "dumbed down" in order for him to perform as well as he has the past few games, but let's imagine that maybe he has turned a corner and that his level of play will remain consistent going forward. If that is indeed the case, then the team would not have to make a costly FA investment into the secondary, thus freeing up money to target other significant areas of need.

[sandwedge]

(Yesterday, 01:21 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Stone pretty much said as much after the Titans game. I believe he specifically cited the game plan finally being simplified or something to that effect.

During the Dallas game, Aikman said he talked to Lou during the week. Lou is feeling the heat and tried everything he could to fix the problems to no avail. He said he was going to more aggressive on defense.
To me that has helped this D. Yes we haven't played great offenses the last couple of weeks, but our D hasn't had to play afraid of the big plays. We all saw what happened when Lou went back to, the bend but not break defense on the last possession for the Titans. 

[Joelist]

For Stone at least the change is a bit in simplifying but also turning him loose and letting him play aggressive. That's how McDonald used him in Baltimore. BTW remember Bates was only "meh" here and he goes to the Falcons with a different, slightly simpler system that lets HIM attack and they have an all pro. There's a common thread here...

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 03:26 PM)Joelist Wrote: For Stone at least the change is a bit in simplifying but also turning him loose and letting him play aggressive. That's how McDonald used him in Baltimore. BTW remember Bates was only "meh" here and he goes to the Falcons with a different, slightly simpler system that lets HIM attack and they have an all pro. There's a common thread here...

Uh, Bates was a 2nd team All-Pro for the Bengals in 2020, same as he was for the Falcons in 2023.

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 03:26 PM)Joelist Wrote: For Stone at least the change is a bit in simplifying but also turning him loose and letting him play aggressive. That's how McDonald used him in Baltimore. BTW remember Bates was only "meh" here and he goes to the Falcons with a different, slightly simpler system that lets HIM attack and they have an all pro. There's a common thread here...

Bates was not "meh" here. He had an all pro worthy season in 2020 and had some other very good seasons. 

I am not defending Lou and his "system", but let's not act like Bates is some kind of product of his enviornment. 

I think this defenses problem is two fold, its full of bad/non productive players (Hubbard, Pratt, both safties) and they simply aren't coached well enough/the system sucks. I think cleaning house of the coaching staff on defense (DC and some position coaches) and not bringing guys like Hubbard, Pratt, possibly Stone back would do wonders for this D. 

[WeezyBengal]

(Yesterday, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The premise of riding with those 3 as the primary CB unit is based upon Battle and Stone doing a proper job at their Safety positions. I know that I joked earlier about Stone needing it "dumbed down" in order for him to perform as well as he has the past few games, but let's imagine that maybe he has turned a corner and that his level of play will remain consistent going forward. If that is indeed the case, then the team would not have to make a costly FA investment into the secondary, thus freeing up money to target other significant areas of need.

Dax and Turner are coming back from significant injuries. I need a solid vet there to build depth. Im not asking for an all pro corner, just a good veteran corner that wont break the bank. 

[Essex Johnson]

(Yesterday, 12:37 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote:

My man Tanner Hudson top 3 again.. the dude needs more reps according to PFF

[Frank Booth]

(Yesterday, 04:10 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: My man Tanner Hudson top 3 again.. the dude needs more reps according to PFF

Tanner Hudson is good. I said it.

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

Look, regarding Stone, the simple facts is, we have so many holes that even with lots of cap space and hitting on all our draft picks...we cannot fill them all.

DEFCON 1 Holes: Fix ASAP
1. WR2 (Higgins FA)
2. RG (Cappa crappa)
3. FS (Stone sinking)
4. DE2 (Hubbard hobbled/Murphy missing)
5. DT (Hill FA, Rankins reeking, Jenkins/Jackson struggling)

DEFCON 2 Holes: Mediocre play
1. LG (Volson meh)
2. LB2 (Pratt's problems)
3. TE1 (All injury, other guys one way only)
4. WR3 (Yoshi yikes)
5. SS issues (Bell's bummer, Battle bonehead)

And we have even gotten into depth issues. Or the lack of a CB1. Or the poor tackling that permeates the D. That is just too much to cover via FA & draft.

The point isn't to say we think Stone or Volson or Murphy or Jackson are now all awesome. The point is, is that if some of these guys start proving they can play at an acceptable level (or, God forbid, higher), then our to do list becomes more manageable. Like 1 year back in contention manageable. But if we need starter level players at WR2, DT, NT, DE2, RG, LG, LB2, FS, TE1, WR3, SS, CB3, and PK, plus depth issues, it is just too much.

In a universe where Stone can man FS at an acceptable level, Murphy can give Trey a little help, Jackson gives you ok-ish play at NT, and Volson isn't godawful, we can see a path to fix this. Without a tear down and wasting another year of prime Burrow, Chase, Hendrickson.

Dig if you will the new picture with Stone, Murphy, and Volson at acceptable starter level and Jackson at rotational level:

DEFCON 1 Needs: Glaring holes/killing us
1. WR2 (re-sign Tee)
2. RG (Cappa crappa)
3. DT (Hill FA, Rankins reeks, but Jackson/Jenkins OK)

DEFCON 2 Holes: Mediocre starters
1. DE2 (Hubbard Hobbled, Murphy OK)
2. LG (Volson meh)
3. LB2 (Pratt's problems)
4. TE1 (All injury, no 2 way others)
5. WR3 (Yoshi struggles)
6. SS issues (Bell's bummer, Battle bonehead)

This is more manageable. We have the $$ to sign Tee and a Cappa IOL upgrade. Restructuring Burrow and a strategic cut or three (Cappa & Rankins, maybe Moss, Hubbard, or Pratt) frees up more space.

Restructure Burrow to boost the cap space by $19 mil, up to $81. Chase's extension will only be the signing bonus proration, say $8 mil. Extend Tee, say $22 mil cap hit. Now we are at $51 mil. Take $4 out to pay the PS. $47. Give Rankins' money to Hill. Spend $20 mil (if we have to) on a quality guard to replace Cappa, but the hit is only $12 after you cut him. $35 mil left.

All your DEFCON1 level needs are filled. Tee is back, one guard spot is now a strength, and Hill/Jenkins/Jackson isn't awesome, but you have 3 playable DTs: one DT (Jenkins), one NT (Jackson), and one swing who can play next to either type (Hill).

That $35 has to cover your draft picks (6) and filling out the rest of the roster, which now stands at 43 heading into the draft. 49 assuming your picks get rostered.

Use that $$ to attack these needs in FA. In my view, there isn't really a big fish/high impact DE or DT out there. The FA TE class is abysmal (Gesicki is the best). And spending on WR3 after paying Chase AND Higgins would be idiotic. For a big spend, that leaves LG (Zeitler, Jenkins), SS (Baker, others), and CB1. Or we just go moderate from here out.

For me, I fix what I can fix in FA. The IOL draft is weak, but the FA class is strong. I have already restructured Burrow, extended Chase, signed Higgins, cut Rankins and paid BJ Hill with the savings, and cut Cappa and signed the best RG FA I can (I budget $20 mil with $8 offset).

I go get another FA IOL (LG or C) and make IOL a strength. The D is such a mess that think a complete fix cannot happen in one year. And centerpiece guys in FA are not there. I mostly am gonna fix that in the draft. But I want to make the O fantastic. Good enough to win games/close games like Philly did to Pitt (2 2nd half Pittsburgh possessions Sunday). The rest of FA will be bargain bin hunting on D (SS, DE, DT) and bringing back some of our own if the price is right (Hilton, Gesicki, Ossai, C. Sample, Hudson, ADG, Ford, T. Brown, Herbert). If by some miracle we have enough $$ left to land an impact guy at DB or LB (or can create enough space to do so), then I do that as well. Moss, Hubbard, McPherson, & Pratt would be my savings candidates.

A'd assume $20-$25 mil left to cover re-signing our own and our picks. That assumes a $10-$15 mil LG. Cut Moss to save $3.5, Money Mac gets you $2.5 (draft Zvada), Hubbard saves you $9.6 and Pratt $5.6 if you have to. But I start with Moss & Mac, and I am up to $26-$31 mil again.

Sure, we may not fill EVERY need. We may have to live with a poor TE situation, or no true CB1, or no stud DE actoss from Trey again. But we should have enough $$ to fill at least 1-2 more defcon2 or lower holes in FA (DE2, DT, LB2, SS, slot corner) and most of the others on Day 1/Day2 of the draft or by retaining some of our own (Gesicki, Hilton, etc).

Again, maybe you put the pieces together differently. Let BJ walk, cut Hubbard & Pratt, &  go for a big DB fish in FA, or LB1. Who knows?

But my point is, if these guys can come good over the last 1/4 of the year, then it changes what we can do in the draft & FA. Gives us more options & freedom.

If Stone comes good, then FS is not a pressing need anymore. More FA/draft focus on the trenches. If Murphy comes good  it is easier to cut Hubbard and use that $$ elsewhere, or keep him and take DE off the board as a huge need, though depth would still be needed. Jackson flashing makes the DT/NT need less acute, particularly if Hill comes back, though some 3T pass rush or direct Reader level guy would always be welcome. But you wouldn't necessarily HAVE to go DT in Rd1.
If Button comes good (seems unlikely now) then WR3 if off the board early in the draft.

We are just pooking for bright spots in the darkness.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Yesterday, 04:10 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: My man Tanner Hudson top 3 again.. the dude needs more reps according to PFF

Sam Hubbard was the #1 player. Having an extremely small sample size can really benefit a player if they're not good at the majority of the rest of their job and can get snaps exclusively when it's favorable to their skills.

Hudson had 5 snaps with 0 of them blocking. Gesicki is already the WR in a TE's body who doesn't block. We don't need two of them and Gesicki is better than Hudson who had 9.0 yards per catch last year and 7.9 this year (and Gesicki is actually younger than Hudson). Hudson is a TE who doesn't block and only produces like a RB in the receiving game.

[Destro]

Defense is going will be declared "improving" right our way into the same mess next year.