With Geno And Dunlap Signed, Will We Go For O-Line FAs?

[Shake n Blake]

(08-31-2018, 02:45 PM)Au165 Wrote: Look at the last couple drafts, it used to be you'd get 5 Tackles in the first 16 picks, now they are struggling to find one or two top 16 worthy tackles in the draft. The spread offenses of college ask very little of O linemen in comparison to NFL schemes. There are a few colleges you can count on to product NFL level O linemen but not much outside of that. 

1. I think you need more than a couple drafts to prove such a point. People used to say the same thing about RB's dying off, and now we have a trend of RB's going early again.

2. You originally said "o-line play", so why focus only on tackles? 

2018: 3 Tackles, 1 Guard, 2 Centers were taken in round 1 
2017: 2 Tackles 
2016: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2015: 5 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard
2014: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
2013: 5 Tackles, 3 Guards, 1 Center
2012: 2 Tackles, 2 Guards
2011: 6 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2010: 4 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard

Now lets compare that to the 90's:

1999: 5 Tackles, 1 Center
1998: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1997: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1996: 7 Tackles, 1 Guard
1995: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard
1994: 4 Tackles
1993: 3 Tackles, 2 Guards, 1 Center
1992: 5 Tackles
1991: 4 Tackles
1990: 1 Tackle, 1 Center

On average, 5.7 Linemen (4.0 Tackles) have been taken in the first round of the last 9 drafts.
In the 90's, 5.1 Linemen (4.2 Tackles) were taken in the first round.

In short, not much has changed there, although it looks like modern teams are valuing interior linemen more than they used to. 

If you look at where these linemen are/were being taken, not much has changed there, either. If you want, I can give you the average draft slot for each position, but that would take some time. 2017 appears to be an anomaly just as 1990 was.

[Shake n Blake]

(08-31-2018, 03:25 PM)Millhouse Wrote: As I said, I am no cap guru, just going by those two popular cap space sites.

I happened to read a Hobson article just after the extensions, and he said this in it :

"with deals rocketing the Bengals to No. 7 in cap spending for this season at about $186 million, according to various web sites" https://www.bengals.com/news/that-time-of-year

And that is true, as they are spending this season about $9 million over the the $177 mill season cap. But the current cap space (I am assuming) is from prior seasons carried over.

Another thing though is that the cap limit has been rising quite a bit last few years. 2015 $143 mill, 2016 - $155 mill, 2017 - $167 mill, 2018 - $177 mill. So next year it probably will go up somewhere near $8-12 million more.

Appreciate all the info. It really can be tough to keep up with the cap situations.

[Au165]

(08-31-2018, 03:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. I think you need more than a couple drafts to prove such a point. People used to say the same thing about RB's dying off, and now we have a trend of RB's going early again.

2. You originally said "o-line play", so why focus only on tackles? 

2018: 3 Tackles, 1 Guard, 2 Centers were taken in round 1 
2017: 2 Tackles 
2016: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2015: 5 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard
2014: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
2013: 5 Tackles, 3 Guards, 1 Center
2012: 2 Tackles, 2 Guards
2011: 6 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2010: 4 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard

Now lets compare that to the 90's:

1999: 5 Tackles, 1 Center
1998: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1997: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1996: 7 Tackles, 1 Guard
1995: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard
1994: 4 Tackles
1993: 3 Tackles, 2 Guards, 1 Center
1992: 5 Tackles
1991: 4 Tackles
1990: 1 Tackle, 1 Center

On average, 5.7 Linemen (4.0 Tackles) have been taken in the first round of the last 9 drafts.
In the 90's, 5.1 Linemen (4.2 Tackles) were taken in the first round.

In short, not much has changed there, although it looks like modern teams are valuing interior linemen more than they used to. 

If you look at where these linemen are/were being taken, not much has changed there, either. If you want, I can give you the average draft 

I focused on tackles because it tends to be the barometer of offensive line quality coming out of college. If you read much on the draft they tend to use the tackle class to grade overall O line quality. As to the quality of linemen coming in check the bust rate on the last 5 years, it has exceeded historical numbers. If you do a quick google search you will see it's a commonly agreed upon that offensive line quality has degraded substantially over the last 4 or 5 years.

I will say this coming class could be one of the best in 4 or 5 years though as far as Tackles go. Back to the topic, no I still do not believe there will be offensive linemen floating around that will be better than what we have. I understand history, I am telling you what the reality today is. I'd love to be wrong, but we will see this weekend I guess.

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(08-31-2018, 03:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Appreciate all the info. It really can be tough to keep up with the cap situations.

Have to be careful with those numbers - 'spending' dollars does not mean they all hit the cap in the year spent

[Shake n Blake]

(08-31-2018, 04:13 PM)Au165 Wrote: I focused on tackles because it tends to be the barometer of offensive line quality coming out of college. If you read much on the draft they tend to use the tackle class to grade overall O line quality. As to the quality of linemen coming in check the bust rate on the last 5 years, it has exceeded historical numbers. If you do a quick google search you will see it's a commonly agreed upon that offensive line quality has degraded substantially over the last 4 or 5 years.

I will say this coming class could be one of the best in 4 or 5 years though as far as Tackles go. Back to the topic, no I still do not believe there will be offensive linemen floating around that will be better than what we have. I understand history, I am telling you what the reality today is. I'd love to be wrong, but we will see this weekend I guess.

You seem to be moving the goal posts on me. First you said to look at the drafts as a sign of linemen quality. You said teams aren't taking as many linemen/tackles. Then I show you that teams are taking just as many linemen/tackles and now you want me to google someone's opinion. 

Whether or not a guy is available or not this weekend doesn't prove anyone right or wrong really. Like I said, the players released vary by year. It's far from a guarantee that any decent RG's or RT's will be available this time. It's also far from a guarantee that we'd pursue them even if available. 

Fwiw, the Cowboys just traded for a Guard from KC with 5 starts under his belt. Hard telling if that guy would be an upgrade, but I guess we'll see what our right side is made of soon enough.

(08-31-2018, 04:17 PM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: Have to be careful with those numbers - 'spending' dollars does not mean they all hit the cap in the year spent

Yup. 

[Au165]

(08-31-2018, 06:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: available. 

Fwiw, the Cowboys just traded for a Guard from KC with 5 starts under his belt. Hard telling if that guy would be an upgrade, but I guess we'll see what our right side is made of soon enough.


Yup. 

Bobby Hart has 21 NFL starts, if simply starting matters. Heck Ced has starts in the NFL. Just saying maybe where we are missing each other is the idea of what an upgrade is.

[Shake n Blake]

(08-31-2018, 06:53 PM)Au165 Wrote: Bobby Hart has 21 NFL starts, if simply starting matters. Heck Ced has starts in the NFL. Just saying maybe where we are missing each other is the idea of what an upgrade is.

I know. Hence me saying "hard telling if he'd be an upgrade".

Starting isn't the only criteria I'd want to look at. PFF grades and watching him in those starts would give a much better idea.

Unfortunately, I have neither his film nor a PFF subscription. 

[Whatever]

(08-31-2018, 03:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. I think you need more than a couple drafts to prove such a point. People used to say the same thing about RB's dying off, and now we have a trend of RB's going early again.

2. You originally said "o-line play", so why focus only on tackles? 

2018: 3 Tackles, 1 Guard, 2 Centers were taken in round 1 
2017: 2 Tackles 
2016: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2015: 5 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard
2014: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
2013: 5 Tackles, 3 Guards, 1 Center
2012: 2 Tackles, 2 Guards
2011: 6 Tackles, 1 Guard, 1 Center
2010: 4 Tackles, 1 Center, 1 Guard

Now lets compare that to the 90's:

1999: 5 Tackles, 1 Center
1998: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1997: 4 Tackles, 1 Guard
1996: 7 Tackles, 1 Guard
1995: 5 Tackles, 1 Guard
1994: 4 Tackles
1993: 3 Tackles, 2 Guards, 1 Center
1992: 5 Tackles
1991: 4 Tackles
1990: 1 Tackle, 1 Center

On average, 5.7 Linemen (4.0 Tackles) have been taken in the first round of the last 9 drafts.
In the 90's, 5.1 Linemen (4.2 Tackles) were taken in the first round.

In short, not much has changed there, although it looks like modern teams are valuing interior linemen more than they used to. 

If you look at where these linemen are/were being taken, not much has changed there, either. If you want, I can give you the average draft slot for each position, but that would take some time. 2017 appears to be an anomaly just as 1990 was.

Just my 2¢, but RB is back on the rise partialy due to the lack of quality OL in the draft.  It used to be that teams tried to follow the Broncos model of building a great line in front of a decent RB.  Now that OL talent is less plentiful, that tactic doesn't work.  The 5th year option is also a good way to keep a RB locked up for his prime at a reasonable rate.  

[Shake n Blake]

(08-29-2018, 05:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 2 years and $8 million with the Cardinals. Probably would've been a good idea to cut Michael Johnson to keep Andre Smith.

Now that we actually have cut Michael Johnson, this is an even more glaring question IMO. I can't help but feel Andre could've helped stabilize the right side.

[Sled21]

(09-01-2018, 09:16 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Now that we actually have cut Michael Johnson, this is an even more glaring question IMO. I can't help but feel Andre could've helped stabilize the right side.

I still suspect MJ will be back in a day or two....

[Shake n Blake]

(09-01-2018, 09:20 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I still suspect MJ will be back in a day or two....

At a steep pay cut maybe. If so, my point is the same.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-31-2018, 02:58 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Geno Atkins – 4 years, 65.3 million ($16.3 m average)

6 Pro Bowls, 2x 1st team All-Pro, 3x 1st team Pro Football Focus
8.8 sacks per 16 games played (since rookie season when he barely played)

Aaron Donald – 6 years, 135 million ($22.5 m average)

4 Pro Bowls, 3x 1st team All-Pro, 4x 1st team Pro Football Focus
10.1 sacks per 16 games played

I know which one I'm choosing.

Geno also had the horrendous injury.

He does things Donald simply cannot do, like throwing Guards into the QB for sacks.

There is a reason Geno is Aaron's favorite player and he modeled his play off of him.

Donald is great too though, not taking anything from the man.

[McC]

(08-28-2018, 08:00 PM)Wyche Wrote: I've read that the two deals signed today are bad news for Johnson and maybe Ryan Hewitt.

You must have read it in a crystal ball.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-02-2018, 04:51 PM)McC Wrote: You must have read it in a crystal ball.

Yeah, Wyche nailed it. I thought MJ would be cut but not Hewitt.