PDA

View Full Version : Our opening day starters.


Rain Man
09-06-2005, 01:24 PM
How do we compare to last year? I think the red is a downgrade and the green is an upgrade.

This does not take into account the dual-edged sword of age and experience.


2004/2005

Holmes/Holmes - Same
Richardson/Richardson - Same
Green/Green - Same, assuming that he's 100%
Kennison/Kennison - Same
Morton/Parker - I wasn't a huge Morton fan, but he was a proven veteran. Let's hope that Samie improves the position, but for this year I'd expect not much more than breakeven, if that.
Gonzalez/Gonzalez - Same
Roaf/Roaf - Same
Waters/Waters - Same
Wiegman/Wiegman - Same
Shields/Shields - Same, assuming he's 100%
Welbourne/Black - I would expect this to be a bit of an upgrade so long as Black can keep performing like last year.
Tynes/Tynes - Same
Baker/Colquitt - Massive improvement unless Colquitt is one-legged.
Woods/Wesley - I think this is Wesley's natural position. I think he can improve the position
Wesley/Knight - I keep hearing that it'll be an improvement. Let's hope so.
McCleon/McCleon - He has to play better than he did last year, right? Same until Warfield comes back, then a significant upgrade.
Warfield/Surtain - I like Warfield, but Surtain will be an improvement.
Barber/Johnson - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Fujita/Bell - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Mitchell/Mitchell - All signs point toward significant improvement. (Was Mitchell our Week 1 starter? I don't recall.)
Hicks/Hicks - Same
Sims/Sims - Same (though I'm hopeful for improvement)
Browning/Dalton - Hopefully a slight upgrade
Holliday/Wilkerson - Can't get worse. Let's assume that this is breakeven for the moment, though I'm a Wilkerson fan.


Agree? Disagree?

Sam
09-06-2005, 01:31 PM
How do we compare to last year?
Morton/Parker - I wasn't a huge Morton fan, but he was a proven veteran. Let's hope that Samie improves the position, but for this year I'd expect not much more than breakeven, if that.

Agree? Disagree?

Had to quote to see which one was green and wich one was red, I'm colorblind.

I said it before, I think Parker is going to have a break out year. Nothing to worry about, more production from this position this year.

As for the defense as a whole, they're going to do fine. The Jets are going to be good compitition for them to start against. I think Penington is overrated. He's also got a recent surgery to prove himself recovered from.

Dawson4004
09-06-2005, 01:32 PM
I agree, but I dont know if Wesley is a natural FS, he sometimes looks lost in coverage. gets sucked in to easy on playaction looking to help the run. I think he is faster then Woods but does that translate into playing better? I dont know. but I think if Wesley stuggles then try Woods and if he cant get it done put in (dare I say it) Bartee.

John_Wayne
09-06-2005, 01:37 PM
How do we compare to last year? I think the red is a downgrade and the green is an upgrade.

This does not take into account the dual-edged sword of age and experience.


2004/2005

Holmes/Holmes - Same
Richardson/Richardson - Same
Green/Green - Same, assuming that he's 100%
Kennison/Kennison - Same
Morton/Parker - I wasn't a huge Morton fan, but he was a proven veteran. Let's hope that Samie improves the position, but for this year I'd expect not much more than breakeven, if that.
Gonzalez/Gonzalez - Same
Roaf/Roaf - Same
Waters/Waters - Same
Wiegman/Wiegman - Same
Shields/Shields - Same, assuming he's 100%
Welbourne/Black - I would expect this to be a bit of an upgrade so long as Black can keep performing like last year.
Tynes/Tynes - Same
Baker/Colquitt - Massive improvement unless Colquitt is one-legged.
Woods/Wesley - I think this is Wesley's natural position. I think he can improve the position
Wesley/Knight - I keep hearing that it'll be an improvement. Let's hope so.
McCleon/McCleon - He has to play better than he did last year, right? Same until Warfield comes back, then a significant upgrade.
Warfield/Surtain - I like Warfield, but Surtain will be an improvement.
Barber/Johnson - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Fujita/Bell - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Mitchell/Mitchell - All signs point toward significant improvement. (Was Mitchell our Week 1 starter? I don't recall.)
Hicks/Hicks - Same
Sims/Sims - Same (though I'm hopeful for improvement)
Browning/Dalton - Hopefully a slight upgrade
Holliday/Wilkerson - Can't get worse. Let's assume that this is breakeven for the moment, though I'm a Wilkerson fan.


Agree? Disagree?

Perfect. Nothing to disagree with.

ct
09-06-2005, 01:37 PM
I don't see Parker as a downgrade from Morton, at a minimum, a push. Potential for an upgrade, even early this year.

I also disagree with Black as an upgrade over Welbourne at RT. I've seen little to be confident in Black starting for us right now. I really hope Sampson can give it a go Sunday.

Wlkerson is defintely an upgrade over Holliday, but an upgrade over Allen I'm not so sure. I do see some weakness vs. the run from Allen, but we've got to get a pass rush from someone on the D-Line on 1st/2nd downs. We cannot blitz all the freakin time!

Another note, DJ is taking over Fujita's spot, and Bell is taking over Barbers spot. You crossed those up. And I think Monty started at MLB due to injury week1 last year.

StcChief
09-06-2005, 01:45 PM
Kennison difference moving to #1 receiver.
D Coverage personnel will/should be tougher on him.

Parker/Morton - upgrade for him vs. their #2 D cover guy.

CanadianChief
09-06-2005, 03:56 PM
Kennison difference moving to #1 receiver.
D Coverage personnel will/should be tougher on him.

Parker/Morton - upgrade for him vs. their #2 D cover guy.

Shouldn't Tony G still be considered our #1 receiver? :)

StcChief
09-06-2005, 04:00 PM
Shouldn't Tony G still be considered our #1 receiver? :)#1 and #2 are the positional assignment for WR.

1 is L WR
2 is R WR

3 is normally a slot on either side

Tony has most catches is listed as a TE not WR

cmh6476
09-06-2005, 11:40 PM
wasn't monty biesel or someone our Week 1 starter? kawika was out week 1, it was going to be Maslowski and he couldn't go, and I think it was Biesel. let me see if I can find it...

cmh6476
09-06-2005, 11:47 PM
wasn't monty biesel or someone our Week 1 starter? kawika was out week 1, it was going to be Maslowski and he couldn't go, and I think it was Biesel. let me see if I can find it...


http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040912_KC@DEN

Beisel was our wk 1 starter last year at MLB. Some may say that the reason we sucked so much at the beginning of the season last year was because we didnt have an MLB...

Beisel started the week 2 carolina game, week 3 houston game, and the week 4 baltimore game it appears. Mitchell was in there for some stats againts Baltimore though, and it looks like he played and had one tackle week 3 against houston.:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20041004_KC@BAL

I don;t think Mitchell actually started until a little ways into the season!

keg in kc
09-06-2005, 11:49 PM
Well, that's definitely a huge downgrade, then...I mean Beisel is a f*cking Patriot now.

A f*cking PATRIOT!

We're doomed.

Doomed.

tk13
09-06-2005, 11:52 PM
Yeah, Mitchell was hurt all preseason, Beisel started at MLB. Remember he had that leaping INT off of Plummer at the beginning of the 2nd half.

If Warfield hadn't been suspended. We'd really had 9 different defensive starters for opening weekend, including Wesley's move to FS.

cmh6476
09-06-2005, 11:53 PM
Well, that's definitely a huge downgrade, then...I mean Beisel is a f*cking Patriot now.

A f*cking PATRIOT!

We're doomed.

Doomed.

I was up in RF, with a couple buddies, and we met up with this Pats fan that lives up there that posts over at fftoday.

I coulda swore this guy I was with was basically saying anyone the pats take is good! If they would have drafted Tim Rattay instead of Brady (who they were looking at I guess around the same pick) he would have succeeded there as well. Said Beisel will excel because of the system. Says it' the system that makes the playerts, not necessarily vice vers!

I was just like wtf? :shake:

not that I want to hijack you thread RM :(

Archie F. Swin
09-06-2005, 11:54 PM
Dante Hall?

cmh6476
09-06-2005, 11:55 PM
Kendall Gammon = Kendall Gammon!

Bowser
09-07-2005, 12:01 AM
Nice summary.

One correction - Dante Hall was our starter at receiver due to injury. I think Parker is better suited to start than Hall is.

Keg already covered the Beisel/Mitchell issue.

CosmicPal
09-07-2005, 12:09 AM
Not sold on the Fujita/Bell improvement yet. Fuj was our leading tackler the past two years and Bell hasn't seen the playing field enough to tell me he won't be hurt after two games.

Something of value you are overlooking is the reserves. For instance, Johnson is a great improvement over last year when at this time, he was a third-stringer behind Blaylock.

The LB corp is improved as is possibly the D-Line and D-backs.

keg in kc
09-07-2005, 12:27 AM
Not sold on the Fujita/Bell improvement yet. Fuj was our leading tackler the past two years and Bell hasn't seen the playing field enough to tell me he won't be hurt after two games.I wouldn't worry too much about it. Tackles are one of the most overrated stats in sports and getting a bunch of them doesn't mean a guy is actually good. Particularly if he's on a bad defense, in which case somebody has to tackle a guy on every play that doesn't end in a score. When your team gives up yardage in chunks and the other teams can drive at will, odds are someone on the roster is going to 'benefit' from that, with inflated tackle totals. Mostly meaningless tackles that don't force punts or turnovers.

Don't get me wrong, I like Fujita, or liked, I suppose, but this "leading tackler" BS is just that. BS. The real issue isn't raw tackle numbers, it's whether the position is improved in terms of tackles for loss, sacks and coverage (which isn't something easy to quantify in stats, of course), all of which combines to tell you how much of an impact a player really has on a game.

And it's not Fujita/Bell, in any case. It's Fujita/Johnson. And, while, again, I liked Fujita, I don't know that it could be argued that he was a standout player in any way. He didn't make game-changing/game-turning plays. He was pretty average, all things being equal. And I think we can get at least that much from Bell, or Johnson, or Fox, or maybe even Griffin. Hopefully we get more.

JMO of course.

Demonpenz
09-07-2005, 12:32 AM
maz lead the team in tackles one year didn't he? That just shows you right there.

Deberg_1990
09-07-2005, 01:06 AM
so does Rich Scanlon = Rich Scanlon???

Logical
09-07-2005, 01:26 AM
Nice analysis Kevin, not sure how you could color Mitchell/Mitchell but other than that everything sounded about right.

Count Alex's Losses
09-07-2005, 01:27 AM
Nice analysis Kevin, not sure how you could color Mitchell/Mitchell but other than that everything sounded about right.

Mitchell is clearly improved.

tk13
09-07-2005, 01:32 AM
Mitchell is clearly improved.
New! Improved! It's Kawika 3.0!

Logical
09-07-2005, 01:33 AM
Mitchell is clearly improved.If you go that way then Tynes/Tynes

Last year we did not know about Tynes but had reason to hope, now we know he is not good.

Count Alex's Losses
09-07-2005, 01:34 AM
If you go that way then Tynes/Tynes

I don't really think he's any worse.

Logical
09-07-2005, 01:35 AM
I don't really think he's any worse.You also do not know Mitchell is better.

Deberg_1990
09-07-2005, 01:37 AM
I don't really think he's any worse.

good, because he couldnt get much worse than last year.

tk13
09-07-2005, 01:50 AM
Tynes was not THAT bad last year. He was a rookie kicker, and he kicked like one at times, but he wasn't the worst kicker in the league. He certainly wasn't any worse than 2nd round pick Mr. Kaeding. Really Tynes just had one bad game very early in the season that's being held against him a whole year later.

Count Alex's Losses
09-07-2005, 01:51 AM
good, because he couldnt get much worse than last year.

Tynes had a very good season last year. He had one bad game. WTF are you talking about?

Deberg_1990
09-07-2005, 02:00 AM
Tynes had a very good season last year. He had one bad game. WTF are you talking about?

that was in reference to Kawika Mitchell. Not Tynes.

Logical
09-07-2005, 02:44 AM
Tynes had a very good season last year. He had one bad game. WTF are you talking about?I have no idea what you are thinking but 17-23 with 2 missed extra points is definitely a bad season for any kicker rookie or not.

As to Kaeding vs Tynes tk13 Kaeding was 80% and missed only 1 extra point where as Tynes was 73% and missed two extra points so I would say Kaeding was better.

Count Alex's Losses
09-07-2005, 02:53 AM
I have no idea what you are thinking but 17-23 with 2 missed extra points is definitely a bad season for any kicker rookie or not.

As to Kaeding vs Tynes tk13 Kaeding was 80% and missed only 1 extra point where as Tynes was 73% and missed two extra points so I would say Kaeding was better.

I wouldn't say Tynes had a bad season. It was average. And one of those missed kicks was a block, the other was a 58 yarder. He really only had four "true" misses.

tk13
09-07-2005, 03:03 AM
Well, for one, don't forget that one of those misses was a 58 yarder, and another was blocked by 9 foot tall Langston Walker of the Raiders.

Even more importantly, you have to really look deeper into the stats. Almost half of Kaedings attempts came within 29 yards, 12 of his 25.

Tynes on the other hand, only had 5 of his 23 FG's from 29 yards in, a much, much smaller percentage.

Plus, you say 7 percentage points difference between them, when you're talking in terms of so few FG's, one miss makes a big difference. For instance, if you give Tynes that blocked FG back, his accuracy shoots up to 78%.

tk13
09-07-2005, 03:17 AM
Thinking about it, that really might be a pretty interesting commentary on how less conservative we are. Half the Chargers FG attempts came from within 30 yards. We only did that 5 times all year. Maybe we're just more successful in the red zone, but knowing Marty, it's probably something more than that.

Logical
09-07-2005, 03:29 AM
Thinking about it, that really might be a pretty interesting commentary on how less conservative we are. Half the Chargers FG attempts came from within 30 yards. We only did that 5 times all year. Maybe we're just more successful in the red zone, but knowing Marty, it's probably something more than that.That Marty is more conservative is certainly not in question.

Count Alex's Losses
09-07-2005, 03:45 AM
Hell, Kaeding missed two kicks under 30 yards. That's criminal. Had Tynes done that, everyone here would hate him.

cmh6476
09-07-2005, 10:02 AM
You also do not know Mitchell is better.

From everything you hear from the coaches it sounds like he will be.

Watching the pre-season games, what I notcied is that Mitchell seems to be playing better because he has more help on the outside. You cannot argue that Bell/ Johnson have a lot more speed on the outside than Fujita/ Barber did. Every game you'd see our LBs get beat to the outside and also get beat a couple plays in pass coverage. it appears now we have the pseed on the outside we need, and our OLBs should be better in pass coverage.

What I've seen from preseason is our OLBs getting to the outside and cutting off the play, forcing the ball carrier to the inside and Kawika breaking up the play. Maybe it's just me, but I think Kawika Mitchell will be a better football player because of the improved talent around him.

Lzen
09-07-2005, 10:24 AM
Well, for one, don't forget that one of those misses was a 58 yarder, and another was blocked by 9 foot tall Langston Walker of the Raiders.

Even more importantly, you have to really look deeper into the stats. Almost half of Kaedings attempts came within 29 yards, 12 of his 25.

Tynes on the other hand, only had 5 of his 23 FG's from 29 yards in, a much, much smaller percentage.

Plus, you say 7 percentage points difference between them, when you're talking in terms of so few FG's, one miss makes a big difference. For instance, if you give Tynes that blocked FG back, his accuracy shoots up to 78%.


Very, very good analysis. :clap:

Lbedrock1
09-07-2005, 10:53 AM
How do we compare to last year? I think the red is a downgrade and the green is an upgrade.

This does not take into account the dual-edged sword of age and experience.


2004/2005

Holmes/Holmes - Same
Richardson/Richardson - Same
Green/Green - Same, assuming that he's 100%
Kennison/Kennison - Same
Morton/Parker - I wasn't a huge Morton fan, but he was a proven veteran. Let's hope that Samie improves the position, but for this year I'd expect not much more than breakeven, if that.
Gonzalez/Gonzalez - Same
Roaf/Roaf - Same
Waters/Waters - Same
Wiegman/Wiegman - Same
Shields/Shields - Same, assuming he's 100%
Welbourne/Black - I would expect this to be a bit of an upgrade so long as Black can keep performing like last year.
Tynes/Tynes - Same
Baker/Colquitt - Massive improvement unless Colquitt is one-legged.
Woods/Wesley - I think this is Wesley's natural position. I think he can improve the position
Wesley/Knight - I keep hearing that it'll be an improvement. Let's hope so.
McCleon/McCleon - He has to play better than he did last year, right? Same until Warfield comes back, then a significant upgrade.
Warfield/Surtain - I like Warfield, but Surtain will be an improvement.
Barber/Johnson - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Fujita/Bell - All signs point to a significant upgrade
Mitchell/Mitchell - All signs point toward significant improvement. (Was Mitchell our Week 1 starter? I don't recall.)
Hicks/Hicks - Same
Sims/Sims - Same (though I'm hopeful for improvement)
Browning/Dalton - Hopefully a slight upgrade
Holliday/Wilkerson - Can't get worse. Let's assume that this is breakeven for the moment, though I'm a Wilkerson fan.


Agree? Disagree?
I thought surtain was here to take McCleons spot. After week 4 Mccleon will be coming in off the bench and Warfield and Surtain will be the starters.

philfree
09-07-2005, 11:00 AM
I know he's not a starter but I think Wilson is gonna help our offense and he will get more then a backups share of stats. Between Wilson and Parker we have a more dangerous set of recievers then we had last year IMO. The only question I see on our offense is the O line and can it maintain the level of play it's carried for the last 3 years? If our O line plays well we'll be the best O in the league again.


PhilFree:arrow:

Rain Man
09-07-2005, 11:00 AM
I thought surtain was here to take McCleons spot. After week 4 Mccleon will be coming in off the bench and Warfield and Surtain will be the starters.

Surtain actually took Warfield's spot, and Warfield took McCleon's spot. He's moving to RCB from LCB. But you're right about the end result.

Gaz
09-07-2005, 12:09 PM
Based on admittedly scant evidence, I think Parker will be an upgrade over Morton. Younger, faster, hungier.

I think that Holmes/Johnson is a major upgrade over Holmes. I really want to see some formations with both of them in the backfield together. The multiple attacks from that formation are gleefully boggling.

I also believe that Wilson will add more options for Saunders to conjure with.

In fact, I see only [1] potential downgrade from last season: Shields clearly ain’t right. Can he last the full season? That is my primary concern. Of course, I wonder the same thing every time I see Roaf gimping around, and then he puts the proverbial pedal down come game time.

xoxo~
Gaz
Shameless Parker-booster, running on raw faith.

Gaz
09-07-2005, 12:12 PM
Let me add that I am very pleased to have Colquitt on the roster. Booming punts with lots of hang time. The “lefty making the ball harder to catch” thing is gravy on the cake.

xoxo~
Gaz
Counting down the moments until kickoff.

Skip Towne
09-07-2005, 12:15 PM
Let me add that I am very pleased to have Colquitt on the roster. Booming punts with lots of hang time. The “lefty making the ball harder to catch” thing is gravy on the cake.

xoxo~
Gaz
Counting down the moments until kickoff.

You put gravy on cake? :shrug:

Gaz
09-07-2005, 12:17 PM
Meta-linguistic awareness is simply wasted on some folks.

xoxo~
Gaz
A pearl cast among swine.

RedThat
09-07-2005, 12:27 PM
Based on admittedly scant evidence, I think Parker will be an upgrade over Morton. Younger, faster, hungier.

I think that Holmes/Johnson is a major upgrade over Holmes. I really want to see some formations with both of them in the backfield together. The multiple attacks from that formation are gleefully boggling.

I also believe that Wilson will add more options for Saunders to conjure with.

In fact, I see only [1] potential downgrade from last season: Shields clearly ain’t right. Can he last the full season? That is my primary concern. Of course, I wonder the same thing every time I see Roaf gimping around, and then he puts the proverbial pedal down come game time.

xoxo~
Gaz
Shameless Parker-booster, running on raw faith.


I think Roaf and Shields will both be fine. I wouldn't worry there. Those guys are iron men.

RedThat
09-07-2005, 12:31 PM
Gaz,

I would also like to add, our depth on the O-line is fine. If either Roaf or Shields went down, Black and Welbourn are capable backups. Now both Black and Welbourn are not Shields and Roaf, I still think they're capable of doing the job.

Rain Man
09-07-2005, 12:36 PM
You put gravy on cake? :shrug:

Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.

Gaz
09-07-2005, 12:38 PM
Capable, yes. Great depth. And I expect that they will be moving into the starting roles next season. Heavy on the next, please.

But, as you pointed out, they are not Roaf & Shields. Losing either of them has to limit the candy Saunders pulls out of his bag.

xoxo~
Gaz
Worrywart.

DT58_sackmonste
09-07-2005, 01:16 PM
comparing Tynes from this year to last year...I think is definitely DOWNGRADE. His mental state has to be on the fringe right now. He knows that if goes out and misses a field goal on opening day that the fans (Not to mention Vermeil) will be ALL OVER HIM!! Last year he had just one the job and confidence was very high. I just hope he can pull it together and give as a constistent performance!!!!