CFZ What Does This Team Really Want from the Players It Pays Big?

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Pretty convenient to leave off the Chiefs and ignore the fact that the Bengals' achilles heel has been OL play.

A premium tackle next to a crappy guard gives you worse problems than a premium guard next to a crappy tackle. We just saw this in 2020. It's probably easier to find a guard, but that doesn't mean the position is less important.

The idea that you can get away with poor guard play is 100% an expired line of thinking.
I never said "get away with poor guard" play. I never ONCE suggested replacing Martin with a bad guard unless you think you can't find a good guard guards?

And I didn't conveniently leave the Chiefs off.....not sure how they back your claim Trey Smith was a late round pick and is cheap lol.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Agreed....you can typically find Gs easier that outside players to fill in, but having a pair of Gs that can run block and pass protect and increasingly valuable in the league as interior players are becoming more dominant. It seems like every week you're going up against a Vea/Donald/Hargrave/Payne etc.... especially in this division where all three opponents are pretty well stocked at the DT position. Obviously there is a limit on what you give into with Martin at age 33, but he's probably the one guy this team can't afford to lose for significant time. I'd rather lose lamb on the offense than Martin, especially given the other health issues on the OL
You'd rather lose Lamb than Martin? Yeah I don't know about that one lol. Without Lamb who's our #1? Gallup? Cooks? Yikes.
 

Mac_MaloneV1

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
5,729
I never said "get away with poor guard" play. I never ONCE suggested replacing Martin with a bad guard unless you think you can't find a good guard guards?

And I didn't conveniently leave the Chiefs off.....not sure how they back your claim Trey Smith was a late round pick and is cheap lol.
The implication of saying it's not a premium position is that you can have poor players there. I mean you can quibble about poor vs. bad. vs JAG...whatever. The point is you're implying that you can have lesser talent

Because the Chiefs spend $16m a year on Thuney
 

Mac_MaloneV1

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
5,729
Agreed....you can typically find Gs easier that outside players to fill in, but having a pair of Gs that can run block and pass protect and increasingly valuable in the league as interior players are becoming more dominant. It seems like every week you're going up against a Vea/Donald/Hargrave/Payne etc.... especially in this division where all three opponents are pretty well stocked at the DT position. Obviously there is a limit on what you give into with Martin at age 33, but he's probably the one guy this team can't afford to lose for significant time. I'd rather lose lamb on the offense than Martin, especially given the other health issues on the OL
No way you lose Lamb for him.

But you don't have to. Pay the players who make your passing game work and cut elsewhere. You never need to sacrifice a WR for an OL, or vice versa.
 

thunderpimp91

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
19,152
You'd rather lose Lamb than Martin? Yeah I don't know about that one lol. Without Lamb who's our #1? Gallup? Cooks? Yikes.
Absolutely. If I knew we would have a 100% Steele going into the season or some assurance that Tyron could last a full year I may look at that a little bit differently, but without Martin there is a very real chance that this Oline is similar to the 2020 mess real quick. A #1 WR doesn't do you a ton of good if your QB is getting sacked 50 times a year.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
The implication of saying it's not a premium position is that you can have poor players there. I mean you can quibble about poor vs. bad. vs JAG...whatever. The point is you're implying that you can have lesser talent

Because the Chiefs spend $16m a year on Thuney
Thuney is not their right guard. Trey Smith is who they drafter in the 6th round and immediately started as a rookie since 2021.

And that is not what I implied lol. Running back isn't a premium position either but that doesn't mean I want Troy Hambrick back there lol. The Objective is to have as many good players as you possibly can. You're as strong as your weakest. So no, I'd never advocate on settling for a Nate Livings or a Mackenzie Bernadeaux. My point is Martin is a premium player at a position that isn't considered premium. It comes after even RB. You have to be mindful of where you spend your money especially on 33 year old players and what positions.
 

thunderpimp91

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
19,152
No way you lose Lamb for him.

But you don't have to. Pay the players who make your passing game work and cut elsewhere. You never need to sacrifice a WR for an OL, or vice versa.
Agreed, and maybe I worded my previous post poorly. I wasn't saying you sacrifice Lamb to pay Martin, I'm arguing that with the current construction of the roster Martin is probably more valuable and worse to have out of the lineup than Lamb, especially with the other oline injury concerns with Steele/Tyron.

My preference is absolutely to keep both, this offense takes a major hit missing either.
 

Mac_MaloneV1

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
5,729
Thuney is not their right guard. Trey Smith is who they drafter in the 6th round and immediately started as a rookie since 2021.

And that is not what I implied lol. Running back isn't a premium position either but that doesn't mean I want Troy Hambrick back there lol. The Objective is to have as many good players as you possibly can. You're as strong as your weakest. So no, I'd never advocate on settling for a Nate Livings or a Mackenzie Bernadeaux. My point is Martin is a premium player at a position that isn't considered premium. It comes after even RB. You have to be mindful of where you spend your money especially on 33 year old players and what positions.
Doesn't matter which side.

And this is the point that you're wrong about. Rephrasing - if you have to have a "bad" player, you'd rather have it at S, LB, RB, TE than OG.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Absolutely. If I knew we would have a 100% Steele going into the season or some assurance that Tyron could last a full year I may look at that a little bit differently, but without Martin there is a very real chance that this Oline is similar to the 2020 mess real quick. A #1 WR doesn't do you a ton of good if your QB is getting sacked 50 times a year.
I get that logic but without Lamb you have issues as well like the 2018 debacle before we got Amari. Yeah Dak may not get sacked 50 times but instead he's leading the league in interceptions with no one to throw the football to. I've seen quarterbacks produce with bad lines. The list is a lot shorter without a #1 receiver.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Doesn't matter which side.

And this is the point that you're wrong about. Rephrasing - if you have to have a "bad" player, you'd rather have it at S, LB, RB, TE than OG.
Why do you say this? Maybe you can get away with a bad linebacker. But I don't see too many contenders getting away with bad safety, RB, TE or TE play.
 

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
61,568
Reaction score
38,929
It doesn’t take a long post to tell you what the team wants from players they pay big money to. They want great play especially in the big games.
 

thunderpimp91

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
19,152
Lamb just turned 24 last month. Martin turns 34 in November.
And for 2023 I'm not sure that's a major factor. Many Olineman play well at 33 these days. In 2026 Lamb will have waaaay more value to the Cowboys than Martin does. For this year I'd rather Lamb be the one to miss time than Martin.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
46,580
Reaction score
46,004
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
In a lot of ways, I like the move of not paying Zack Martin any more than his contract is worth. He wanted that contract; he got it. Why renegotiate the deal? Play it out, then score another contract. Plus how much have we heard about Zack Martin's workout plan and how hard he's been training. The same ole same ole, every year. He's one of those guys Broadudus talks about who come in looking the same every year.

Meanwhile, like it or not, we have a player like Diggs, who is still very young, and still playing lights out, playing big, more or less, until I guess it came to really big. I was making excuses for Diggs last year, and I hope this offseason he bulks up and comes in ready and prepared to lay some wood. High rep workouts can keep you lean and strong, and Diggs should be hitting it like Parsons, and I suspect he is...
I
Anyway, this whole holding out thing isn't going to sit well, and was ill-timed by Martin. I respect his game,but he couldn't have timed it any worse than this.
That said, there's a bigger overall picture here. The Cowboys are outwardly resistant to paying him any more than this contract, and they apparently realize the future lies ahead. And then there's Martin, well like Zeke, at 32-years old, and aging, like the rest of us, and you just kinda squirm even though he's a big part of our game, because he isn't as good as he once was.. Just still good, and plays his role well Do the Cowboys dare disrespect a guy with so many Pro Bowls? One who they know is aging?

The Pro Bowl is a measure of popularity. If you look at the stat sheets, I wouldn't say Martin was close to being the best guard in the league last year, overall.

I guess we'll see. I'm a fan who never gets in any other players' pockets, rarely, if ever do I comment on those thread. But this throws it in my face, and now I have to consider it

Since the topic of scarcity has come up, I'd rather give that money to the older players who still come in and dominate at times, like Dlaw, and the younger guys, Parsons, Diggs, etc.

That's your triplets on this team. And then there's CeeDee Lamb and Pollard on offense. Plus Dak, Gallup and now Cooks! Without those three, there's no backbone, and i'm no cap expert so I don't really care to understand how it all works, in detail, plus I realize it can be offeset and so on, but back to the topic, I guess what I'm saying is that they know there's a youth movement coming on, and they want to secure their players.

You can't pay someone for their popularity. That's all the Pro-Bowl really is. Martin needs to get that through his head, and play. Or I think the Cowboys walk away from that one well within their tight to do so for the betterment of the team. Martin is still good. But he's not worth more than what he's already making.

How can you not be happy with $86,000,000?
He’s a first round Hall of Famer playing like a first round Hall of Famer. Pay the man.
 

thunderpimp91

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
19,152
I get that logic but without Lamb you have issues as well like the 2018 debacle before we got Amari. Yeah Dak may not get sacked 50 times but instead he's leading the league in interceptions with no one to throw the football to. I've seen quarterbacks produce with bad lines. The list is a lot shorter without a #1 receiver.
Fair point, but I'll take the player that helps both the run game and the pass game. I'll continue to believe that you build from the inside out (Cincinnati is a major exception). With the Oline depth so questionable on this 2023 team I'd consider Martin the more valuable player, but don't think that I'm dissing Lamb either. It's certainly not ideal to lose him either. I think it's close enough that I'm perfectly fine to agree to disagree on the subject though, but I do think that Martin despite his position carries a ton of value for that to be a reasonable debate though is my bigger argument.
 

MountaineerCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,426
Reaction score
72,972
I never said Aikman was carried wrong poster genius lol.
Nah.

You and your pals love to tell us Aikman was replaceable because of his team. What team? You must not be talking about guys like Larry Allen since Martin is replaceable in your eyes and Guards aren’t important.

Keep that energy, bro.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Fair point, but I'll take the player that helps both the run game and the pass game. I'll continue to believe that you build from the inside out (Cincinnati is a major exception). With the Oline depth so questionable on this 2023 team I'd consider Martin the more valuable player, but don't think that I'm dissing Lamb either. It's certainly not ideal to lose him either. I think it's close enough that I'm perfectly fine to agree to disagree on the subject though, but I do think that Martin despite his position carries a ton of value for that to be a reasonable debate though is my bigger argument.
You are right. The game is built in the trenches. That's been pretty consistent. But it's worth noting that you can get inferior play to Martin and still have a good run game and pass protection. I think we all agree Zack Martin is a 10. You can still get good play from a player that's a 5 or 6 in comparison.

We need Martin for this playoff push so I'm sure he will get whatever he asks for and probably should.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,522
Reaction score
76,364
Nah.

You and your pals love to tell us Aikman was replaceable because of his team. What team? You must not be talking about guys like Larry Allen since Martin is replaceable in your eyes and Guards aren’t nothing.

Keep that energy, bro.
Ok well post the quote where I said Aikman was replaceable? Should be rather simple....
 

plasticman

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,473
Reaction score
17,557
If the Cowboys lose Martin then they might as well forget about running the ball.
 
Top