I read a few days ago, a comparison of picking up Barrons (SP?) to when the Cowboys picked up Derrick Kinnard (SP?)
They made an interesting point, in that this is not specifically a pick up of a 16 game starter, but rather a pick up of a player who can come in for a period of time, either as a rotation back-up or for a few games should another player go down...and thus be a fair to solid player who will keep the OL from being exposed.
Basically they made a point that your OL is only as strong as your weakest player...making a point about a crew of OL can have 3 pro-bowlers, 1 average player and then 1 guy who flat out sucks...and that group will simply suck as that 1 guy gets beat.
But you could have an OL crew of 1 Pro Bowler and 4 average guys and collectively they will fair better simply because of the lower blown plays.
They used some Cowboy teams as examples...the year that the Cowboys went on to beat the Steelers in the Superbowl, which was with Kinnard. Then they used a recent team (Can't remember which year), the Cowboys had expected to do great things, but as some OL went down, they were forced to play a deep OL Backup which turned out to be a failed experiement.
And the end of the day, they simply need OL guys who can provide positive contributions if and when they actually play.
This trade isn't going to be headline material at the end of the season, most of us will forget about it...but the odds are, this will not be a player that anyone notices as a bust...which for OL, the goal is to go unnoticed, after all...we only notice who screws up when it comes to lineman.
|