Upgrades Since '17 - O Edition | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Upgrades Since '17 - O Edition

Has anyone actually looked at Kilgores’s career in SF? Special teamer early in his career, riddled with injuries and missed games, last year was his first time playing all 16 games...so you’re argument of practice time is a moot point. Grades out poorly in pass protection. What he lacks in talent he makes up in effort; still a career avg C at best.

Sitton is an upgrade at guard, but the rest are a bit unproven. We can hope they improve, but compared to the top 15 OL in the NFL, I can’t find reason to be optimistic. I just don’t agree with everyone’s optimism here.

Yes I've looked into his career quite a bit. He had a major injury and it took a while for him to get beyond it. He doesn't to my knowledge have any degenerative conditions and now has a clean bill of health. Unlike Pouncey. He will practice. Unlike Pouncey.
 
It's a false construct. If you don't think a move is an upgrade, explain why. Just like if you do think a move is an upgrade, you've got to explain why.

The "on paper" thing and the "wait to see how it plays out" thing are completely useless arguments.
But people don't though. They just say "Well, Davis will be better than he was last year. Minkah will be excellent and a proper FS." Stuff like that. They just assume that every piece is an upgrade. So sometimes I, and others, will reply and point out that yes, they look like upgrades on paper, but they won't all work out that way.

I don't know who will work out, and who won't. I don't even have guesses. I just know that some won't, as is the case every year.

I also don't see that "on paper" or "wait to see how it plays out" are any kind of arguments. They're just statements.
 
I honestly think the receiving corps WILL be better this season, and I'll actually just go ahead and say it, and eat my lumps if they fall flat on their faces.

I think Danny Amendola will be better than Jarvis Landry when he's on the field (maybe 8 games?). I think Jakeem Grant will get more playing time and that's going to matter. I think Mike Gesicki will at least be a wash with Julius Thomas. And I'm not even going into Albert WIlson, who I think is going to pleasantly surprise some people here.

RB is where I'm a little concerned, just because Frank Gore is really getting up there in years and Kenyan Drake is now going to have to shoulder the load for 16 games, something he has never done before. I think that if Drake can stay healthy for 16 games, he will be a breakout star player in the NFL, but I'm a little worried about whether or not he can manage that.

Hey I actually agree with you here, don't get me wrong. You know, give me Mike Gesicki over Julius Thomas any day. Give me Kenyan Drake over Jay Ajayi any day. And like you, I believe the makeup of the WR unit is better.

But I do think we have to acknowledge that the bull arguments in all cases are not overwhelming. Mike Gesicki is a rookie.

Jay Ajayi played well in 2016 and played well when he went to Philadelphia, and Kenyan Drake has a history of injuries. And if you really think about it, and I know it's not this simple but still, we've replaced Jay Ajayi and Damien Williams with Frank Gore and a rookie Kalen Ballage...and you could argue that should be considered a flat downgrade.

And then with the WRs unit...I mean, for whatever this is worth and I don't put a ton of store in it obviously but it needs to be said, Jarvis Landry is considered to be an elite player at what he does. Wes Welker was never an ultra efficient player on yards per target or yards per catch bases. But his value both in New England and Denver was clear. That's gone and in his place are two guys who seem half as proven.

I think there's a valid bull case at all three positions, and I think there's a valid bear case at all three positions. Some years and some positions I'm going to lean toward the bear case. Some years and some positions the bull case is just going to make SENSE to me. This year and these three positions happen to be the latter. I think Mike Gesicki could be an animal, particularly in the red zone. I think Jakeem Grant getting more opportunities will pay off, and I think both Danny Amendola and Albert Wilson will also pay dividends. I think the new unit without Jarvis Landry will get off to faster starts, which will pay off. I think the makeup of the group in terms of blockers and run-after-catch guys will give improve our screen game. I think Kenyan Drake is so much more of an ideal fit for this offense compared with Jay Ajayi that it shouldn't even be arguable, and I like that both backups behind him have REAL pass blocking/catching ability. It's not just wishful thinking with either guy, they know what they'e doing catching passes.
 
But people don't though. They just say "Well, Davis will be better than he was last year. Minkah will be excellent and a proper FS." Stuff like that. They just assume that every piece is an upgrade. So sometimes I, and others, will reply and point out that yes, they look like upgrades on paper, but they won't all work out that way.

I don't know who will work out, and who won't. I don't even have guesses. I just know that some won't, as is the case every year.

I also don't see that "on paper" or "wait to see how it plays out" are any kind of arguments. They're just statements.

Not going to disagree, but I will make a qualification. People on both sides seem to think the upgrade argument is black or white. I think not. For example, I think only agenda-driven people will deny Tannehill is an upgrade over Cutler, Gesicki is an upgrade over JT, and Fitz is an upgrade over no FS last year. The flip side is a downgrade from Suh. Yes, there is a chance things don't work that way, but sane, honest people see the likelihood of those upgrades/downgrades as quite high. OTOH, is the 3rd LB. Timmons replaced by . . . no one knows and no one can express much confidence. Between those two examples are guys like Tank who SHOULD be better with a year's experience, and Davis, who SHOULD be an upgrade. I'll not venture into the Landry emotionalism.
There are people here who list all the personnel changes and give reasons why each will fail. If hx teaches the willing anything, it's that a few changes will work and some won't. There will be surprises and disappointments. There will be some who are good enough to start until replaced. That's the NFL. One of my annoyances is those who answer all predictions with "too early" or "won't know until September" as if a prediction can't be changes. Someone made a reference to the weather forecast. Everyone knows next weeks forecast will change, but that doesn't prevent predictions.
 
For 4 straight years?


Everyone knows Miami Dolphins special teams coach Darren Rizzi hand-selected kicker Jason Sanders in the seventh round.

So Rizzi came to a recent news conference prepared to explain why a player who missed 29 percent of his college chances could be worthy of being one of only two kickers drafted in April.

“The first thing is when I go in and evaluate, when we look at the kicker position, the number one thing you’re looking at is the kicker, the talent, the ability,” Rizzi said. “A lot of people don’t want to hear this but really, when you look at a college placekicker, one of the last things I look at is field goal percentage; and there’s a reason for that.”

Rizzi explained that in college, the snapping and holding just isn’t as consistent as it is at the NFL level.
Rizzi then went on to outline how Stephen Gostkowski (76 percent), Matt Bryant (72 percent), Mason Crosby (74 percent), Phil Dawson (74 percent) and Robbie Gould (63 percent) were much better in the pros than in college.

http://dailydolphin.blog.palmbeachp...d-a-kicker-who-missed-10-of-35-college-kicks/
 
Not going to disagree, but I will make a qualification. People on both sides seem to think the upgrade argument is black or white. I think not. For example, I think only agenda-driven people will deny Tannehill is an upgrade over Cutler, Gesicki is an upgrade over JT, and Fitz is an upgrade over no FS last year. The flip side is a downgrade from Suh. Yes, there is a chance things don't work that way, but sane, honest people see the likelihood of those upgrades/downgrades as quite high. OTOH, is the 3rd LB. Timmons replaced by . . . no one knows and no one can express much confidence. Between those two examples are guys like Tank who SHOULD be better with a year's experience, and Davis, who SHOULD be an upgrade. I'll not venture into the Landry emotionalism.
There are people here who list all the personnel changes and give reasons why each will fail. If hx teaches the willing anything, it's that a few changes will work and some won't. There will be surprises and disappointments. There will be some who are good enough to start until replaced. That's the NFL. One of my annoyances is those who answer all predictions with "too early" or "won't know until September" as if a prediction can't be changes. Someone made a reference to the weather forecast. Everyone knows next weeks forecast will change, but that doesn't prevent predictions.
I absolutely agree with you here. Most of the ones you mention should work out. My grievance is with those who more or list every position we've changed players in this year, and announce they'll be upgrades. I've a slight worry over Gesicki. I've no idea why! Some weird random hunch, so it's basically worthless. But just have this nagging feeling that he's the big one who fails for us.
 
I absolutely agree with you here. Most of the ones you mention should work out. My grievance is with those who more or list every position we've changed players in this year, and announce they'll be upgrades. I've a slight worry over Gesicki. I've no idea why! Some weird random hunch, so it's basically worthless. But just have this nagging feeling that he's the big one who fails for us.

I'm gonna be a homer here. Gesicki, at his worst, equals JT, so no downgrade. Full list, I see Tannehill, Sitton, Gesicki, McMillan, and Fitz as upgrades. I'm far more worried about Kilgore, Davis, Smythe, although, statistically, two of them will perform well. The wild card is Baker. I have almost no worries about depth upgrades. That leaves Tunsil, Drake, Godchaux, Taylor, Spense, Quinn, Harris, Anthony, Tank, McTyer as guys who should improve from last year. If just half of them play well, those are significant upgrades.
To me, if all but one of my 'easy upgrade' list play close to potential, two of my 'worries play close to potential, and half my 'more experienced guys play close to potential, that's a lot of upgrades. No, there's no guarantee I'm right, but it shows why some of us are optimistic.
 
I'm gonna be a homer here. Gesicki, at his worst, equals JT, so no downgrade. Full list, I see Tannehill, Sitton, Gesicki, McMillan, and Fitz as upgrades. I'm far more worried about Kilgore, Davis, Smythe, although, statistically, two of them will perform well. The wild card is Baker. I have almost no worries about depth upgrades. That leaves Tunsil, Drake, Godchaux, Taylor, Spense, Quinn, Harris, Anthony, Tank, McTyer as guys who should improve from last year. If just half of them play well, those are significant upgrades.
To me, if all but one of my 'easy upgrade' list play close to potential, two of my 'worries play close to potential, and half my 'more experienced guys play close to potential, that's a lot of upgrades. No, there's no guarantee I'm right, but it shows why some of us are optimistic.
I hear ya. And I hope you're right. And as I mentioned in another thread .. my optimism is indeed starting to return too. I'm just a little more cautious about my optimism than others I think.
 
I hear ya. And I hope you're right. And as I mentioned in another thread .. my optimism is indeed starting to return too. I'm just a little more cautious about my optimism than others I think.

My optimism equates to 8-8 which I think is reasonable.
 
So true...its literally like a Meteorologist saying:

"There is a 70% chance of rain in your area"

and somebody else saying:

"You don't know its going to rain there until it does!"....

It might be true, but the whole point is making predictions based on numbers, past performances and other variables

An important consideration at this point in developing predictions is the prioritizing the values of all this stuff. In effect, we personalize our predictions based on what "numbers, performances and other variables" we feel are most important. There is no wrong or wright way to do this without knowing the actual outcome before making the prediction.

For me, the satisfaction comes from making some specific, quantifiable predictions, getting some of them right and readjusting my prioritizing based on those successful predictions I made. For example, when I first started to follow the Dolphins I made several predictions. They were as follows:
1) The first 4 games of 2016 would have a lot of problems while the team got up to speed with Gases' game plans, just like what happened with the bears in 2015. I got this right!
2) We would go 10-6 for the year. I based this on the performance of the 2015 Bears who were competitive, but not as good in my opinion. The 2016 Dolphins were competitive and a bit better than the Bears. I got this right!
3) I predicted Gase would get the most out of some 2nd and 3rd tier players, based on what happened to the 2015 Bears. I got this right!
4) I did not make a prediction about getting into the playoffs with this record, because I don't feel I know enough about all the other teams in the NFL and how they might get seated.
5) I made a prediction for the score of each game we played and if we would win or lose. I got the number of total W-L right, but I had 6 games where the W-L was reversed. I didn't get any of the scores right but about 1/2 the time I was within a touchdown one way or the other. This is an area for me that needs some improvement, but that will require a more detailed analysis of other teams that I am not willing to take time for.

As for 2017, forget it. None of my predictions included the draconian absurdities that followed the Dolphins last year. I have decided to modify my game day predictions based on the weather forecast for that week at that location. Maybe I did learn something from last year.

As for 2018 I am making the following predictions:
1) If we win our first 5 games we will go undefeated for the season.
Rational: I am focusing on the first 1/3rd of the season because that is where I think we will be the least stable. All teams do some developing the first few games and we are no exception. The best indicator for me for seeing wins in the first 4 or 5 games is that we will be presenting an offense that has improved in capability across every facet of the offense. We will be using a more varied playbook and this will all be new to our opponents' defenses. Not many teams have made as significant a change in their play style and we will have gotten better at stopping them due to our new acquisitions of players and coaches.

After these first games we will continue to improve through having more available plays and improved team coordination during those plays. At this point we will probably be a better team than anyone we play against for the rest of the season.

2) If we don't win all of the first five games, I believe we will end up 12-4 or 13-3 for the season and will make the playoffs because those kinds of numbers almost always get you in. I don't think this will be due to loosing to some better teams, but to our making some mistakes in those games that the other teams capitalize on.

3) As for post game play predictions, I want to wait to see which players we have lost and which players have exceeded expectations. I also want to look at all the playoff teams performances over the last 4 games to see whose opponents games are peaking up. I feel this is the most significant consideration for a team in the playoffs. Identifying why they are peaking can give great insight into how effective we will be against them and visa versa.

4) As for the Superbowl, all bets are off. a Superbowl is a season in itself. Any team that gets into the Superbowl, play the most consistently and still makes some big plays is the most likely to win. Given the extra time to prepare and the fact that there is no reason to hide any capability in order to fool a team the following week, makes this the greatest show on earth.
 
Has anyone actually looked at Kilgores’s career in SF? Special teamer early in his career, riddled with injuries and missed games, last year was his first time playing all 16 games...so you’re argument of practice time is a moot point. Grades out poorly in pass protection. What he lacks in talent he makes up in effort; still a career avg C at best.

Sitton is an upgrade at guard, but the rest are a bit unproven. We can hope they improve, but compared to the top 15 OL in the NFL, I can’t find reason to be optimistic. I just don’t agree with everyone’s optimism here.
Good points. But while looking at those grades it is worth noting that on our own team with our own players Brendel graded out better than Pouncey. So if you're saying Kilgore is the floor, then maybe Brendel will outplay him. Unproven … fair analysis. But, young OL often improve. Maybe Kilgore and/or Brendel can make the strides we saw from Jesse Davis last year. Food for thought.
 
2) If we don't win all of the first five games, I believe we will end up 12-4 or 13-3 for the season and will make the playoffs because those kinds of numbers almost always get you in. I don't think this will be due to loosing to some better teams, but to our making some mistakes in those games that the other teams capitalize on.

Oh, you brave man.
 
The offense should take off in year three of Adam Gase. If not, then it may be time to question if Gase is the guy.

I see improvement everywhere on offense, with maybe a few exceptions. If you factor in Ajayi, it's hard to say that this running back group is better. Granted, I think Drake has a chance to be special, top 10 type special. And I do like the addition of Gore. You also have to take into account that Ajayi was apparently a difficult personality to handle and not a complete back (missed blocks, not a great wide receiver).

At wide receiver, Miami has enough young talent to step up to make up for the loss of Landry. But it's hard for me to say the wide receiver group is better. It certainly may be. I'm interested to see what Wilson can provide and I still believe Grant could make a bigger impact. Who knows with Parker. My expectations for him have been downgraded to be sure. I think we'll see some big plays and a contributor to the offense, but not an elite/number one wide receiver that many expected when he was drafted. Stills and Tannehill were definitely on the same page in 2016 so I expect more of the same.

The offensive line should be quite a bit better with Sitton, Kilgore, a new offensive line coach and maybe Tunsil taking his game up a level.

Quarterback should be quite a bit better with Tannehill a huge upgrade over Cutler.

Tight end should be a lot better with Gesicki, Smythe as possibly the two main cogs. Escobar, Derby and Gray certainly could factor in.

All in all, I think the offense is better than NFL average and hopefully that will show up in points scored.
 
Back
Top Bottom