DJ's left nut |
10-29-2019 09:47 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunKC
(Post 14561019)
See I can’t agree with this. I understand that Veach missed on some low risk/low cost guys like Darron Lee, but you have to keep in mind that this is year 1 in a 4-3 with new personnel. Can’t fix it all next year.
We are 5th in sacks and 17th in PPG. That’s an improvement over last year. And yeah the major thing is the LB’s are still bad, but if they can get a couple of additions there next year, our defense will be above average.
Not getting the Okafor hate either. He’s been a solid rotational vet that’s on pace for 6 sacks. That’s pretty much living up to his billing IMO. He’s only making 30% of what Clark is making.
Again, we are seeing good early returns from Hardman, Thornhill, Saunders and Rankin plus the Ogbah trade has been a big hit.
I think if we have more offseasons like this one (minus the big Clark trade), we’ll be just fine.
|
You've been satisfied w/ Okafor? He's been a little more athletic than I expected but he's been SUPER soft against the run. He's been pushed around big-time; way too easy to get on skates.
And I feel like there should be a 50% surcharge against any stats accumulated against that Broncos team - holy shit they are terrible. I mean laughably bad. And that's where Okafor got 2/3 of his pass rush productivity (after being pretty much silent through the first 6 weeks).
Okafor's been pretty rough to this point, man. Now he DID have his best half of the season against Detroit and my memory is he got dinged in that one. Maybe he was rounding into form and the Denver game was a continuation of that rather than a blip made possible by a god-awful OL - we'll see if he gets back healthy.
But to this point I don't think he's been worth writing home about, especially given how susceptible he's been against the run.
And how did we go from the offseason saying "Hey, I think Veach knew all along they were switching to a 4-3 that's why he drafted Speaks and signed Hitchens..." to "well what do you expect, he's only had 1 year to get the personnel he needed...."
I've always subscribed to the former. Speaks makes ZERO sense in a 3-4 and was a dead giveaway that they weren't long for that system; Hitchens made more sense in a 4-3 as well. Moreover, the team spent a ton of time in 4-2-5 formations last year anyway (or that 'heavy nickle' they liked to run), which aren't significantly different than what we're doing now.
I don't think you can just give him a pass there - he's had 2 years to bring in personnel for this system and when they're not running their base looks more than 1/3 of the time, then he's had 2 years to get the sub packages in working order and simply hasn't brought in the talent necessary to do so, regardless of scheme.
|