FA Agency Day 2 and beyond.

[shasta519 2,625]

39 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Every decent player has an impact on their team. I just think the term impact player means more, as confusing as that sounds. I think of an impact player like Luck, Leonard, TY Hilton, and Nelson. A guy who can change a game with one play or a guy who stands out well above the rest.

 

That's what it means. It's a difference maker...someone that commands attention and can change the game with one play.

[CR91 5,939]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

That's what it means. It's a difference maker...someone that commands attention and can change the game with one play.

 

so is hooker not a difference maker? All he had last year was 40 tackles and two picks. wow he sucks atleast by your definition 

[Defjamz26 1,902]

6 minutes ago, CR91 said:

So getting us in the top 10 in run defense, that had nothing to do with Geathers?

Sure he played a part. But not as big a part as the D-Line and our all pro LB did.

[CR91 5,939]

Just now, Defjamz26 said:

Sure he played a part. But not as big a part as the D-Line and our all pro LB did.

 

So without geathers, we'd be what in run defense top 15-20? thats not making an impact?

[stitches 7,513]

9 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

No I whole heartedly Agree Duke is the better player, but they fit the same role so I dont see Ballard looking there

I'd rather have 2 of that type than what Ajayi is. 

[NewColtsFan 7,404]

11 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Sure there is. About 2.5 yard/catch and 1 yard/carry.

 

Johnson is better at making people miss and picking up chunk yardage in the passing game. And he's actually a threat to run the ball (well...out of light fronts and shotgun). I really don't care to see Hines running the ball anymore.

 

What the.............????

 

You do know that Hines has only been a RB for basically two years.    Last season and his senior year in college.    He'll get better.

 

You do know that our offense will be improved and with it,  hopefully Hines has a chance to grow and improve with it.

 

Just because he's not great today,   doesn't mean he won't be much better tomorrow.

 

Hines should get better.     There's no apparent reason why he won't.

 

[shasta519 2,625]

7 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

So getting us in the top 10 in run defense, that had nothing to do with Geathers?

 

You wanna give up on hines after one season? He had 800 total yards and 4 tds

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

[NewColtsFan 7,404]

27 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Mitchell was more impactful in the 1st game he started. He ended up winning AFC defensive player of the week for 7 tackles, a PD, a INT, and a FF. It terms of impact it was more impactful than any game Geathers had this season. Check the game logs and you’ll see Geathers just racks up tackles. He doesn’t create turnovers or create negative plays in general.

 

And yet Mitchell has announced he won't be back next year, despite your rave reviews.

 

And, apparently,  we are still trying to re-sign Geathers,  despite your lukewarm reviews.

 

Imagine that......

 

[CR91 5,939]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

 

Who else on the eagles played the sproles role? 

[csmopar 6,706]

15 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Sure he played a part. But not as big a part as the D-Line and our all pro LB did.

but yet when he was out, KC shredded our D....

[Mr.Debonair 1,672]

7 minutes ago, csmopar said:

but yet when he was out, KC shredded our D....

Huh?

[shasta519 2,625]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

What the.............????

 

You do know that Hines has only been a RB for basically two years.    Last season and his senior year in college.    He'll get better.

 

You do know that our offense will be improved and with it,  hopefully Hines has a chance to grow and improve with it.

 

Just because he's not great today,   doesn't mean he won't be much better tomorrow.

 

Hines should get better.     There's no apparent reason why he won't.

 

 

No thanks...I want no part of that "Hines is a RB/Hines is not a RB" discussion that is going on.

 

All I will say is that his strength was clearly in the passing game. And on this team...a guy still figuring out how to play RB is not the deal candidate to be getting many carries each game. He wasn't making people miss much and he wasn't creating yards after contact. He could get better...but there are guys out there (and on this team) that are ahead of him.

[csmopar 6,706]

 

 

 

[krunk 3,998]

16 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

I think having Duke and Hines would be redundant because it's practically the same skill set.  Duke is like a more refined Hines to me.

[NewColtsFan 7,404]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

No thanks...I want no part of that "Hines is a RB/Hines is not a RB" discussion that is going on.

 

All I will say is that his strength was clearly in the passing game. And on this team...a guy still figuring out how to play RB is not the deal candidate to be getting many carries each game. He wasn't making people miss much and he wasn't creating yards after contact. He could get better...but there are guys out there (and on this team) that are ahead of him.

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

[chad72 6,506]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

[CR91 5,939]

 

[NewColtsFan 7,404]

10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

I was responding to Shasta who wrote that he didn't want to see Hines run the ball anymore.

 

That struck me as.....    unwise.

 

[shasta519 2,625]

13 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Who else on the eagles played the sproles role? 

 

Smallwood and Barner were back up change of pace guys. Barner took over returning punts when Sproles got hurt in 2017. 

 

Obviously...neither of those guys are Darren Sproles...he's one-of-a-kind. But they did some of the same things. It never hurts to have depth and redundancy built in. 

[CR91 5,939]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

Smallwood and Barner were back up change of pace guys. Barner took over returning punts when Sproles got hurt in 2017. 

 

Obviously...neither of those guys are Darren Sproles...he's one-of-a-kind. But they did some of the same things. It never hurts to have depth and redundancy built in. 

 

I get the depth part, but its not worth giving up a pick for a player that we would ask Hines to basically do the same thing even if he might be better

[richard pallo 2,322]

If we really want another RB go and get Crowell.  He's a nice fit and already released.  

[shasta519 2,625]

18 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

 

I agree...which I why I think people view Hines in more of a specialized role...like 2-1 personnel or out in the slot (which is how they used him at times last year). Having him to run out of the backfield (especially against a base defense) to keep the defense honest is sort of a waste of touches...when he's getting less than 4 YPC. He was very easy to stop in the run game. It would be one thing if he was ripping off chunk plays...but he hasn't so far.

 

But you bring up a larger point that I like...and this is a reason why I have wanted to add a RB than can run and catch for a while now. With the current depth chart, you have two guys that run well but don't offer much in the passing game (Mack and Wilkins) and a guy who can make some plays in the passing game but doesn't run well (Hines). To your point, the offense becomes predictable in those scenarios. 

 

Obviously these guys can improve other aspects of their game as they develop...but in the meantime being able to add a guy that can do both well (Coleman) or one that is a playmaker in the passing game but also productive in the run game (Johnson)...would be a boon to the offense I think. 

[NewColtsFan 7,404]

6 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree...which I why I think people view Hines in more of a specialized role...like 2-1 personnel or out in the slot (which is how they used him at times last year). Having him to run out of the backfield (especially against a base defense) to keep the defense honest is sort of a waste of touches...when he's getting less than 4 YPC. He was very easy to stop in the run game. It would be one thing if he was ripping off chunk plays...but he hasn't so far.

 

But you bring up a larger point that I like...and this is a reason why I have wanted to add a RB than can run and catch for a while now. With the current depth chart, you have two guys that run well but don't offer much in the passing game (Mack and Wilkins) and a guy who can make some plays in the passing game but doesn't run well (Hines). To your point, the offense becomes predictable in those scenarios. 

 

Obviously these guys can improve other aspects of their game as they develop...but in the meantime being able to add a guy that can do both well (Coleman) or one that is a playmaker in the passing game but also productive in the run game (Johnson)...would be a boon to the offense I think. 

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

[shasta519 2,625]

29 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

 

White is a good comp. He wasn't very much of a RB early on either. And he has improved...but he's not a guy that gets many carries each game. It's usually matchup-dependent. BB gave him like 8 total carries in the playoffs across three games. (Reich did the same thing with Hines as well).

 

The real difference for me is that in White's 2nd season (he missed nearly all of his rookie season)...he immediately proved to be much more dynamic in the passing game. Hines isn't there yet...whereas a guy like Duke Johnson is. 

 

And Duke's a better RB than both White and Hines.

 

 

[shasta519 2,625]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

 

Yeldon gets a lot of flack for some reason...but I like that he is versatile. And it never hurts to have RBs like that. 

[shasta519 2,625]

48 minutes ago, krunk said:

I think having Duke and Hines would be redundant because it's practically the same skill set.  Duke is like a more refined Hines to me.

 

Yeah...there is some redundancy. But redundancy isn't a bad thing when we are talking about a physical position like RB. And we are talking offensive weapons...there is no real limit to how they can be deployed.

 

In this case... I would say refined = better and more versatile...which is something the RB group could use.

[Blueblood23 324]

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

 

so is hooker not a difference maker? All he had last year was 40 tackles and two picks. wow he sucks atleast by your definition 

I know it's not popular on this forum, but Hooker has not been a difference maker. He may never be the player most think he is or maybe this year he becomes that guy. Really hope he does as I have many doubts.

[CR91 5,939]

2 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

I know it's not popular on this forum, but Hooker has not been a difference maker. He may never be the player most think he is or maybe this year he becomes that guy. Really hope he does as I have many doubts.

 

So all the 30+ yard tds that we've been famous for giving up before Hooker got here hasn't been reduced?

[Blueblood23 324]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

So all the 30+ yard tds that we've been famous for giving up before Hooker got here hasn't been reduced?

Sure it has since he plays 20+ yards off the line of scrimmage. Come on man you're better than that.

[krunk 3,998]

23 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

I'm hoping we look at Yeldon also

[CR91 5,939]

1 minute ago, Blueblood23 said:

Sure it has since he plays 20+ yards off the line of scrimmage. Come on man you're better than that.

 

Its not that simple. Why do you think teams don't try to go deep on us anymore? You think thats convenience? If you thinks its just because of the scheme, you're wrong 

[Blueblood23 324]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

Its not that simple. Why do you think teams don't try to go deep on us anymore? You think thats convenience? If you thinks its just because of the scheme, you're wrong 

OK then I'm wrong.

[Chloe6124 9,014]

 

[CR91 5,939]

Just now, Blueblood23 said:

OK then I'm wrong.

 

if its so simple to stop deep passes by playing a cover two, more teams would do it, instead Hill continues to run through zones and burn teams deep

Just now, Chloe6124 said:

 

 

Will Steve Ishamel give up 17 is the question  

[Mr.Debonair 1,672]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm hoping we look at Yeldon also

I think he just caught another swing pass on us lol

[Chloe6124 9,014]

I love Funchess’s personality. Reminds me a lot of Eric Ebron. Now we just need him to ball out for us.

[Fluke_33 2,353]

I just heard on the radio here in Mass that the pats offered Humfries 10m a year.  The radio hosts called it outrageous and couldn't beleive it.  Oddly earlier when they mentioned the colts signing Funchess to 10m for the 1 year they didn't think that shocking.  

 

Maybe someone out there knows more than i do!  hahaha

[CR91 5,939]

3 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

I just heard on the radio here in Mass that the pats offered Humfries 10m a year.  The radio hosts called it outrageous and couldn't beleive it.  Oddly earlier when they mentioned the colts signing Funchess to 10m for the 1 year they didn't think that shocking.  

 

Maybe someone out there knows more than i do!  hahaha

 

I think they were shocked he picked the titans over the pats is what they mean

[csmopar 6,706]

 

 

[Fluke_33 2,353]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

I think they were shocked he picked the titans over the pats is what they mean

no, they were specifically talking about the amount offered.  (They were also surprised that he didn't take it but that was a separate discussion)