Satele could be first of many casualties in Miami

If only it were.... -he dreams wistfully-


(by the way, I think the Dolphins will be a super-popular team this year for all Madden players, who, I believe, will want to try out our Wildcat in the game)

 

I wouldn;t trade Porter for a mid-roud pick either. Totally agree there. However, I would trade him for a second.

Just as you argue it's possible to keep Porter and somehow find his replacement gradually, I am similarly optimistic in a different way, by thinking we could find his replacement even faster with an extra ticket in the raffle.

Three second round picks makes it easier to find a good pass rusher than two second round picks.

The difference between us, I think, is that I am willing to field a slightly weaker roster this year if it virtually guarantees us much stronger rosters in 2010-2018.

 

And therein lies the problem, bro. There is no guarantee.
"A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" may be an antiquated saying, but it's still as true today as it was back then.
It's unfair to assume that Porter won't play as well as he did last year. He may play even better if we have more pass rush threats. So many keep saying "Porter wore down, Porter wore down" But I also saw him getting more double teams later on in the year, once other teams figured out that he was the only real pass rush threat.
As to the loss of JT....... yes I think we missed him. I think our defense would have been that much better had JT come in and committed to the off season training and suited up for us.
I'm happy we have Henne in the wings, but JT's presence would have made our D better.

 

Amen!

 

Wow, At least give him a damn chance. It's his third year in the league, the year WRs usually blossom.

BTW, Samson is in Oakland not San Diego.

 

Right.

I don't think it was as much of him "fizzling" as it was that teams were keying on him almost every play. Of course a guy who's getting double-teamed isn't going to be as effective as one who isn't. And sure, all that extra work trying to beat two tackles instead of just one, probably did wear him down quite a bit.


I say draft another LB early and let the new LB and Wake get a crack at rushing the QB with Porter and let's see what happens.

Porter might not duplicate his stats from last season, but if he finished with 8 sacks and caused the disruption/pressure that helped guys like Wake or Johnson (wishful thinking) to get 6-8 a piece, then isn't that just as good of a contribution?

I would certainly think so.

 

Potential Trade Bait:

* Matt Roth - We will draft two LB's in this draft, we might be able to get a 5th round pick.
* Jason Allen - Might be able to get a 5th round pick.
* John Beck - We will be lucky to get a 6th round pick.
* Ernest Wilford - We will be lucky to get a 7th round pick.
* Paul Solia - We might be able to get a 7th round pick.
* Brandon London - Maybe a 7th round pick.

The above players will not yield a pick better than the 5th round.

The following players are to important to trade, but could not think of any other players that could be on the block.

* Will Allen - Contract Year + Age, might get a 4th round pick.
* Cam Camarillo - Injury will hurt his trade value, just signed new deal, maybe a 5th round pick.

I don't see Miami trading away some of the back-ups for 6th & 7th round picks. They already know the system and might improve.

If Miami is going to get more picks for the draft, it will be from trading down in the 1st and maybe even the 2b pick.

I would love for Miami to trade down into the second and take...
CB, OLB, NT with the three second round picks.

Then use the rest on WR, MLB, T, G, CB, FS, RB, QB...which ever the best player at one of those positions for the remaining rounds.

Joey will be here next year, cannot see the team trading away the only proven rushing LB we have on the roster. We have a weak secondary when you think about depth, take JP out of the system and it just became a major weak spot on the team. We would get torched by slot WR's and TE's at will.

 

Bro I would be totally shocked if this team traded their leading reciever.

 

Well the argument that some are making for keeping Porter (it isn't guaranteed that a rookie could step in and fill his shoes) can be used in this case as well. There is no guarantee that a rookie is going to come in and provide that dominant pass rush opposite of Porter, putting him in the same spot as last year. Then we have a big money player whose value will dip as teams double team him from the beginning of the season and who will tire out and become a nonfactor at the end.

Call me crazy, but I would prefer to have the young player and move the contract and injury concerns.

 

?

he had no pass rush opposite him last year. theres basically no chance we have the same terrible pass rush as last year.

 

How do you prove that? You can't guarantee anything.

I'll use the example that someone else used earlier, say we draft a guy like Sintim to play opposite of Porter and he turns into a Vernon Gholston. What then? Wake? He dominated the CFL, but there is a major difference in talent level, game speed and strength between the NFL and the Canadian version. Crowder? Good luck with that, we've been waiting for how many years now for him to pressure a QB? Roth? Isn't he the guy that everyone is writing off and wanting to replace?

So there is a pretty good chance that we will have the same type of passrush next year, nothing is guaranteed as you and a few others pointed out earlier. It works both ways, not just when talking about replacing Porter.

 

Sooo if there's a pretty good chance we could have the same type of passrush next year, wouldn't we want to keep the one guy who contributed?

If you had to choose between having one solid passrusher or 0, wouldn't that be an obvious answer?

I don't get it.

 

Sorry I missed this, I submitted my post and then logged out.

Sorry I misunderstood, but when you talked about "Dominating passrusher on the other side" I assumed that you were talking about the rookie.

And that's were we part ways on achieving that. I don't see Porter as a long term answer, he may only be here another for 2 years.

Good teams in all sports turn their older players with value into new younger talent instead of letting them walk away (of course there are exceptions). Porter is an asset, do we let him leave via FA or roster cut, or do we get something for him while his value is high? If we wait he will be another year older, a year removed from last years performance and the return will be considerably less.

IMO we aren't going to be a SB contender next year, I think our success this year had alot to do with a weak schedule and a gimmick play. But next year the schedule is going to get tougher, teams will have had a year to gameplan for the wildcat and our OL is still a major concern in my mind, the addition of Grove did nothing to change that. So next year we will be fighting in the AFCE with the Tom Brady led Pats, the improved Buffalo Bills and the Jets who always play us tough, I'm not counting on the playoffs and I'm not throwing in the towel. I'm looking at our situation rationally and trying to find a way to improve for the future when our team as a whole will be stronger, better and ready to compete.

So to me, if I'm working under the theory of this article that we will take a step back to improve for the future, Porter is the player that represents the best value that we could get in return and easiest position to address with #25.

Again I'll mention the Vernon Gholston comparison that someone brought up earlier, it works both ways. See my response to nappy.

I'm the type of person that is always looking at players and judging their value to the Phins vs their value to another team, or more specifically, what can they offer us in the future vs what can we get for them now? I don't believe in holding onto vets forever, I think we need a system like the Pats where they are always looking for the next guy to replace the entrenched star and moving the vets for picks to bring back younger assets. When you look at players as assets, you begin to understand that letting them leave without getting anything in return actually hurts your team rather than helps. Unless you are a perenial SB contender, talented vets can be let go. Not all at once as nappy suggested in response to my post, but one player could be moved one year and another player can be moved the next. You are constantly building and looking for ways to capitalize on your assets. If we aren't going to be a SB contender next year, then Porter is basically a wasted asset IMO.

Draft picks aren't a sure thing, so the more you have, the better the odds that one of them will be a contributor to the team. I trust this FO to find the best players to fit this system through the draft, this isn't like FA where your first option may decide to sign elsewhere and you have to settle for 2nd best, you have an opportunity to draft the player you want. This isn't the Wanny or Saban era where we are left scratching our heads or pounding our fists because we passed on someone for a Jamal Fletcher, this FO is going to put our picks to good use and their record in that area supports that.

When I said the same, I was talking about Porter's surrounding cast. And we all saw how he played when teams focused on him down the stretch and how he wore down. I think everyone here would agree that that isn't good enough to help us become SB contenders considering the tougher schedule and improved AFCE rivals, so IMO that makes a guy like Porter expendable so we can get better a year from now.

We need to take advantage of an aging players value while we can, just like we did with JT in order to get an extra 2nd rounder. True JT forced his way out, but we still moved a player that alot of people here felt was still playing at a Defensive MVP type level and we didn't miss a beat. Porter and JT played the same position, if JT had stayed with us last year, one of them would have seen their stats decline. Where would we be this year without that 2nd rounder and JT on the roster? We would be without a key young player for the future (potentially) all so we could say that we had a talented aging vet on the team.

That isn't a smart player personnel decision IMO.

 

I think some people are seriously over-estimating what we would get in return for Joey Porter.

I'd be suprised if it was anything higher than a mid-late 3rd.

That being the case, I think keeping him for 2 more years would be more valuable than picking up that 3rd.

 

I don't get why you can't grasp the concept of a young LB is better then an older LB? He clearly showed signs of wearing down end of last year and would disappear when we needed him most. I also refuse to believe that sack total tells the entire story. I don't believe that Porter (at this point in his career) is anywhere near the talent of Demarcus Ware.

Would he benefit this team next yr if he's here... sure. But if the front office trade him for picks, I gotta believe they have replacements to mitigate porter's absence.

Besides we have no idea what our younger players are capable of. Porter himself had only 5.5 sacks in 2007 while playing opposite Taylor. Do you think it's a coincidence that Taylor leaves and Porter excels or perhaps that it's the nature of the position in this defense?

 

I don't think we would get anything higher than a 3rd for him and I stated that earlier in the thread. But that extra 3rd rounder would allow us to shift our focus a bit, we could look for another passrusher in the 2nd round and still have the same number of picks left to address other areas on the team or allow us to trade up.

Again, that is all dependent on what other teams are willing to give up. The longer we wait, the less we will get in return.

 

How about you grasp your own concepts and stop contradicting yourself before you attempt to attack one of my ideas?


Not sure if Porter's sacks tell the story? Go read the last Porter thread where someone (sorry, I forgot who made the post) made an awesome post that broke down every sack and it's effect on the game. Needless to say, his great stats were made in very important situations.


Porter only had 5.5 sacks opposite Taylor and JT's departure was the reason for Porter's 2008 season?

That might also have to do with the fact that this regime actually figured out that a passrusher is best used, when rushing the passer. Strange idea, I know.


I would do some more research and gather more info before making a post like that.

 

I see that as a bigger gamble than just keeping him.

I still think we could make a run in 2010 if we have another draft like last season, so my opinions of keeping Porter center around his mentoring and ushering in a young, nasty D that could be dominant as early as 2010.

 

last year this time I was all for dumping joey.. IMO, he is worth more than a 3rd, so no reason to trade him unless a 2 gets offered, I disagree with the 3 is good enough camp.

 

If we believe that Henne is going to be the starter next year, as several reports and sources suggest, isn't that kind of the same deal here (taking a step back to improve the future)? Henne is a total question mark until he can display in a real game that he can win an NFL game, or more importantly a big NFL game. Replacing Penny with Henne is a step back IMO. True Henne has a stronger arm, but does he have the ability to win?

Not even if it allowed us to use one of our current 2nd rounders to find another pass rusher?

Just as an example, say we plan on drafting a guy like Sintim in the first and our priorities in the 2nd are CB and WR. That extra 3rd rounder would allow us to draft a passrusher in the 2nd and push one of those needs back to the third round (WR IMO) or it would give us the ability to trade back into the 2nd round if need be.

We could go from currently having:

2 seconds
1 third

...to having...

2 seconds
2 thirds

or

3 second rounders

JMO but I favor moving a player like Porter

 

Not a similiar comparison at all. Let's stick to one position at a time.

I see what you mean about getting younger. But, I don't think it's worth dumping a key player for a 3rd round pick and possibly be sacrificing an entire season. By sacrificing, I mean 4-12 territory.


The reason? We don't have to. I'm all in favor of drafting 2 LBs on Day 1 AND keeping Porter. Why the hell not?

 

I think it is, we would be moving a key vet player who has performed well for us in order to get younger, in a year in which many people see us being a legit contender. I think the comparison is a good one.

Again, you can't say with any certainty that 4-12 would happen. The rookie could come in and perform effectively or we could keep Porter and go 1-15. Point being that the team doesn't revolve around one player. My POV is that we aren't going to be a SB team next year, so we can afford to make the move, and if it hurts us we won't be "destroying" our season as some have suggested.

Again, this is all based on an article. We don't know how the FO really feels.

Bro, I've already explained my thoughts on aging players and how teams should maximize their assets. Please refer back to that so my posts don't become redundant.

 

I'm just saying,

I think we could keep him and draft 2LBs. I think his play for the next 2-3 years would be worth more to us than the value of a 3rd rounder.

Of course it's a guess as what would happen with the pick we would get, so it's not really relevent.

What we do know is that Porter can still contribute at a very high level, and last year he was the only LB on that D that you could say that about. I say keep him and keep drafting replacements so we're absolutely positive that our LB group is solid. I say leave no chances that we have anything less than a stellar LB core. Our defense lives or dies with it so why not make it the biggest focal point?

 

This just seems like a "i hope we lose a lot of games to get a high draft pick next year, i mean, we arent going to win the superbowl this season anyways" attitude

no thanks, i dont like that attitude at all, ill keep my Joey, my most impactful defensive player and my wins...you take your middle round rookie.

 

I remember some folks talking about tanking games to improve our picks not too long ago... that REALLY bothered me.

 

I apologize, I assumed common sense. Judging Porter in 2007, one might suggest he was washed up, clearly proven wrong by his 2008 performance. Based on that fact alone, you can't look at our other linebackers sack total and assume they aren't as good as Porter. The only people capable of making a decision like that is the Front Office who see them day in and day out practicing. My point is to trade Porter now, based on his 2008 stats assuming we have a young alternative who may be a bit raw but has unreached potential that can be realized by game experience. I'm not for trading porter without a viable replacement. But I believe our youngsters can make bridge the void left by porter.

Of course they were, when is getting a sack ever a bad thing. I could draw up a similar analysis using completed passes, or good runs. However, just as pointless, I can show you instances where a sack would have been nice.

The whole point was that Porter's talent was wasted beside Taylor, they both play the same position. Which is why porter blossomed after Taylor left and Porter took Taylor's place. It wasn't fair to judge Porter on his 2007 performance, just like it isn't fair to suggest that since the next best player had total of 5 sacks in 2008 we need Porter, or that we don't have a player to replace Porter. I didn't realize I had to spell this out.

I would process a post completely before retaliating.

 

FO's regardless of the team they try and put together on the field put them together with one goal and one goal in mind: to win the superbowl.

no fan should think otherwise.

 

Nowhere did I say that and that isn't my thought process at all. But looking at our situation realistically, we barely made it into the playoffs last year and the road is alot tougher this year. Instead of holding onto Porter, why not get value for him while he still has some?

There is a major difference between tanking a season and taking one step back to improve for the future.

Agreed

 

Wow. Just wow.

I'm not wasting my time responding to you again. That's common sense.

 

Please keep the conversation civil. It's okay to disagree, but please do so with respect.

 

We need LB help everywhere though, so we might as well draft 2, maybe even 3 guys this year. Unless we luck out and find a guy who can play inside and outside like Dansby, we should take at least 1 of each IMO.

Porter does have an expiration date coming sooner than later. And Wake is a gigantic ? right now. I just think we should draft as if Porter and Wake don't exist.

You can never have enough LBs in a 3-4.

 

Just saw this on Rotoworld:

Dolphins QB John Beck is available for any compensation amount, according to ESPN's John Clayton. Clayton says any team "need only make an offer" to get Beck. The Dolphins are still trying to clear any Cam Cameron holdovers off their roster. The Ravens could show some interest in Beck as competition for No. 2 QB Troy Smith.

Source: ESPN Insider

It would appear Miami's new regime is in fact trying to rid itself of many of the '07 draft class.

 

Already has its own thread dude.

 

Yeah, just saw it a few minutes ago. Don't know how I missed it. But, thanks for pointing it out!

 

No problem.

 

Say what?