Texans cut Phillip Lindsay

[Hammock Parties]

SIGN HIM VERCH!

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I'm not convinced it will be or it won't - I'm saying I simply don't care either way.

If he isn't - bully. If he is, Andy will immediately use that against teams.

I'd agree that he often doesn't play RBs he doesn't trust in pass pro but A) We're in some weird new era where teams just don't blitz Patrick Mahomes and B) He seems to maybe have a blind spot in this regard for veteran backs.

Bottom line is that he brings a skill we don't have and he'll likely bring it cheap. If we use it - great. If we don't - well that's too bad. I don't see any reason to NOT pick him up when all it would cost us is an IR trip for McKinnon.

This is the important aspect, IMO. If McKinnon is hurt, Lindsey could replace that.

[Chris Meck]

He might even see meaningful snaps....like next April.

[loochy]

So did we sign this piece of shit yet?

[Deberg_1990]

What’s CPs obsession with Has-beens?

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

OKAY NOW WAIT

You were just insisting that Lindsay's lack of blocking cannot be a cue to defenses.

Now you're agreeing with DJLN that it's a cue from which we can take advantage.

Pick a position, please.

Lol, i'm mocking you, dude.

My position is simple: His blocking is likely adequate enough. Regardless, his limited snap usage would be restricted to packaged plays. Plays that the Chiefs change seemingly every week.

Because his snaps are limited, and because his potential usage is vast, the idea that his presence would telegraph plays is ****ing reeruned.

You seem stuck on this idea that if he "can't" pass block then that means the Chiefs will only bring him in for run plays, thus telegraphing the plays. That's bum**** reeruned and in no way indicative of how the Chiefs call plays.

AND if that even were the case. If your imaginary 1969 football world works out like that, all that means is we'll magically put in Lindsay every time we wanna take a shot over the top.

But alas, football doesn't work in real life the way you imagined it in your head.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

You seem stuck on this idea that if he "can't" pass block then that means the Chiefs will only bring him in for run plays, thus telegraphing the plays. That's bum**** reeruned and in no way indicative of how the Chiefs call plays.

In fairness - that IS kinda how Gore has been used.

Right at half the snaps he's been in for have been handoffs to him. That's a pretty hard 'tell'.

But as we've kicked around in the various "Chiefs are a power running team now that Patrick Mahomes is ass and the Cover 2 cannot be beaten" threads, it just doesn't take all that many times running the football to scare teams. The inverse would also be true. If you're throwing the ball even half the time Lindsay is in the backfield, that's going to be good enough to keep teams from truly selling out to beat it.

Moreover, they're just not going to dedicate much in the way of valuable practice reps trying to deal with stretch plays to Lindsay and diagnosing same.

There's no reason to worry about tells here.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I'm not convinced it will be or it won't - I'm saying I simply don't care either way.

If he isn't - bully. If he is, Andy will immediately use that against teams.

I'd agree that he often doesn't play RBs he doesn't trust in pass pro but A) We're in some weird new era where teams just don't blitz Patrick Mahomes and B) He seems to maybe have a blind spot in this regard for veteran backs.

Bottom line is that he brings a skill we don't have and he'll likely bring it cheap. If we use it - great. If we don't - well that's too bad. I don't see any reason to NOT pick him up when all it would cost us is an IR trip for McKinnon.

You know, I hadn't considered (A).

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

What’s CPs obsession with Has-beens?

They are cheap.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

You seem stuck on this idea that if he "can't" pass block then that means the Chiefs will only bring him in for run plays, thus telegraphing the plays. That's bum**** reeruned and in no way indicative of how the Chiefs call plays.

Going to go with DJLN on this one -- that is how they call plays. They sculpt the plays to what the players do well and avoid plays they don't do well.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Going to go with DJLN on this one -- that is how they call plays. They sculpt the plays to what the players do well and avoid plays they don't do well.

What?

DJ just said they run Gore around a 50/50 split. He just told you that they'd use Lindsay similarly. That's exactly wtf i've been saying. THAT THEY AREN'T GOING TO JUST RUN HIM EVERY SNAP. WHICH MEANS THERE IS NO "TELL". DJ and I disagree there. 50/50 to me is balance, not a tell. And it's telling you that the Chiefs are as likely to throw as they are to run with Gore in.

Your initial argument is that he "can't" passblock, therefore they won't use him on passing downs, thus telegraphing plays. I told you that was dumb.

So yes, thanks for agreeing with me i guess.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

DJ just said they run Gore around a 50/50 split. He just told you that they'd use Lindsay similarly. That's exactly wtf i've been saying. THAT THEY AREN'T GOING TO JUST RUN HIM EVERY SNAP. WHICH MEANS THERE IS NO "TELL". DJ and I disagree there. 50/50 to me is balance, not a tell.

Disagree, I'm afraid. If they're running Gore "50%" of the time he's in, that's a tell, given his limited snaps.

Also, take it down a notch.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Disagree, I'm afraid. If they're running Gore "50%" of the time he's in, that's a tell, given his limited snaps.

Also, take it down a notch.

It's a tell. It's a tell that they're as likely to run as they are to pass. How the **** else do you interpret equal distribution other than equally?

If you want to pose your argument as, "they're more likely to run with Gore than say, with CEH" - purely based on the volume of passing plays. Sure. Specifically because we pass at such a large clip. Even so, it's 50/50 instead of what, 60/40 with CEH? That ain't enough to swing the pendulum.

Either way, it makes no difference as these defenses aren't coming up for Gore. Or CEH. Nor would they for Lindsay. Only one team has gotten away from the "Chiefs Defense" this season. That was the Raiders and look what happened to them.

Bah, all of that is moot. The point is, your initial argument sucked. We've moved the goal posts now, and you can latch onto DJ's nuts all you want, but the point is the Chiefs can do a variety of plays with Lindsay, none of which would insinuate they're telegraphing shit.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

It's a tell. It's a tell that they're as likely to run as they are to pass. How the **** else do you interpret equal distribution other than equally?

Tells aren't 100% certainty, pal. Maybe you haven't played sports, but surely you've played poker.

Think of it this way.

There are a number of things you can do with a RB who can stay in to block. But you scratch out those plays when you have one that can't.

DCs know that better than anybody. And seeing Lindsay in the huddle means they can reliable scratch out the plays you know they're not going to do because the RB in question can't do them. That allows you to call a defense geared towards the smaller set of plays, and it gives you better odds on nailing the offense.

[Chiefspants]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

What’s CPs obsession with Has-beens?

See Ingram, Melvin.

[VAChief]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

What’s CPs obsession with Has-beens?

For complimentary pieces nothing wrong with taking a flyer on guys that might add something you don’t have, in this case speed at RB.