I wouldn't say he was a consistent anything. He's had consistent times. But he's anything but consistent. More recently it probably has had to do with injuries, but it still is the issue.
I don't know that anyone on this board is more versed in health and body of the professional football player then DJ. If he says Grimes has the body type to still play at a high level for the next three years i see no reason to disagree.
This is why I think its possible grimes signs a long term deal here for less cause getting tagged at his age with his injury history could blow up in his face entirely. The sure thing might be more appealing than the unknown. I'm sure the offer we make will still be high, just not top 3 money
Hmmm, well, I cannot argue against that the body at 31 is starting to degress relative to the ages 22 thru 28.. However, if were taking football players, there are body types where the wiring is more genetically put together than the average football player..Some bodies are so advanced in those depts that basically their aging at a slower rate, their gonna keep their explosive capabilities longer than the norm, so I think in grimes case that also needs to be taken into account.. I don't think his body is declining as fast as you might think..relative to him, to a degree of course, but relative to the norm, no. This guy I believe from seeing him jump and move has over a forty inch vert..seeing the quickness in his transition from read to react was very impressive.. Also very important CK, he's not 31 right now, he won't be 31 til late July.. I think a three year deal you will still have a body type that at the end will be playing at the level athletically someone 3 years younger.. With his athletic ability, playing til 33 and expecting the ability to look like it does today isn't that risky..
Not saying I want Decker (I want OL help), I just like that other teams get more production out of guys like Decker than we get from Wallace. And they don't come with the baggage. Though it's probably just the Dolphins s*it Offensive situation. Marshall goes from Miami to Chicago and doubles his TD output. Decker's 11 TD's for Denver probably turns to Wallace's 5...and probably less if he were in Miami. Though playing for Miami doesn't fully excuse some open drops by Wallace, because maybe then he would get those "15-20 more Touchdowns"?
Players can play at past 30 though. Just for reference on PFF's CB free agency list. 5 of the 18 guys who scored at least a positive 2.0 or higher...........were 31 and upwards of 35. I don't think a 3 year contract with an out in the 3rd year is a bad idea.
I think a Wilfork comparison is a little strong. He is stout when he want to be, can tend to take plays off it seems. I would like to keep him too though. I think he could have two more strong years, another couple of maybe solid. I think coaches decisions about reps and such matter too.
This isn't 1994, players are using their resources to keep their bodies in good enough condition to buck that trend. If you're concerned Brent may get hurt?? Makes sense, but to suggest he is declining NOW??? Off base.
The man played all 16 games without a scratch..last year he had the Achilles, the year before wasn't much better, the year before that he went to the pro bowl, the two years prior to that he was healthy.. I know you've done some studies about some players at this age, maybe you could point those things out again for reference, but this particular player does have very unique genetics, so signing any player there are no guarantees, but his body type and explosive metrics demand a different set of rules. The part that makes me optimistic is how well he came back from that Achilles, I didn't see one once of limited athleticism or speed, I also trust that he is a guy who will train hard during the offseason.. Bottom line..42 inch vert is a 42 inch vert..it's all relative..I believe from 30 to 33 with these kind of genetics you can maintain most of your speed and agility if you train accordingly..after that is when it can take a bit of a dive.. I would take a risk because I think the players body type lessens the risk..
Does anyone honestly think that the Brent Grimes we had in 2013 was the same Brent Grimes as in 2011? Because if you do then I would politely suggest you might not have watched him play much in 2011. So yes. Already declining.
Once again, none of the players had the genetic makeup of grimes..also when healthy, imo grimes is the best player.
Not by much..also, this years injury was the year after the surgery to his Achilles, chances are if he trains correctly he might gain a little more this upcoming season, strengthening the muscles around the injury takes time.
You honestly believe Brent Grimes is better than Pat Surtain or Sam Madison? And come on with the genetic makeup arguments based on no genetic testing or even a physical examination. It has its limits.
If you lined up all three, all 100 percent healthy, and if I had one game to win, I'd go with grimes at corner. The measurables, the leaping ability, the body fat %, the quickness, the body itself can define a lot without doing any testing..
Surtain and Madison were very good, but they would take a huge hit these days because they were some grabbing n holding *** Cbs. So I think it's very plausible to assume Grimes is every bit as good.
Brent Grimes isn't even as good as Brent Grimes, let alone Sam Madison or Pat Surtain. The last time Grimes suited up before the Achilles injury he allowed only 258 yards receiving on 459 snaps of his direct coverage, including 25 catches on 56 attempts. This year Grimes allowed 730 yards receiving on 641 snaps of his direct coverage, including 59 catches on 98 attempts. So his completion percentage went up from 47% to 60%, his yards per completion went up from 10.3 yards to 12.4 yards, his YPA went up from 4.6 yards to 7.4 yards, his coverage snaps per catch went down from 18.4x to 10.9x and his yards per coverage snap went up sharply from 0.56 to 1.14. He was good for us this year and I'm grateful. But if anyone is trying to pretend that the 2013 Brent Grimes was better than Madison or Surtain in their primes then I think they're way off, as the 2013 Brent Grimes wasn't even better than Brent Grimes in his prime. I also don't buy these voodoo genetics theories based on never having physically examined a guy or his genetic profile.
Neither is better than Grimes. Grimes is the best corner this has ever had. In a league with Woodson, Revis, etc, there are some great corners in the league, Grimes has been top 3 corner in the last 7 years. His athleticism and quickness is unmatched. Grimes is to CB what Earl Thomas is to safety. He is unreal.
i'm not comparing careers here, your stats are comparing the player in different years on different teams, I simply stated that if I have one game to win, all three in their prime and healthy,I would take the overall talents of grimes.. for you to infer in that situation,that it isn't close, I don't agree. as far as studying the genetic part of a football player/athlete..i'dont need to take blood...do you?
Man I thought he was the @@@@ coming over from the niners..he was great that year, I forget what happened?
Richard Sherman is as," grabbing n holding ***," as I've seen and he seems to be getting by with it these days.
