PFF Free Agent Tracker/Odrick/Delmas/Clay

Odrick should be a keeper. He's the closest we have to a leader of the future, and he won't break the beak to turn him into one of the few Dolphins lifers that this current roster offers the potential for. He's likable, vocal, cares about the team, will hold others accountable, works hard, does what's asked of him, and most importantly- with the volatile state of this defense/scheme thanks to Coyle, Odrick is the only big body we have who offers great scheme versatility capable of playing whatever defense we end up running in the future. If you need him to drop weight to play 4-3 end or 1-gap DT, he does it. If you want him bigger to offer more stoutness, he'll do that too. He can 1-gap it, 2-gap it, play inside, outside, 3-tech, 1-tech, 5/6-tech, and even 7-tech if needed. Personally, I'd call him a priority signing. IDK, with Earl Mitchell receiving 4yr/16M, maybe Odrick gets a 5yr/25M deal or close to it. Drop Starks and add Knighton to a 3 yr deal, maybe 3/19 which is in line with the annual rate Atlanta gave Soliai.

"ToddPhin wrote:

Odrick should be a keeper. He's the closest we have to a leader of the future, and he won't break the beak to turn him into one of the few Dolphins lifers that this current roster offers the potential for. He's likable, vocal, cares about the team, will hold others accountable, works hard, does what's asked of him, and most importantly- with the volatile state of this defense/scheme thanks to Coyle, Odrick is the only big body we have who offers great scheme versatility capable of playing whatever defense we end up running in the future. If you need him to drop weight to play 4-3 end or 1-gap DT, he does it. If you want him bigger to offer more stoutness, he'll do that too. He can 1-gap it, 2-gap it, play inside, outside, 3-tech, 1-tech, 5/6-tech, and even 7-tech if needed. Personally, I'd call him a priority signing. IDK, with Earl Mitchell receiving 4yr/16M, maybe Odrick gets a 5yr/25M deal or close to it. Drop Starks and add Knighton to a 3 yr deal, maybe 3/19 which is in line with the annual rate Atlanta gave Soliai.

Sure at 5 mill.

"djphinfan wrote:

i would argue for Clay..when healthy he has this gear that flashes pretty consistently when looking at his elusiveness and yac...I can win with him being one of the two top tight ends..

He's very respected around the league, has a good attitude, will work hard, and I think we can get him at a fair price.

you better sign him NOW! If he hits the market I see the Patriots backing up the Brinks truck. Perfect replacement for Hernandez.

"ToddPhin wrote:

Odrick should be a keeper. He's the closest we have to a leader of the future, and he won't break the beak to turn him into one of the few Dolphins lifers that this current roster offers the potential for. He's likable, vocal, cares about the team, will hold others accountable, works hard, does what's asked of him, and most importantly- with the volatile state of this defense/scheme thanks to Coyle, Odrick is the only big body we have who offers great scheme versatility capable of playing whatever defense we end up running in the future. If you need him to drop weight to play 4-3 end or 1-gap DT, he does it. If you want him bigger to offer more stoutness, he'll do that too. He can 1-gap it, 2-gap it, play inside, outside, 3-tech, 1-tech, 5/6-tech, and even 7-tech if needed. Personally, I'd call him a priority signing. IDK, with Earl Mitchell receiving 4yr/16M, maybe Odrick gets a 5yr/25M deal or close to it. Drop Starks and add Knighton to a 3 yr deal, maybe 3/19 which is in line with the annual rate Atlanta gave Soliai.

Great point! He is a jack of all trades and MASTER of NONE. Sounds like a 3.5 to 4 million dollar player to me. Oh wait didn't he get in a argument with Phailbin? HE'S TOAST!

"Grimes dogs wrote:

you better sign him NOW! If he hits the market I see the Patriots backing up the Brinks truck. Perfect replacement for Hernandez.

We gotta stop worrying about what the Pats do every offseason. We need to instead figure out how to make guys we want to keep play better so they don't go to New England and suddenly look like ballers.

"Philbinfan wrote:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/12/25/2015-free-agents-defensive-interior/

Odrick looks like a 6 million dollar man. My guess to retain him is 5 years 30 mil range......more?....less?

Clay is the Youngest of the top TE's, he will get paid. How much to keep him???

I don't want Delmas back, how bout you?

My hope for free agency is a conversion to a base 3-4 defense and acquisition of Justin Houston. I think the combo of Wake and Houston could bring true greatness and prove to be too much for most Offenses to deal with. Houston's price??? High, very high.

Well, I still think we need to wait and see if Coyless is still going to be the DC...In that case, we won't be going after any 3/4 guys... But it's a bit early yet for me to make any guesses as to where they might go in FA...

"Launchpad McQuack wrote:

We gotta stop worrying about what the Pats do every offseason. We need to instead figure out how to make guys we want to keep play better so they don't go to New England and suddenly look like ballers.

Well, I don't know about how the fans should react, but if I'm Hickey/Philbin, I'm damned interested in what the pasties are doing in the offseason, especially if I want to be competitive with them....

But back OT, yeah, I want Clay back...

"Larryfinfan wrote:

Well, I don't know about how the fans should react, but if I'm Hickey/Philbin, I'm damned interested in what the pasties are doing in the offseason, especially if I want to be competitive with them....

But back OT, yeah, I want Clay back...

Two different teams with different philosophies and schemes.

You shouldn't post dumb scare-tactic stuff about how New England is going to sign our free agents.

I think it is a good idea to set your team up to counter what your biggest rival is doing. Beating the Patriots is basically the key to success for this team.

"Grimes dogs wrote:

you better sign him NOW! If he hits the market I see the Patriots backing up the Brinks truck. Perfect replacement for Hernandez.

Patriots NEVER break the bank for free agents and wouldn't for Clay

Revis was a huge signing so I guess never say never but he was/is the best corner
in the NFL.

"miamiron wrote:

Patriots NEVER break the bank for free agents and wouldn't for Clay

Revis was a huge signing so I guess never say never but he was/is the best corner
in the NFL.

Revis.

"Grimes dogs wrote:

Great point! He is a jack of all trades and MASTER of NONE. Sounds like a 3.5 to 4 million dollar player to me. Oh wait didn't he get in a argument with Phailbin? HE'S TOAST!

I was about to thank this post.... till I realized it lacked intellect to say the least. Have you actually watched Odrick's technique, genius? Now, if on the other hand "master of none" is meant to slight his general ability and worth as a player, well, then that's equally silly. How many players in this league actually ARE considered "masters" of their position? C'mon, let's hear it. Yeah, that's what I thought. Anyone who thinks Odrick is average or below average should stop watching football immediately and get back to cartoons or Saved by the Bell or whatever. He's the most valuable DT this team has and is currently the 2nd most valuable member of our Dline behind Wake b/c of his solid play and scheme versatility. When this defense was a top 8 scoring unit for 3 straight years, it was NEVER in spite of Odrick. Lobotomies, when did they go out of style?

"ToddPhin wrote:

I was about to thank this post.... till I realized it lacked intellect to say the least. Have you actually watched Odrick's technique, genius? Now, if on the other hand "master of none" is meant to slight his general ability and worth as a player, well, then that's equally silly. How many players in this league actually ARE considered "masters" of their position? C'mon, let's hear it. Yeah, that's what I thought. Anyone who thinks Odrick is average or below average should stop watching football immediately and get back to cartoons or Saved by the Bell or whatever. He's the most valuable DT this team has and is currently the 2nd most valuable member of our Dline behind Wake b/c of his solid play and scheme versatility. When this defense was a top 8 scoring unit for 3 straight years, it was NEVER in spite of Odrick. Lobotomies, when did they go out of style?

Let me point out that you just defended a guy by saying that he is "solid."

No offense to you personally, but just think about that for a second. He's "solid?" How impressive is that for a 1st round pick? How easy to duplicate would it be if all a player had to achieve was to be viewed by the fans as "solid?" I mean, hell, Earl Mitchell was solid yet he didn't cost us much as a free agent signing. Should our standard of Odrick be that he's merely "solid?"

To me, I equate "solid" with "good but replaceable." When I hear "scheme versatility" I think to myself, 'ok, he's not a dominant 43 DT like Sapp or Suh nor is he a powerful 34 NT like Wilfork or Hampton.' To me, a phrase like "scheme versatility" is just a polite way of saying he's not good enough to be a dominant force in any type of scheme, but he can adjust his technique to give serviceable production. In that way, "scheme versatility" is just a Plan B for when a player doesn't turn out to be a star.

I think what he's trying to argue is that (as you said yourself) Odrick is a "solid" and "versatile" player but not one that should be seen as the crux of the team nor a talent that is worthy of a big contract on the order of $6-8M per year.

It's certainly fine to look at Odrick and say he's a solid player, but is he anything better than that? Do we need him? Can we afford to let him go? Would it be wise to move on to someone else?

In fairness, the front-7 played badly towards the end of the year so if we're going to get better, we need to carefully evaluate how many of those guys are merely "solid" players and how many are crucial pieces that would be too hard to replace should be lose them.

"77FinFan wrote:

Revis.

They broke the bank for a Top 5 corner by giving him a one year deal? And even so, that's the kind of player you do it for, not Wallace, or Clay.

But I don't mind if we bring Clay back, I do mind if we waste money on Odrick, that guy is highly overrated here, I think people just like his little sack celebration too much and put little importance on impact and playmaking ability, both of which he's very average at.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

They broke the bank for a Top 5 corner by giving him a one year deal? And even so, that's the kind of player you do it for, not Wallace, or Clay.

But I don't mind if we bring Clay back, I do mind if we waste money on Odrick, that guy is highly overrated here, I think people just like his little sack celebration too much and put little importance on impact and playmaking ability, both of which he's very average at.

I like his attitude and that's worth something, it's just not worth much.

It's sort of like how great people said it was when Cam Wake was toting around that chain as a symbol of the defensive line's solidarity.

It's great fodder for the fans until you realize it's BS that doesn't actually account for players doing their jobs on Sunday.

At that point, it's just embarrassing.

The fact that people are suggesting using a first round pick on a DT is all you need to know about Odrick. You already have Earl Mitchel Randy Starks and Odrick, and people are suggesting to get another DT..

5 years 30 million? No thanks, bye Odrick dance your way to the another team. Our defense won't miss a beat, we won't be better or worse with or without him, so using that money on him is a waste when you can use that money to sign a solid guard and take away a need at the draft.

"Grimes dogs wrote:

Great point! He is a jack of all trades and MASTER of NONE. Sounds like a 3.5 to 4 million dollar player to me. Oh wait didn't he get in a argument with Phailbin? HE'S TOAST!

He did? Your proof being a gif showing Odrick unhappy during the midst of a game? That made it a full blown argument or was there something else I missed?

"Vertical Limit wrote:

The fact that people are suggesting using a first round pick on a DT is all you need to know about Odrick. You already have Earl Mitchel Randy Starks and Odrick, and people are suggesting to get another DT..

5 years 30 million? No thanks, bye Odrick dance your way to the another team. Our defense won't miss a beat, we won't be better or worse with or without him, so using that money on him is a waste when you can use that money to sign a solid guard and take away a need at the draft.

This is harsh but sometimes putting it bluntly is a good thing.

Is Odrick good enough sign with a team like Baltimore and play in a Super Bowl? Definitely. Will he ever be one of the bigger reasons a team gets there? No.

He's a role player. He's a nice piece to have when things are already going well.

"MrClean wrote:

He did? Your proof being a gif showing Odrick unhappy during the midst of a game? That made it a full blown argument or was there something else I missed?

I don't get the love affair with Clay tbh.

He isn't fast, isn't big, doesn't have great hands.

I mean he is decent, but not a game changer.

"DolphinGreg wrote:

Let me point out that you just defended a guy by saying that he is "solid."

No offense to you personally, but just think about that for a second. He's "solid?" How impressive is that for a 1st round pick? How easy to duplicate would it be if all a player had to achieve was to be viewed by the fans as "solid?" I mean, hell, Earl Mitchell was solid yet he didn't cost us much as a free agent signing. Should our standard of Odrick be that he's merely "solid?"

To me, I equate "solid" with "good but replaceable." When I hear "scheme versatility" I think to myself, 'ok, he's not a dominant 43 DT like Sapp or Suh nor is he a powerful 34 NT like Wilfork or Hampton.' To me, a phrase like "scheme versatility" is just a polite way of saying he's not good enough to be a dominant force in any type of scheme, but he can adjust his play to serviceable.

I think what he's trying to argue is that (as you said yourself) Odrick is a "solid" and "versatile" player but not one that should be seen as the crux of the team nor a talent that is worthy of a big contract on the order of $6-8M per year.

It's certainly fine to look at Odrick and say he's a solid player, but is he anything better than that? Do we need him? Can we afford to let him go? Would it be wise to move on to someone else?

In fairness, the front-7 played badly towards the end of the year so if we're going to get better, we need to carefully evaluate how many of those guys are merely "solid" players and how many are crucial pieces that would be too hard to replace should be lose them.

Ahhh I see. Well thank you for using YOUR definition of "solid" as a way to distort the entire context of my post to fit your agenda. Solid means solid, not whatever fabricated meaning you've twisted it into to make Odrick appear worse. You bang on something solid and it doesn't break. I didn't say brittle. I didn't day fragile. I didn't say vulnerable. I didn't say susceptible. I didn't say mostly solid. I said solid, and I'm sure as hell not gonna call Odrick a bad player or even a common player just because he's not one of the game's elite at his position.

Secondly, if you wanna get into this 1st round chatter nonsense and use whatever misguided value you've created for Odrick in attempt to show that he's somehow been a waste of a 1st round pick or something, then you should probably look at the other options present at the time and reassess your thinking. The next 11 players off the board until Miami's 2nd round pick: #29 Kyle Wilson , #30 Jahvid Best , Jerry Hughes , Patrick Robinson , Roger Saffold , Chris Cook , Brian Price , Dexter McCluster , Nate Allen , TJ Ward , Arrelious Benn . It's patently absurd to believe anything less than an All Pro from a late 1st rounder is a failure, or even an underachievement. Odrick most certainly been a good player that any defense can win with, and when you pair that with his rare level of versatility, it makes him a defensive asset, a valuable player, something most of those aforementioned names were not.

Thirdly, I COULDN'T CARE LESS what your ridiculous and inaccurate translation of "scheme versatile" is amidst your second attempt to twist my context to trash Odrick. JJ WATT is currently the epitome of SCHEME VERSATILE. Before him that honor was held by Justin Smith, you know- the future Hall of Famer. And your reference of Ndomukong Suh? Do some research. Detroit moves him all over their Dline, and they don't do it out of boredom. They do it to mix up fronts/looks, to create matchup advantages, to prevent offenses from keying on him, and to cause confusion.

HEY! OMG! WHERE'S SUH IN THIS IMAGE?! Did he disappear?! WTH is Detroit doing forgetting to stick a DT in the middle?! ALERT ALERT, BUSTED PLAY!! Ohhhhh, I see now, he's outside at DEFENSIVE END! Guess you didn't watch the Miami game, eh?


Detroit added Ziggy Ansah to the D-line who is... wait for it... incredibly SCHEME VERSATILE. He can play inside, outside, closed end, open end, penetrating 1-gap, stout 2-gap. Ansah's versatiity allows Suh's versatility to be utilized all the more. Look at the above image. Ansah is lined up at 6-tech against the rookie right tackle, you know- since he's scheme versatile and not relegated to the left tackle's side all the time where Albert's located. Unlike the non scheme versatile Olivier Vernon, Ansah can effectively line up at 6-tech and make this play work. Ansah got a sack on this play BTW {wink}. Detroit has TONS of versatility thanks to those 2 guys, and this versatility has a lot to do with their newfound defensive success. In case you didn't know, Suh wasn't added to that defense this year. He's been there 5 seasons yet this is the first that Detroit ranked higher than 15th in scoring, so it's not just about sticking Suh in the middle and saying Voila' like you seem to think.

Where's Suh on this play? He's isolated at 6-tech on the left side now!... with Ansah standing up in the middle about to loop around him, you know- because they're versatile like that.


How about this one? Hmph, Suh is outside at 7-tech LDE this time. resulted in a Suh sack.



Scheme versatility has NOTHING to do with overall talent level and EVERYTHING to do with versatility- the skill set and ability to perform multiple roles. Scheme versatility is incredibly important in today's NFL. Who do you think most of the top defensive teams in the league are? They're SCHEME VERSATILE ones. Seattle, KC, Zona, Buffalo, Baltimore, Houston, NE, Cleveland, and San Fran, 9 of the top 10 scoring defenses this year, can all mix it up at a moment's notice thanks to SCHEME VERSATILITY, and you can't employ true scheme versatility without scheme versatile players. Otherwise it's just a sub-package play with the DC frantically trying to sub in and out less talented, specialized BACKUPS, and the roster has to occupy spots for these roles that a SCHEME VERSATILE starter could otherwise take care of.

Do you actually want the defense to line up exactly the same all season long? Do you know what 1-gap and 2-gap mean, the difference between them, and how each offers positives and negatives depending on the situation and opponent? Ditto for the difference between 3-4 and 4-3, Under front & Over front, closed end and open end? You'll see teams like Seattle, Zona, and San Fran employ all these looks during the year, and I believe we did as well in 2012.

Do you know how valuable it is to have a good D-lineman who can reliably be moved all over the line AND be a plus at each of these positions? Apparently not. But hey, I'm glad Stephen Ross informed you that his team will be a traditional 1-gap 43 Defense every snap for life and thus has no need for current or future scheme versatility and thus no need for scheme versatile players. You should've probably prefaced your post with that tidbit. :wink2:

"DolphinGreg wrote:

This is harsh but sometimes putting it bluntly is a good thing.

Is Odrick good enough sign with a team like Baltimore and play in a Super Bowl? Definitely. Will he ever be one of the bigger reasons a team gets there? No.

He's a role player. He's a nice piece to have when things are already going well.

It's only harsh if what you and Vertically Limited are saying is correct, which it isn't..... so it's not harsh, it's just wrong, right along with the rest of your post and the one before it. So welcome to Wrongville. Population 1 2. I'm sure Vertical has a welcome package prepared for you.

"ToddPhin wrote:

It's only harsh if what you and Vertically Limited are saying is correct, which it isn't..... so it's not harsh, it's just wrong, right along with the rest of your post and the one before it. So welcome to Wrongville. Population 1 2. I'm sure Vertical has a welcome package prepared for you.

LOL! "Wrongville"

"speed wrote:

I don't get the love affair with Clay tbh.

He isn't fast, isn't big, doesn't have great hands.

I mean he is decent, but not a game changer.

I think Clay's limited availability was a big factor in this season's results. Last year he was pretty impressive.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top100-2014/0ap2000000350283/Luke-Kuechly

"smahtaz wrote:

I think Clay's limited availability was a big factor in this season's results. Last year he was pretty impressive.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top100-2014/0ap2000000350283/Luke-Kuechly

Him dropping the TD vs the Lions that would have won the game did it for me. A true TE makes that catch.