Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Chris Harris trade a year later


jtm

Recommended Posts

I know a bunch of people (including myself), were up in arms when the Panthers traded Harris to the Bears. I looked up the stats this morning from 2010 and figured I would share:

Chris Harris - age 28, 7 yrs. in NFL

2010 - 70 tackles, 5 interceptions

Charles Godfrey - age 25, 4 yrs. in NFL

2010 - 84 tackles, 5 interceptions

Sherrod Martin - age 26, 3 yrs. in NFL

2010 - 85 tackles, 1 int.

On paper it appears that we got more production, for less money, and younger legs. Just thought it was interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also found it interesting. All the while people were whining when we started the youth movement i was applauding. When we lost Pep i hoped that CJ and or Brown would step it up. Our young guys have gained valuable experience and some have shined with more playing time. Pickles was the turd in the punch. But then again what did we expect with lame duck coaching, oline shake up, and a rookie QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people were whining because we saw a 2-14 team, while the office didn't. Mixed with a complete refusal to sign any worth FA's or experience on the field. Going young was a good idea, but don't be naive, going young was a blanket term for last year. There were other motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not defending the front office, but I thought this was interesting. I bet if you pull Kometeau's numbers you will find similar results. Ultimately, the collapse of this team last year was attributed to letting Jake go and miscalculating Moore's talent. I thought it was time for Jake to go as well, but I don't think there is any doubt we would have been a lot better team last year with him. I guess we all got what we wished for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we are on the subject -

Julius Peppers - 2010 54 tackles, 8 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, 2 int

AGE - 31

Charles Johnson - 2010 62 tackles, 11.5 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 0 int

AGE - 24

*CJ doesn't cost $17 million a year and doesn't take plays off*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people were whining because we saw a 2-14 team, while the office didn't. Mixed with a complete refusal to sign any worth FA's or experience on the field. Going young was a good idea, but don't be naive, going young was a blanket term for last year. There were other motives.

Nobody thought the offense would be the main reason for 2-14 though. Moose was about the only one of those veterans who could have made a slight difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

defenses that get off the field tend to have less "production"

touche but the players we let go didn't cause the collapse - we got similar production on defense with younger players that can only improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defenses that offenses that are mostly three and out also have more "production".

^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Fresher legs leads to more production throughout a game. Especially for stats like sacks. If a defense is holding a team to multiple 3 and outs it usually translates into more passing downs in the course of a game. Whereas a team thats offense is on the field all day tends to run much more later in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the only player that we let go that would have added wins was Delhomme.

Not because he is worth a damn, but if Jake would have been here then Fox probably wouldn't have totally poo the bed in the coaching department last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we are on the subject -

Julius Peppers - 2010 54 tackles, 8 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, 2 int

AGE - 31

Charles Johnson - 2010 62 tackles, 11.5 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 0 int

AGE - 24

*CJ doesn't cost $17 million a year and doesn't take plays off*

Yeah I said this last offseason (and I believe even in the 09 offseason when I said we should have save ourselves the money) and people thought I was crazy for saying Johnson was the more consistent and better all around DE. Peppers was way too hot and cold.

Johnson was a steal. Don Gregory is the sh$%. Look how much better our drafts have looked since he was signed in 06'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...