POLL: Which Defensive Players Need to be Cut, Traded, & Upgraded?

[Steve]

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. The defense reclamation project will take at least a couple years unless the existing guys take a step up. Like if Tillery somehow can show vast improvement in the run game. Although that scenario might be asking for way too much. Then there's Murray.

It's a numbers game. There are only so many players per year we can bring in. And we aren't looking for physical talent, since we are doing fine identifying those types of players.

We need to get players who not only have the physical tools to play (like Murray and Tillery) but the right sort of mental processing (and character and ...).

Staley runs a more complicated scheme. It gives a D more options on how they can stop an offense, more variety in what they do. But the more mental processing you put on players, the more you eliminate the number of guys who can play in that scheme.

There is a reason that many teams prefer to play simpler schemes because it opens up the pool of candidate players. But Bradley ran a very simple scheme, and we couldn't find and develop players in that scheme either.

The Popper article pointing out that we finally got our dime package is interesting, but I think he is missing an important point. His thesis is that we FINALLY got the dime package we wanted to have all on the field we really wanted to use. I am not sure that is true. We finally got our inital, best 6 DB on the field at the same time vs Denver, but is every guy in that group the guy that Staley really wants in his D?

How many of the D would have made the cut and been on the Rams dime package last season? Mike Davis was playing pretty well at times this season, but he has gotten exploited the last couple weeks, and he is our #1 CB (at least in terms of salary). Samuels has struggled to be on the field with concussions and is not been playing as well as he did initially. Harris has gotten a lot better this year in the slot. Gilman ... the secondary looked thin all year and I don't think there is any reason to think that has changed.

[Hadl2Alworth]

It's a numbers game. There are only so many players per year we can bring in. And we aren't looking for physical talent, since we are doing fine identifying those types of players.

We need to get players who not only have the physical tools to play (like Murray and Tillery) but the right sort of mental processing (and character and ...).

Staley runs a more complicated scheme. It gives a D more options on how they can stop an offense, more variety in what they do. But the more mental processing you put on players, the more you eliminate the number of guys who can play in that scheme.

There is a reason that many teams prefer to play simpler schemes because it opens up the pool of candidate players. But Bradley ran a very simple scheme, and we couldn't find and develop players in that scheme either.

It's funny you say that because I recall the word on Tillery coming out of college was he played hot and cold at Notre Dame and could not be pushed to play consistently well. Basically not very coachable. He would play well when he felt like it. My question is why would any GM draft such a player in the first round with that knowledge of the player? Wouldn't that be a major red flag? That seems very strange to me.

[chargeroo]

It's funny you say that because I recall the word on Tillery coming out of college was he played hot and cold at Notre Dame and could not be pushed to play consistently well. Basically not very coachable. He would play well when he felt like it. My question is why would any GM draft such a player in the first round with that knowledge of the player? Wouldn't that be a major red flag? That seems very strange to me.

You are assuming that what they said about Tillery was right - but is it? Have you seen him taking plays off? I don't think I have. I've sure seen him get stopped dead in his tracks by the OL that's blocking him but I haven't seen him give up or simply make a half-hearted effort. Don't believe everything you read from those draft sights and don't believe guys are great by judging by seeing their "highlights".

[Topcat]

You are assuming that what they said about Tillery was right - but is it? Have you seen him taking plays off? I don't think I have. I've sure seen him get stopped dead in his tracks by the OL that's blocking him but I haven't seen him give up or simply make a half-hearted effort. Don't believe everything you read from those draft sights and don't believe guys are great by judging by seeing their "highlights".

Consistency and lack of effort was a concern for Tillery pre-draft:

Competitive Toughness - While effort may have been a question in the past, Tillery was lights out this past season, playing every rep hard and consistently attempting to make hustle plays. Physical snap-to-snap, didn't see his effort fade at all in 2018.

WORST TRAIT - Block Recognition/Consistency

Round Grade: 2nd

https://thedraftnetwork.com/player/jerry-tillery

[Steve]

It's funny you say that because I recall the word on Tillery coming out of college was he played hot and cold at Notre Dame and could not be pushed to play consistently well. Basically not very coachable. He would play well when he felt like it. My question is why would any GM draft such a player in the first round with that knowledge of the player? Wouldn't that be a major red flag? That seems very strange to me.

You can't necessarily rule out every young player who is inconsistent. Your draft board would be almost empty. Most, if not all rookies/young players are inconsistent. It is the reason coaches hate young players and prefer vets.

And you say that, but if you watch his last year in ND, he had a string of good almost dominant games before he got hurt. He continued to keep playing. Once he tore his labrum, he was a lot less productive but kept playing because his coaches asked him to.

The players who worry me are guys who don't play hard, and that is not Tillery's problem. At least it is not a big problem. There are plays where he seems to be not playing hard, but usually, it looks like his body language is saying he is confused, and that I do think is a problem for him.

Tillery has trouble reading plays on the fly and reacting accordingly. When he guesses right, he can be dominant. He just can't put it together play after play. He has a couple of good plays per game, and that's it. If one of those is on a run to the other side, you aren't getting anything on the stat sheet today.

Tillery has gotten better this season, but he needs to get his act together. We need to let players get a chance to play and develop, but they aren't on scholarship, and the time is running out. Next year his cap hit is like $3.6 mill, which is not that much for a DT who can rush the passer. After that, I am not sure I would sign him to a 5th-year option.

If he suddenly has a great year in year 4, even if we have rejected the 5th-year option, we can still resign him, his agent will just make us pay. We are a good enough team that we can't have a DL who gives up as many big plays as TIllery does.

[La Costa Boy]

So Linval, CHJ and D. Harris lead in the firing line. Davonte really doesn't count as he was a PS add from SF if I recall. Now, Linval and especially CHJ do need to go IMHO. I wonder what the savings is on the 2 of them.


Anybody????.........Beuller???....................

[gzubeck]

So Linval, CHJ and D. Harris lead in the firing line. Davonte really doesn't count as he was a PS add from SF if I recall. Now, Linval and especially CHJ do need to go IMHO. I wonder what the savings is on the 2 of them.


Anybody????.........Beuller???....................

They're not signed for next year so we have to base it off this years salary so each of them earn around $9.5 million. So next year they either take a pay cut or sign with someone else.

[Steve]

Joesph is a role player, who is still big and physical, but you can't put him on the field a ton, and you have to play to his strengths. He is best when a team wants to run right at him. When teams force him to run side to side, by pitching, sweeping, or focusing on outside zone runs (Dallas, Cleveland) he can be a real liability. You probably only want him playing 20-30% of the snaps, at most. He can line up at NT, and play DT in our 4 man fronts, but his salary has to reflect that he is not an every-down player anymore.

Harris had his worst season in pass coverage last year, and really didn't tackle that well. He started OK, then fell into a slump, and has been up and down all year. He is a declining player who is slowing down. We need more speed vs KC, not less. If we bring him back, and I am not sure I would, it has to be with one or more new players to push for Harris' starting nickel DB job.

[Formula 21]

I’m hoping year 2 in Staley’s scheme will show us an improved, smarter Tillery and Murray. They do have skills. Especially Murray.

[Steve]

I think there is a chance they can turn into the players we hoped when we drafted them.

Tillery is playing better than he was last year. Last year he was pretty much just lost. Now he flashes the occasional play amid all the aimless wandering. Not ideal, but it is an improvement. Murray is still figuring out what it takes to be a good NFL player, and there is the position change.

The odds are probably not great, but the odds are against every player who comes in the NFL anyway. There was never even a 50-50 chance of that happening to start with, and now it is less than that.

The big thing is that both of them have the physical tools to be top-notch players. Most of the players we will draft and bring in as UFA, street FA or undrafted FA don't have that kind of upside. So, there is no harm in giving Tillery and Murray a chance to develop through TC of next season. Bring them in, and give them a chance to develop, but let them know if they aren't playing well enough, they will get cut at the end of TC.

There is also not much advantage in cutting them now. Tillery and Murray were both high picks, Tillery only saves us the cost of a single league minimum player (a little over $900k). Murray could save more, up to $1.7 mill, but again, that is only enough to sign a bare-bones UFA, a backup quality player. Tillery is probably going to be the best pass-rushing DT we have, no matter how the draft and FA pan out. But it is always a numbers game on the DL, so can we afford to carry a pass rush specialist???? He has until TC to get himself out of that issue and develop into a full-time DL. Murray might be somewhat better off, since he would likely be a great ST guy.

Tillery will get the message his days are numbered because I don't think anyone on earth thinks we are going to pick up the 5th year option on his rookie deal. No one would pay Tillery $10.3 million per season (that is the estimate OTC gives for his 5th year option). Murray would be somewhat less, and he has an additional year, but no one is going to pick that up unless he plays better before that.

[beachcomber]

Joesph is a role player, who is still big and physical, but you can't put him on the field a ton, and you have to play to his strengths. He is best when a team wants to run right at him. When teams force him to run side to side, by pitching, sweeping, or focusing on outside zone runs (Dallas, Cleveland) he can be a real liability. You probably only want him playing 20-30% of the snaps, at most. He can line up at NT, and play DT in our 4 man fronts, but his salary has to reflect that he is not an every-down player anymore.

Harris had his worst season in pass coverage last year, and really didn't tackle that well. He started OK, then fell into a slump, and has been up and down all year. He is a declining player who is slowing down. We need more speed vs KC, not less. If we bring him back, and I am not sure I would, it has to be with one or more new players to push for Harris' starting nickel DB job.

the few plays I got a glimpse of tonight.... it did not look good for 25.... he looked lost on D, and w/his feet in the sand compared to the opposing pass catchers.