Oline ranking for Cards

[SECTION 11]

Albert Haynesworth

I know you’re still reading this, so I’ll just add that this is one of the worst comps of all time. This is literally the exact opposite of Hump, in every possible way. No amount of Natural Light will make this logical.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

The teams know better than us, and outside of rookie contracts, it's an open market on both sides (more or less).

Maybe there are three or four guys on rookie contracts better than Hump (who was extended 10 months ago). You're not really making an argument: you're making an assertion and then getting Big Mad that no one is engaging with you.

I get your argument, but it kinda gets washed out when you consider (a) extensions aren’t the result of open market bidding; (b) need almost always drives overpays, particularly at premium positions; and as you’ve acknowledged, (c) rookie contracts skew any such rankings.

At the end of the day Humphries is a solid LT. Not great, but not the problem of the line.

Overall this line is weak. We have a solid LT, we have no idea who is going to play LG, but it’s a battle of lesser drafted players. Our centers have very very little experience playing the position and no real recognized “success” playing any position at the NFL level. Our RG played acceptably last season, but not so great as to warrant any interest/contract (if we are using the latter as a litmus test) on the open market in the past two offseasons. And RT is a battle between a long-in-the-tooth serviceable journeyman and a rookie whose top comp seems to our existing solid but not spectacular LT who took a couple seasons to grow into ability.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

That’s how it works. You play well you get paid well. How else do you think NFL teams evaluate players to determine compensation? By their looks? Maybe their sense of humor? Maybe they break down fair market value by assessing their favorite color. Maybe you have some secret stash of o-line stats that nobody knows about.

Mmm, a lot get paid on their potential or on need. If they didn’t we wouldn’t have any overpaid players, right? And the league is certainly full of those.

 

[kerouac9]

I get your argument, but it kinda gets washed out when you consider (a) extensions aren’t the result of open market bidding; (b) need almost always drives overpays, particularly at premium positions; and as you’ve acknowledged, (c) rookie contracts skew any such rankings.

At the end of the day Humphries is a solid LT. Not great, but not the problem of the line.

Overall this line is weak. We have a solid LT, we have no idea who is going to play LG, but it’s a battle of lesser drafted players. Our centers have very very little experience playing the position and no real recognized “success” playing any position at the NFL level. Our RG played acceptably last season, but not so great as to warrant any interest/contract (if we are using the latter as a litmus test) on the open market in the past two offseasons. And RT is a battle between a long-in-the-tooth serviceable journeyman and a rookie whose top comp seems to our existing solid but not spectacular LT who took a couple seasons to grow into ability.

I think that Hump could be the second-best player on a good line.

FWIW, I think that NFL free agency markets have gotten extremely efficient. Take a look at the current LT market: where do you see the overpays? Yes, sometimes teams get sideways with a free agent, but they're usually gone the next year, or the market adjusts.

I don't really understand the concept of "overpaying" on a free agent contract. According to whom? The team measures what the value of a player is, and then makes an offer. No one complains about underpays for a player. Extensions (not restructures -- that's why I like to look at per-year average on contracts not what a guy is making this year) represent the replacement value of a player (often enough).

 

[Chopper0080]

I think that Hump could be the second-best player on a good line.

FWIW, I think that NFL free agency markets have gotten extremely efficient. Take a look at the current LT market: where do you see the overpays? Yes, sometimes teams get sideways with a free agent, but they're usually gone the next year, or the market adjusts.

I don't really understand the concept of "overpaying" on a free agent contract. According to whom? The team measures what the value of a player is, and then makes an offer. No one complains about underpays for a player. Extensions (not restructures -- that's why I like to look at per-year average on contracts not what a guy is making this year) represent the replacement value of a player (often enough).

Agree with this. Looking at that list, and excluding players on rookie deals, that is a decent representation of a good LT ranking. The only outlier I see is the Bolles contract but I may be overly critical of him.

 

[SECTION 11]

At the end of the day Humphries is a solid LT. Not great, but not the problem of the line.

Seems easy enough to understand I would think.

 

[DaHilg]

Seems easy enough to understand I would think.

Easy to understand when you have no other valuable pieces on the OLine (until now w PJ).. otherwise you wouldn’t pay to 10 money for a “solid” LT. The position you want as #1 on the OL.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I think that Hump could be the second-best player on a good line.

FWIW, I think that NFL free agency markets have gotten extremely efficient. Take a look at the current LT market: where do you see the overpays? Yes, sometimes teams get sideways with a free agent, but they're usually gone the next year, or the market adjusts.

I don't really understand the concept of "overpaying" on a free agent contract. According to whom? The team measures what the value of a player is, and then makes an offer. No one complains about underpays for a player. Extensions (not restructures -- that's why I like to look at per-year average on contracts not what a guy is making this year) represent the replacement value of a player (often enough).

I think the “overpay” represents a scenario in which a team’s overestimation of the players future production is reflected in the contract. Obviously there’s is a subjective element to it in terms of both the front end and back end evaluation. But you can’t say there’s no such thing as overpaying. To use an extreme to illustrate, paying leki fotu as the highest paid defensive lineman in the league would categorically be an overpay.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I think that Hump could be the second-best player on a good line.

FWIW, I think that NFL free agency markets have gotten extremely efficient. Take a look at the current LT market: where do you see the overpays? Yes, sometimes teams get sideways with a free agent, but they're usually gone the next year, or the market adjusts.

I don't really understand the concept of "overpaying" on a free agent contract. According to whom? The team measures what the value of a player is, and then makes an offer. No one complains about underpays for a player. Extensions (not restructures -- that's why I like to look at per-year average on contracts not what a guy is making this year) represent the replacement value of a player (often enough).

Completely agree.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Seems easy enough to understand I would think.

You would think.

 

[kerouac9]

To use an extreme to illustrate, paying leki fotu as the highest paid defensive lineman in the league would categorically be an overpay

So an overpay is something that would never happen. Got it.

 

[Chopper0080]

Easy to understand when you have no other valuable pieces on the OLine (until now w PJ).. otherwise you wouldn’t pay to 10 money for a “solid” LT. The position you want as #1 on the OL.

There are 14 NFL LTs making over 14 mil. DJ's salary in that group is 9th. He is getting market value for a "solid" veteran LT. Onnce younger, and maybe better, LTs who are currently on rookie deals get paid, that will drop DJ even lower. His contract is not a problem, and his play is not a problem.

 

[Chopper0080]

So an overpay is something that would never happen. Got it.

The closest you will likely see is a situation like Jordan Phillips. His salary jumped 400% from 2018 to 2019. Then the Cardinals signed him to roughly 200% of that number and I don't know that they had other "bidders" in that range based upon his production.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

So an overpay is something that would never happen. Got it.

As I said, that’s an extreme to point out the fallacy of your contention. There’s a continuum with rile, ability, salary. To believe there’s no such thing as an overlay along that continuum is being purposefully obtuse. If it weren’t the case why are there players who are still productive that teams can’t trade and eventually just get cut? Because they’re overpaid.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

As I said, that’s an extreme to point out the fallacy of your contention. There’s a continuum with rile, ability, salary. To believe there’s no such thing as an overlay along that continuum is being purposefully obtuse. If it weren’t the case why are there players who are still productive that teams can’t trade and eventually just get cut? Because they’re overpaid.

While I agree with you, the 'overpaid scale' if we want to call it that, changes from year or year or maybe even game to game. You can sign a guy to a reasonable contract and then they get hurt or traded to a new team and they aren't the same player.

Same goes for most contracts that have huge escalators towards the end of it where if you look at the contract with a 'this year view,' instead of looking at the contract as a whole where the player could have been underpaid the first part of it...

 

[kerouac9]

The closest you will likely see is a situation like Jordan Phillips. His salary jumped 400% from 2018 to 2019. Then the Cardinals signed him to roughly 200% of that number and I don't know that they had other "bidders" in that range based upon his production.

Jordan Phillips is a good example, but the Cards course-corrected after two seasons and moved on. The big risk is paying for one-year wonders on long-term deals with high guarantees. It's a great question what the market looked like for Phillips. He was sitting in free agency for more than two weeks before he was brought in here.

And there was immediate skepticism about the size of that contrac.t

As I said, that’s an extreme to point out the fallacy of your contention. There’s a continuum with rile, ability, salary. To believe there’s no such thing as an overlay along that continuum is being purposefully obtuse. If it weren’t the case why are there players who are still productive that teams can’t trade and eventually just get cut? Because they’re overpaid.

But the example was so ludicrous to be self-defeating. If the only example of an overpay is something that would never happen, then you're putting up straw men.

Productive players who can't be traded are usually about the structure of the contract (like DHop) and not about the total comp on the deal.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I think “overpay” is also a definitional discussion.

For instance, if we are talking facts and circumstances a contract may not be an “overpay,” whereas if we are talking value-for-dollar it may be.

Made up example:

The cardinals are expected to be the dregs of the nfl (okay, so maybe that part isn’t made up). They need a center. Let’s say two other playoff teams are also in the market for a center. The only way to lure a mid-level talented center to the cardinals is to pay him $10M/year (in order to outbid the other two playoff teams). That’s not an overpay based on facts and circumstances because the market dictated the amount necessary to procure the services.

But let’s say the previous season the top two centers in the league signed extensions that paid them $8M/year. The cardinals would be paying $10M/year for mid level production when the very best centers are earning $8M/year for much better production. From a value perspective it’s an overpay by the cardinals. A necessary overpay, but an overpay nevertheless.

And that hypothetical is just a scenario where signing the mid-level center works out. If he ends up sucking, or if the talent evaluation was wrong and he can’t play, had a fluke prior season, or doesn’t fit your offense I think it becomes an overpay under both definitions.

 

[oaken1]

I think “overpay” is also a definitional discussion.

For instance, if we are talking facts and circumstances a contract may not be an “overpay,” whereas if we are talking value-for-dollar it may be.

Made up example:

The cardinals are expected to be the dregs of the nfl (okay, so maybe that part isn’t made up). They need a center. Let’s say two other playoff teams are also in the market for a center. The only way to lure a mid-level talented center to the cardinals is to pay him $10M/year (in order to outbid the other two playoff teams). That’s not an overpay based on facts and circumstances because the market dictated the amount necessary to procure the services.

But let’s say the previous season the top two centers in the league signed extensions that paid them $8M/year. The cardinals would be paying $10M/year for mid level production when the very best centers are earning $8M/year for much better production. From a value perspective it’s an overpay by the cardinals. A necessary overpay, but an overpay nevertheless.

And that hypothetical is just a scenario where signing the mid-level center works out. If he ends up sucking, or if the talent evaluation was wrong and he can’t play, had a fluke prior season, or doesn’t fit your offense I think it becomes an overpay under both definitions.

wow... instead of typing all this out you could have just edited your previous post to say..."Paying Leki Fotu as an average NFL defensive lineman..."

 

[kerouac9]

I think “overpay” is also a definitional discussion.

For instance, if we are talking facts and circumstances a contract may not be an “overpay,” whereas if we are talking value-for-dollar it may be.

Made up example:

The cardinals are expected to be the dregs of the nfl (okay, so maybe that part isn’t made up). They need a center. Let’s say two other playoff teams are also in the market for a center. The only way to lure a mid-level talented center to the cardinals is to pay him $10M/year (in order to outbid the other two playoff teams). That’s not an overpay based on facts and circumstances because the market dictated the amount necessary to procure the services.

But let’s say the previous season the top two centers in the league signed extensions that paid them $8M/year. The cardinals would be paying $10M/year for mid level production when the very best centers are earning $8M/year for much better production. From a value perspective it’s an overpay by the cardinals. A necessary overpay, but an overpay nevertheless.

And that hypothetical is just a scenario where signing the mid-level center works out. If he ends up sucking, or if the talent evaluation was wrong and he can’t play, had a fluke prior season, or doesn’t fit your offense I think it becomes an overpay under both definitions.

I just don't think these hypothetical examples mean anything. No one is going to re-set the market for an average center because collusion has become the norm in the NFL and no one seems to care much.

People (including me, probably) moaned about how the Christian Kirk contract was a massive overpay. Today he's averaging less per-year than Dionte Johnson. The dimensions that make up player value objectively are:

- Age
- Past production
- Positional value
- Injury history

Subjective factors that likely impact the player's valuation for specific teams include their most recent situation (are they buying high or low plus scheme fit), team need, and attitude/culture fit.

As I said, I think that the labor market in the NFL has become wildly efficient such that overpays end up being of the Jordan Phillips variety and not the Albert Haynesworth type.

 

[DaHilg]

There are 14 NFL LTs making over 14 mil. DJ's salary in that group is 9th. He is getting market value for a "solid" veteran LT. Onnce younger, and maybe better, LTs who are currently on rookie deals get paid, that will drop DJ even lower. His contract is not a problem, and his play is not a problem.

He’s not even close to top 10 is the problem.. 20-32 is where he is slotted by the vast majority of analyst. The love fest by a handful of folks that are choosing to engage. That’s why you all are fans and not analyst. I can’t comprehend where you all are coming from? He’s never had an elite season, no more than 2…maybe 3 good seasons in his career… which doesn’t amount to even close the time he has had injury plagued season or just flat out sucked.

Where is the evidence to support this love? If it’s just bc he’s a cardinal and he’s as close to a legit offense lineman we have then OK. But let’s leave it at that. Incoming the first ~3-5 down votes on this post from the exact same people.. with no supporting evidence to their opinion other than they like Hump.

 

[kerouac9]

He’s not even close to top 10 is the problem.. 20-32 is where he is slotted by the vast majority of analyst. The love fest by a handful of folks that are choosing to engage. That’s why you all are fans and not analyst. I can’t comprehend where you all are coming from? He’s never had an elite season, no more than 2…maybe 3 good seasons in his career… which doesn’t amount to even close the time he has had injury plagued season or just flat out sucked.

Where is the evidence to support this love? If it’s just bc he’s a cardinal and he’s as close to a legit offense lineman we have then OK. But let’s leave it at that. Incoming the first ~3-5 down votes on this post from the exact same people.. with no supporting evidence to their opinion other than they like Hump.

I think the margin between the 8th and 18th-best left tackle in the NFL is so small as to be meaningless. There are a handful of elite players, a slightly larger group of guys that you're going to make a priority to replace next offseason, and then a plurality of starters who would be difficult to upgrade.

D.J. Humphries belongs in this last group. I don't know why this seems hard to understand. No one is putting him in the same class as Budda Baker. Being a starter who would be difficult to upgrade from could make him one of the top three players on the Arizona Cardinals 2023 offense.

 

[DaHilg]

I think the margin between the 8th and 18th-best left tackle in the NFL is so small as to be meaningless. There are a handful of elite players, a slightly larger group of guys that you're going to make a priority to replace next offseason, and then a plurality of starters who would be difficult to upgrade.

D.J. Humphries belongs in this last group. I don't know why this seems hard to understand. No one is putting him in the same class as Budda Baker. Being a starter who would be difficult to upgrade from could make him one of the top three players on the Arizona Cardinals 2023 offense.

He wouldn’t be difficult to upgrade from that’s the thing.. put Paris or Josh Jones there - and how much are we losing from day 1? Not much at all and actually gaining a much higher ceiling. Why is that hard to understand?

I appreciate your posts but hard for me to give you credibility as you were one of the biggest Kliffy advocates out there. Stating multiple times it wasn’t the his scheme and play callings fault. When it very obviously was.. there’s yet a millionth article out there on this - this time by SI. I suggest doing a google search to read it. It’s the same thing the casual fans saw for years.

 

[kerouac9]

He wouldn’t be difficult to upgrade from that’s the thing.. put Paris or Josh Jones there - and how much are we losing from day 1? Not much at all and actually gaining a much higher ceiling. Why is that hard to understand?

I appreciate your posts but hard for me to give you credibility as you were one of the biggest Kliffy advocates out there. Stating multiple times it wasn’t the his scheme and play callings fault. When it very obviously was.. there’s yet a millionth article out there on this - this time by SI. I suggest doing a google search to read it. It’s the same thing the casual fans saw for years.

This is exhausting. Josh Jones is bad. The current staff is the third to decide he's not worth the time or effort.

Paris Johnson makes the Cardinals better at right tackle than starting him at left tackle and putting Kelvin Beachum out there.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Jordan Phillips is a good example, but the Cards course-corrected after two seasons and moved on. The big risk is paying for one-year wonders on long-term deals with high guarantees. It's a great question what the market looked like for Phillips. He was sitting in free agency for more than two weeks before he was brought in here.

And there was immediate skepticism about the size of that contrac.t



But the example was so ludicrous to be self-defeating. If the only example of an overpay is something that would never happen, then you're putting up straw men.

Productive players who can't be traded are usually about the structure of the contract (like DHop) and not about the total comp on the deal.

So you expect dhops next contract to have the same annual comp?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

He wouldn’t be difficult to upgrade from that’s the thing.. put Paris or Josh Jones there - and how much are we losing from day 1? Not much at all and actually gaining a much higher ceiling. Why is that hard to understand?

I appreciate your posts but hard for me to give you credibility as you were one of the biggest Kliffy advocates out there. Stating multiple times it wasn’t the his scheme and play callings fault. When it very obviously was.. there’s yet a millionth article out there on this - this time by SI. I suggest doing a google search to read it. It’s the same thing the casual fans saw for years.

Because the replacement that you are talking about was a top 6 pick in the draft. Those are pretty hard to come by.

The other one is probably a top 40 or 50 player at the position. Not that hard to see.