Monday, February 21, 2005
Cornerback - Does KC corner the market?
NOTE: Stay tuned! We will be moving to http://www.mostvaluablenetwork.com soon!
Today is Day 5 of our positional analysis. Today, we will cover cornerbacks. Tomorrow, we will cover safeties.
Little Bro: Allow me to switch gears and start off this post on cornerback. Talk with any Chiefs fan. Hop onto any Chiefs discussion board. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the vast majority of them want a shutdown cornerback. I happen to disagree with that sentiment.
First, let me get one thing straight: our cornerbacks are awful. I know this, anybody with any eye for NFL talent knows this, and judging by Vermeil's comments on 810 radio, the Chiefs know this as well. Warfield is a solid corner. He is not a shutdown corner, but I would still contend that if his help defense was better, he could be a solid #1 corner. McCleon and Bartee are a waste of time. Battle and Sapp have potential, but you can't rest all your hopes on potential, particularly two players who are a long way from being serviceable starters.
The bigger question is: what talent level do we need at cornerback? To get a good feel of the pulse in the Chiefs' fan base, there are generally two schools: 1) Go after Ty Law or Patrick Surtain, or 2) Go after a second-tier corner like Baxter, Lucas, or Dyson. The predominant sentiment is to go with the former. I side with the latter.
I have had extensive arguments with Chiefs fans about my stance. The common response to my position is: "Are you blind? Look at the numbers! Our pass defense is awful! It must be the corners! Trade our second round pick for Surtain! Break the bank for Ty Law! We need a shutdown corner! Hell, give us a Ty Law and throw a Samare Rolle on the side!" Let's break down this all-too-typical response. First, corners are not the only ones responsible for poor pass defense. In our case, our safeties don't provide any help, period! Our linebackers might as well just kneel down before every snap, because they're useless in covering tight ends. And even though we statistically ranked highly in sacks, our pressure on the quarterback is grossly inconsistent and, more often than not, is surprisingly the result of coverage sacks.
Secondly, there is a public misperception that shutdown corners are difference makers. They aren't. I can't think of a single NFL cornerback who is a clear difference maker in their defense. I once thought Ty Law was, until the Pats dominated on defense without him. I once thought Champ Bailey was, until the Redskins pass defense soared without him and the Broncos' pass defense didn't improve one bit with him. I thought Samare Rolle was a shutdown corner, until the Titans' defense imploded no doubt because they lost so much talent up front.
Finally, the plea for a shutdown cornerback assumes that you have to go from worst on the talent scale to best, and that's the only way you can improve. McCleon and Bartee were awful last year. We probably could have brought back James Hasty out of retirement, and he still would've outplayed the "sultans of jack-squat." Hell, I bet big ole' Willie Roaf could have outplayed those two. But does any of this justify upgrading to a shutdown corner? Lucas, Baxter, and Dyson are all major upgrades. By getting any of those second-tier corners, we go from worst to average. More importantly, we free up room to look elsewhere. If getting one of those three assures that we can lock-in a Kendrell Bell or an Edge Hartwell, then this is a flat-out no-brainer.
I know we like to dream about the Gunther Cunningham defense of the '90's and how our bump 'n' run corners didn't take crap from anybody, no way, no how. But this is a new era. This is a new NFL. Corners are only supporting cast members now. You can't bump 'n' run when strict holding rules forbid you from bumping. You can't "run" when wide receivers are getting so big, strong, and fast that cornerbacks just can't keep up with the improved abilities of wide receivers. You can't shutdown a spread offense like New England's or Indianapolis', both of which will throw it to one of their other four effective receiving options if their top option is covered. Shutdown corners are just not in vogue anymore. They are necessary supporting actors. But as far as their talent level, you can make a wide receiver like Troy Brown look like a pro bowler if you surround him with the right talent.
So that's where we need to approach this whole cornerback fiasco. We don't need or want shutdown corners. We need to get solid corners who won't cost us an arm and a leg, then we need to spend that saved money to solidify the supporting cast. Remember, one Ty Law equals one Baxter plus Kendrell Bell, with potentially extra money on the side.
Big Bro: I agree with you in part. No, I do not find it necessary to get Ty Law and/or Patrick Surtain. If CB was our only problem, then I would not have much of a problem going after one of them. But we do have too many problems at other positions to say that getting either one would be a good idea. Surtain would certainly require trading a high draft pick, one that I do not feel KC can afford. Furthermore, both players will count far too much against the cap. The free cap space needs to be spent on several players, not one CB. And I agree, getting a Baxter, Lucas, or Dyson would help tremendously.
That being said, I don't think it would be a bad idea to draft a CB in the first round if one of the elites (such as Rolle or Pac Man) is available. The Chiefs could use a CB to groom for the future, and if they are able to obtain someone like Baxter or Lucas while also drafting an elite CB in the 1st round, I would consider that a major victory. I agree with the general sentiment that rookie CBs do not make an immediate impact as starters; however, they can make a very good impact as a rookie nickelback while learning how to be an NFL-quality CB (witness what the Eagles did with Shepard and Brown). The Chiefs could probably also draft a different player in the 1st (a LB please?) while drafting their CB of the future in the 2nd round. But PLEASE no more safety-to-CB projects like Bartee or Battle again!
We have to keep in mind that Warfield is likely to face a suspension from the league for his DUI. That leaves the Chiefs in a major bind. I think it is pretty unanimous among Chiefs fans that a quality free agent CB is an absolute necessity. But the Chiefs might need to get 2 CBs. I agree about not breaking the bank in free agency. But I would push strongly for drafting a CB in the 1st or 2nd round.
As for what we've got: Warfield has turned into a good corner (not just solid, but good), having improved his tackling substantially. McCleon is a smart player, but his physical skills limit him severely, and he is no longer able to be a starting CB. The Chiefs should give up on Bartee as a CB. He has the physical skills, clearly, but after several years he has seemingly learned nothing. Battle, I think, might be another Bartee, as he has all the physical skills in the world, but has terrible technique and seemingly did not learn with experience. Finally, I like Benny Sapp. I think he's another McCleon in that he shows pretty good technique, but his physical size will limit him as a starter and probably as a CB as he ages.
Today is Day 5 of our positional analysis. Today, we will cover cornerbacks. Tomorrow, we will cover safeties.
Little Bro: Allow me to switch gears and start off this post on cornerback. Talk with any Chiefs fan. Hop onto any Chiefs discussion board. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the vast majority of them want a shutdown cornerback. I happen to disagree with that sentiment.
First, let me get one thing straight: our cornerbacks are awful. I know this, anybody with any eye for NFL talent knows this, and judging by Vermeil's comments on 810 radio, the Chiefs know this as well. Warfield is a solid corner. He is not a shutdown corner, but I would still contend that if his help defense was better, he could be a solid #1 corner. McCleon and Bartee are a waste of time. Battle and Sapp have potential, but you can't rest all your hopes on potential, particularly two players who are a long way from being serviceable starters.
The bigger question is: what talent level do we need at cornerback? To get a good feel of the pulse in the Chiefs' fan base, there are generally two schools: 1) Go after Ty Law or Patrick Surtain, or 2) Go after a second-tier corner like Baxter, Lucas, or Dyson. The predominant sentiment is to go with the former. I side with the latter.
I have had extensive arguments with Chiefs fans about my stance. The common response to my position is: "Are you blind? Look at the numbers! Our pass defense is awful! It must be the corners! Trade our second round pick for Surtain! Break the bank for Ty Law! We need a shutdown corner! Hell, give us a Ty Law and throw a Samare Rolle on the side!" Let's break down this all-too-typical response. First, corners are not the only ones responsible for poor pass defense. In our case, our safeties don't provide any help, period! Our linebackers might as well just kneel down before every snap, because they're useless in covering tight ends. And even though we statistically ranked highly in sacks, our pressure on the quarterback is grossly inconsistent and, more often than not, is surprisingly the result of coverage sacks.
Secondly, there is a public misperception that shutdown corners are difference makers. They aren't. I can't think of a single NFL cornerback who is a clear difference maker in their defense. I once thought Ty Law was, until the Pats dominated on defense without him. I once thought Champ Bailey was, until the Redskins pass defense soared without him and the Broncos' pass defense didn't improve one bit with him. I thought Samare Rolle was a shutdown corner, until the Titans' defense imploded no doubt because they lost so much talent up front.
Finally, the plea for a shutdown cornerback assumes that you have to go from worst on the talent scale to best, and that's the only way you can improve. McCleon and Bartee were awful last year. We probably could have brought back James Hasty out of retirement, and he still would've outplayed the "sultans of jack-squat." Hell, I bet big ole' Willie Roaf could have outplayed those two. But does any of this justify upgrading to a shutdown corner? Lucas, Baxter, and Dyson are all major upgrades. By getting any of those second-tier corners, we go from worst to average. More importantly, we free up room to look elsewhere. If getting one of those three assures that we can lock-in a Kendrell Bell or an Edge Hartwell, then this is a flat-out no-brainer.
I know we like to dream about the Gunther Cunningham defense of the '90's and how our bump 'n' run corners didn't take crap from anybody, no way, no how. But this is a new era. This is a new NFL. Corners are only supporting cast members now. You can't bump 'n' run when strict holding rules forbid you from bumping. You can't "run" when wide receivers are getting so big, strong, and fast that cornerbacks just can't keep up with the improved abilities of wide receivers. You can't shutdown a spread offense like New England's or Indianapolis', both of which will throw it to one of their other four effective receiving options if their top option is covered. Shutdown corners are just not in vogue anymore. They are necessary supporting actors. But as far as their talent level, you can make a wide receiver like Troy Brown look like a pro bowler if you surround him with the right talent.
So that's where we need to approach this whole cornerback fiasco. We don't need or want shutdown corners. We need to get solid corners who won't cost us an arm and a leg, then we need to spend that saved money to solidify the supporting cast. Remember, one Ty Law equals one Baxter plus Kendrell Bell, with potentially extra money on the side.
Big Bro: I agree with you in part. No, I do not find it necessary to get Ty Law and/or Patrick Surtain. If CB was our only problem, then I would not have much of a problem going after one of them. But we do have too many problems at other positions to say that getting either one would be a good idea. Surtain would certainly require trading a high draft pick, one that I do not feel KC can afford. Furthermore, both players will count far too much against the cap. The free cap space needs to be spent on several players, not one CB. And I agree, getting a Baxter, Lucas, or Dyson would help tremendously.
That being said, I don't think it would be a bad idea to draft a CB in the first round if one of the elites (such as Rolle or Pac Man) is available. The Chiefs could use a CB to groom for the future, and if they are able to obtain someone like Baxter or Lucas while also drafting an elite CB in the 1st round, I would consider that a major victory. I agree with the general sentiment that rookie CBs do not make an immediate impact as starters; however, they can make a very good impact as a rookie nickelback while learning how to be an NFL-quality CB (witness what the Eagles did with Shepard and Brown). The Chiefs could probably also draft a different player in the 1st (a LB please?) while drafting their CB of the future in the 2nd round. But PLEASE no more safety-to-CB projects like Bartee or Battle again!
We have to keep in mind that Warfield is likely to face a suspension from the league for his DUI. That leaves the Chiefs in a major bind. I think it is pretty unanimous among Chiefs fans that a quality free agent CB is an absolute necessity. But the Chiefs might need to get 2 CBs. I agree about not breaking the bank in free agency. But I would push strongly for drafting a CB in the 1st or 2nd round.
As for what we've got: Warfield has turned into a good corner (not just solid, but good), having improved his tackling substantially. McCleon is a smart player, but his physical skills limit him severely, and he is no longer able to be a starting CB. The Chiefs should give up on Bartee as a CB. He has the physical skills, clearly, but after several years he has seemingly learned nothing. Battle, I think, might be another Bartee, as he has all the physical skills in the world, but has terrible technique and seemingly did not learn with experience. Finally, I like Benny Sapp. I think he's another McCleon in that he shows pretty good technique, but his physical size will limit him as a starter and probably as a CB as he ages.
Comments:
<< Home
Good call, LB.
I couldn't agree more. The Chiefs don't have to reinvent the wheel here. Just acquire a top-tier vet with a great work ethic and mad skillz is more than great.
Then we can get quantity and quality.
The best of both worlds.
Post a Comment
I couldn't agree more. The Chiefs don't have to reinvent the wheel here. Just acquire a top-tier vet with a great work ethic and mad skillz is more than great.
Then we can get quantity and quality.
The best of both worlds.
<< Home
