This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel.
but is he even that good? he was the 25th ranked tackle last year and will cost a ton of money. Plus he seems like a "me first" guy, refusing to play anything other than LT. And we still have a question mark at RT with Martin. I don't like the move, much rather sign Eric Winston at a bargain price, keep the picks, and give Martin a chance at LT and see what the draft yields.
________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
100% agree berk. If this guy refuses to play right tackle, then we trade a question mark (Martin at LT) for a certain problem (Martin at RT) or we completely give up on Martin, an All American who has only had 3/4ths a season at his ALL-American position and the only thing we could do is trade Martin to Indianapolis and re-unite him with Andrew Luck and Coby Fleener.
Albert allowed 1 sack in 2012, with 17 total QB disruptions, and was ranked 7th by PFF in pass blocking efficiency. Martin allowed 6 sacks, and 57 total QB disruptions, ranking 64th in pass blocking efficiency.
This is about protecting your potential franchise QB. Martin was awful in pass protection last season. Putting all of your eggs in Martin's basket could ruin the entire season.
This is a business. I think fans forget that. Of course Albert wants to stay at LT. LTs get paid more than any other OL position.
THe only difference is cap space... IF we can get a much better tackle for a 2nd rd pick then drafting one in the the 2nd rd with the same pick, the move makes sense if you can stomach the money implications. SInce we were willing to pay Jake pretty well, we had a certain amount of money budgeted to pay our LT... The move makes sense to me, depending on how we value the tackles available in the 2nd, and how much we value cap space.. If it happens, I would much rather give up a 2nd rd pick next year then this year.. Hopefully our 2nd rd pick next year will not be as good as 42... Unless KC is willing to take 54 this year then I would probably do it this year...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche
dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Albert allowed 1 sack in 2012, with 17 total QB
> disruptions, and was ranked 7th by PFF in pass
> blocking efficiency. Martin allowed 6 sacks, and
> 57 total QB disruptions, ranking 64th in pass
> blocking efficiency.
>
> This is about protecting your potential franchise
> QB. Martin was awful in pass protection last
> season. Putting all of your eggs in Martin's
> basket could ruin the entire season.
>
> This is a business. I think fans forget that. Of
> course Albert wants to stay at LT. LTs get paid
> more than any other OL position.
how do you explain the pfw 25 ranking for him? Which makes him painfully average for a guy you will be giving up a 2d and a lot of $$ for
________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hate to say it, but I think I'd rather trade up
> and get Fisher or Joekle (assuming one is there at
> 6--unlikely) than trade a #2 for albert.
Yeah that is an alternative as well. If you can use that same 2nd rd pick to trade up and get Fisher, and u think he is a stud, then you get a younger, cheaper, possibly better player.. but giving up 42 will be painful for me if it happens...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2013 04:01PM by Crowder52.
ps-but now you dedicate your 1st rd pick to a tackle, instead of another player at a different positon that could help the team.. With ALbert, you still get to use that 1st rd pick on somebody besides a tackle...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolfanmark Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Albert allowed 1 sack in 2012, with 17 total QB
> > disruptions, and was ranked 7th by PFF in pass
> > blocking efficiency. Martin allowed 6 sacks,
> and
> > 57 total QB disruptions, ranking 64th in pass
> > blocking efficiency.
> >
> > This is about protecting your potential
> franchise
> > QB. Martin was awful in pass protection last
> > season. Putting all of your eggs in Martin's
> > basket could ruin the entire season.
> >
> > This is a business. I think fans forget that.
> Of
> > course Albert wants to stay at LT. LTs get paid
> > more than any other OL position.
>
>
> how do you explain the pfw 25 ranking for him?
> Which makes him painfully average for a guy you
> will be giving up a 2d and a lot of $$ for
It's a mistake to lump him in with the RTs, because it's comparing apples to oranges, He was 17th among LTs in 2012. He excelled in pass blocking, but saw his ranking hurt by a low run blocking grade that was out of character for him. In 2011, he was 12th among LTs, excelling in pass protection, and earning a positive run blocking grade.
By comparison, Martin ranked 35th among RTs. And we spent a 2nd round pick on him.
Over the last two years combined, Albert has allowed 41 QB disruptions. Martin allowed 57 in 2012 alone.
Jake Long ranked 25th among LTs in 2012, 8 spots below Albert. In 2011, Long was 14th among LTs, 2 spots behind Albert.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2013 04:18PM by dolfanmark.
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hate to say it, but I think I'd rather trade up
> and get Fisher or Joekle (assuming one is there at
> 6--unlikely) than trade a #2 for albert.
We would have to trade up to the 3rd spot to get a shot at Fisher or Joeckel. That would require trading out first and both second round picks, or our first, one second, and both thirds.
No thanks. I would much rather trade a #2 pick for a proven LT than give up the entire top of our draft for an unproven talent.
The Fins don't have a lot of options here. Martin was terrible in pass protection last season. And he was even worse at it when he moved to LT. Counting on him would be a huge risk. They can't trade up high enough to get Fisher or Joeckel without giving up too many picks. Lane Johnson has been projected as high as the #5 pick. And we have heard that Ireland isn't crazy about Johnson. Sure, Johnson is a freakish athlete. But, he needs to improve his strength. And he's very inexperienced at LT. And I have a question. How'd he gain 80 pounds in 4 years without getting fat?
The Fins spent all this money on Wallace, Hartline, Keller, and Gibson, and none of it matters if Tannehill doesn't have time to throw.
D-mark, does Albert fit the more athletic O-lineman Philbin covets?
Also, if we sign him, we'd have to clear up some cap space, which puts guys like Bess, Carpenter and Incog on even thinner ice. Maybe we trade for Albert, draft Cooper @12 and.....bye, bye Incog.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2013 05:01PM by dolphaholic.
So many scenarios....which I'm sure Ireland is loving because nobody knows who we are after in the draft.
I am 90% sure we are not taking a CB. It just doesn't make sense to take one that high and some teams are not that high on Milliner...even if by some chance he fell to the #12 spot. They are confident in Grimes recovery or they would not have signed him.
Crowder is right that trading a 2nd for Albert allows us to take the BPA at 12. I have a feeling we are holding out until they agree to the #54 instead of 42.
The problem with moving up to draft a tackle is that it eats up two draft picks and we go into the season with two huge question marks at tackle. Do we really want a rookie and a poor performer from 2012 protecting the franchise? Probably not. The downside to Albert is the huge contract he wants. He would also have to agree to a long term contract before the trade happens.
More and more the actions of the FO are showing me that they are unsure about Martin as a starter.
I could see us taking a versatile player that can play T or G in the mid rounds for competition for Martin and the guard spots.
Cooper would throw a wrench into the lineup (for Incog) but somehow I don't see them taking a guard that high when we are on a mission for play makers. I think they will hang on to Incog.
The Chiefs could use a 3-4 DE and a slot receiver. They should throw Odrick and Bess in the trade talks to lower that 2nd round demand.
While DT make sense, it would not fill a major need this year. It is more of a want IMO so taking one at 12 is 50/50.
I think we are taking Tyler Eifert and then a DE @ 42 if we can keep that pick in the trade. Two play makers. Very unlikely but maybe we get lucky and Carradine falls to round 2....even if we have to jump up a few spots and throw in a 4th rounder.
I think we will grab a CB but not in the first round and not Rhodes.
I also think we go after a WR after 2a...maybe 3rd round and see if Swopes or Bailey fall that far.
ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark, Martin was in his rookie year.
>
> Maybe he wasn't that great as a freshman at
> Stanford either.
>
> Let's give him some time.
>
> And again, what do we do at Right
> Tackle??????????????????????????????
Martin was a disaster in pass protection. A disaster. He ranked 75th out of 80 tackles in pass protection. And he was worse in pass protection at LT than he was at RT. Seriously, why spend money on a WR who excels at deep routes if you have a LT who can't protect the QB? You need time if you want to throw the deep ball. If Martin is a bad LT, you derail the entire passing game.
eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He will be given time but hopefully we also plan
> our personnel aquisitions on the premise that he
> may not.
And that's the key, right? Options at LT are slim. There are only 3 guys in this draft that are believed to be able to step in and start at LT, and even one of those guys (Johnson) is considered a guy that could need time to develop. Normally, at #12, you'd be in good shape to take one of the top 3 LTs. But, this year, the top 3 LTs could go in the first 5-7 picks. And that's really the key. If they have to go with Martin at LT, and he's still bad, it drags down the gains made by signing Wallace, Keller, and Gibson.
How's this? Trade a #2 pick for Albert. Then trade down from #12 and pick up a 2nd rounder to replace it.
The LT spot needs to be sured up. Does Martin do that? Maybe. Maybe isn't good enough, because if he's not up to it, the good work of the offseason goes to waste. Going into the season with Martin, Terron Armstead/Menelik Watson, and Nate Garner as your tackles would be scary, and would be taking a pretty big risk.
The more I think about it the more I do not want Albert unless we can do it in a player trade. Odrick and Bess for Albert or Odrick and a 5th round pick.
Filling the LT hole with one of the best pass protectors in the league (1 sack allowed last season) for a 2nd round pick is something Dolphins fans should be happy with.
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what is this fascination with getting rid of our
> good players? ever hear of depth?
Ever hear of Cap management?
By trading guys in their last year with the franchise you get to use the picks you acquire to add depth, possibly find starters/stars and manage your cap.
I'd agree that you don't give them away but if you can get decent picks for them, you make the trade, especially if you are adding a quality player with a big cap number.
our cap this year is more than fine. So dumping guys in their last year does not help the cap.
sorry, we are not the pats who can get away with trading good players "a year early," because they are (or were) stacked a many positions. DT is a position of strength. You get rid of Starks or Solia and add a rookie, and it's a question mark once again
________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> our cap this year is more than fine. So dumping
> guys in their last year does not help the cap.
> sorry, we are not the pats who can get away with
> trading good players "a year early," because they
> are (or were) stacked a many positions. DT is a
> position of strength. You get rid of Starks or
> Solia and add a rookie, and it's a question mark
> once again
If we add Albert, which was the nexus of the discussion in this thread of dealing Soliai or Bess or carpenter, our cap is not "just fine". We are over it.
Adding Albert changes the equation. If adding him puts us over or at the cap we then have to think about where we can create cap space to fill whatever spots we need to fill after the draft.
That means you have to look at it from a different perspective.
What's better for the team?
Keeping Soliai and Bess as backups for one year and then letting him walk, or acquiring Albert who will start at LT along with the 2 or 3 players we get with the picks for trading Soliai and Bess?
if adding albert "puts us over the cap" (it doesn't, we have space now and another 10mm coming June 1), then we shouldn't be trading for him and giving him all that $$.
He's not that good. The upside to letting Long leave was not sinking a ton of $$ into a mediocre LT. And now we want to do it again, and give up a 2d rounder in addition?
As for trading Solia and Bess, Bess isn't that much $$, and we won't get a high pick for him, so he's not really that relevant to the equation. But I agree he's is probably not in the long term plans and if we draft a WR high this year he will probably be gone regardless of anything we do with Albert.
As for trading Solia, unless we can get a #2 for him, he's better off on the team. Just bc he's in the last year of his deal doesn't mean we can't re-sign or extend him. Good DTs are hard to come by, and worth having around even if just for 1 final season (unless we are writing this season off before it begins).
________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
>
> As for trading Solia, unless we can get a #2 for
> him, he's better off on the team. Just bc he's in
> the last year of his deal doesn't mean we can't
> re-sign or extend him. Good DTs are hard to come
> by, and worth having around even if just for 1
> final season (unless we are writing this season
> off before it begins).
4-3 DTs are easier to come by than 3-4 NTs. They don't need to be 330-lb guys who can swallow up two blockers. $8M is a ton of money for a 2-down player. Vernon is up to 270 lbs. If he is ready to be an impact player as a DE, that pushes Odrick inside, which reduces the need for Soliai. And the draft has a lot of good DT prospects. And when we pick at #12, a DT may very likely be the best player available. It has to be considered. We are in good cap shape next year, too, even with the contracts of some of the new guys escalating. But, even so, there is only room for one of Soliai or Starks next year. And Soliai is limited in the 4-3 because he provides no pass rush. I would say there is almost no chance he is on the roster next season. So, trade a #2 for Albert, and trade Soliai to a 3-4 team for a #2, and call it good.