View Full Version : Jaques Reeves
papabear
04-28-2008, 05:01 PM
I don't know how many of you ever read any of KC Joyner's stuff, but it relies heavily on stats and the metrics he's come up with. I like the idea of looking deeper into the stats to get something more meaningful, like OBPS in baseball vs. just batting average. The way most of his stuff is done leaves some room for subjectivity, but he tries to outline how he breaks down each category.
Anyway I just found an old article from him where he talks about underrated players and one of them was Reeves. I thought it was interesting if for no other reason than the only people who seem to agree with him are the Texans staff.
KC Joyner (http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/columns/story?columnist=joyner_kc&id=3277748)
Jacques Reeves, CB, Texans: Reeves, formerly of the Cowboys, had a 7.9 YPA in 2007. That number alone says he is average, but it is skewed somewhat by three of his games. Reeves struggled in Week 2 at Miami, got beat for a 69-yard touchdown by Donte' Stallworth in Week 6 against New England and had a subpar showing in Week 11 against Washington.
Take those three tilts out of his numbers, and Reeves' YPA drops to 7.0, which is a starting-cornerback level YPA. He might not be a shutdown cornerback, but he certainly is an upgrade for a weak Houston secondary that can use all the help it can get.
I disagree with taking out his "bad days", but according to him we shouldn't be as worried about who will play corner opposite Bennet until Dunta comes back. If you look earlier in the article he slams Drayton Florence's 10.8 ypa, and claims that numbers like those usually get a player benched or released.
I'm really not sure how much stock to put into all this, but I thought it was interesting.
HPF Bob
04-28-2008, 07:04 PM
Yeah, and if you take Adam Everett's bad plate appearances out, he's a .300 hitter. :p
Keith
04-28-2008, 07:43 PM
Yeah, it's kinda tough to ignore those plays. Probably something similar could be said about Petey, like take away those two 83-yd TD passes he gave up and he actually played a good game.
That's just the life of a corner.
Hopefully these guys, will all get better help in deep coverage from the safeties, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
dadmg
04-29-2008, 01:19 AM
After reading the Football Outsiders early free agency review (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2008/03/04/ramblings/audibles/6173/), I felt a bit better about the Reeves signing and since then I've heard more positive than negative so I guess I'll just wait and see.
TheMatrix31
04-29-2008, 04:58 AM
Yeah, it's kinda tough to ignore those plays. Probably something similar could be said about Petey, like take away those two 83-yd TD passes he gave up and he actually played a good game.
Lee Evans tore us a new one that day.
papabear
04-29-2008, 08:50 AM
The taking out the bad plays is ridiculous, but even with those in he still rates his as average.....which is 100x better than what most people have said about him.
NickO
04-29-2008, 10:59 PM
At least the Reeves acquisition doesn't carry the sting of the 2nd and 3rd given up for P-Buch the tackling machine. I think the Reeves bonus money is reasonable for a guy with starting experience and at worst he's DEPTH. This franchise is finally coming around to the point where they have to start making tough decisions for roster spots because of the depth Smith/Kubiak have brought in.
jppaul
05-04-2008, 12:30 AM
I am just hoping that he is not Faggins kind of crispy. See Lee Evans lighting him up like a christmas tree.
Vinny
05-05-2008, 11:06 AM
Joyner was one of the guys who rated Carr so highly a few years ago. He seems to look at a lot of film but I'm not big on stats to define or grade players. Personally, I think that you can use formulas in statistically driven sports like baseball because of the 1 on 1 matchup the pitcher has with the hitters. I know there are other defenders in play but the crucial element in baseball is the hitter vs the pitcher. In football there are just too many variables, techniques and strategies that impact any given play.....football is just a sport you gotta eyeball. If not you end up lovin' guys like Carr for no good reason other than because he grades out with high 'metrics'.
HPF Bob
05-05-2008, 01:19 PM
I totally agree, Vinny. Baseball is a series of one-on-one matchups while football is far more of a team-vs-team sport for the stats to be analyzed as thoroughly as they are in baseball.
I have to hand it to Vinny on this one. I stayed with Carr entirely too long. Now I see the error of my ways. So my hat is off to ya Vinny.
I agree that in Football, you have to see the game and the games within the game, to really judge a player. So I think I will reserve judgment until I see Reeves in a few games.
Bigtinylittle
05-21-2008, 06:01 PM
When Dunte and Faggins were in together at the beginning of last year, what I saw was that the QB rarely threw at Dunte and when he did, Dunte usually made the play. The QB threw at Faggins way more often and Petey looked terrible. He either got beat or he played so far off his man that the reception was a forgone conclusion.
That's why I wasn't surprised when our defense didn't really seem to miss the loss of Dunte very much. It was almost like his talent was being wasted. In my opinion, having a very weak corner is one of the very worst problems a defense can have. It gives the offense a play they can go back to over and over. An automatic.
Even though neither Reeves or Bennett are as good as Dunte, as a duo I would rate them ahead of the Dunte/Faggins duo. And when we get Dunte back, things should be even better.
Now if we can just get a decent pass rush out of our front four, we could be pretty salty against the pass.
I just want us to have good enough talent so we can mix up our coverages more. Because of the injuries last year we seemed to be limited to only a couple of schemes.
Roy P
05-26-2008, 07:26 PM
In my opinion, having a very weak corner is one of the very worst problems a defense can have. It gives the offense a play they can go back to over and over. An automatic.
Now if we can just get a decent pass rush out of our front four, we could be pretty salty against the pass.
I was watching the 2003 Colts vs. Bucs game on NFL Network and the Bucs had a hell of a defense. They should have won that game pretty easiliy. However, Brian Kelly was out with an injury so the CB duo was Ronde Barber and some guy named Wansley.
To make a long story short, Peyton and the colts scored 4 touchdowns in 4 minutes left in the game because the weak link in the secondary was exposed and exploited.
This was my reasoning behind wanting CB Antoine Cason in the 1st round during the draft. Hopefully, Bennett and Molden can hold their own this season and Reeves can help out too. None of us know when/if Dunta is coming back. I'm optimistic that he'll be up to speed around week 10. By that time, we could be out of the playoffs.
There were a lot of CB's available (and taken) in the first round. My opinion was if we couldn't get McKelvin or DRC, then the next bet was OLT. When all of the "glitter" OLT's were gone at #18, I kinda thought, well it is a tossup between the kid from S. Fla. (Jenkins?), and Duane Brown. The CowCrooks traded back up to get the CB, so to me the choice of Duane Brown at #26 was somewhat of a no-brainer. I feel he will do us proud. The two extra picks didn't hurt any either.
..........And besides, it was coach Hokes who scouted Fred Bennet back in 2006, and look what he has done after being given the chance. Coach Hoke also worked out Molden just before the 2008 Draft. I feel good about our secondary, given the fact that Hokes will do the honors for the CBs, and Rhoades will do the same for the safeties. I will just flat disagree with RP, and say we will still be in it for the playoffs at week 10, if the injury bug doesn't strike us down like it has for the past two years. Okam could be the key. If he stops the run on first and second, then it will make it a lot easier to defend the pass on 3rd, or 4th down.
I get the impression from what I see and hear on the internet that Dunta wants and feels he'll be ready for opening day. I think the team may not let him, though and make him take the safe, cautionary road to returning....
He's (Dunta) at a point in his career, I believe, where he doesn't need that many reps so it is good for the new guys (Molden, Reeves) to get the majority of the reps in practice...
papabear
06-09-2008, 09:23 AM
I get the impression from what I see and hear on the internet that Dunta wants and feels he'll be ready for opening day. .
That may be what he wants, but I would be absolutely shocked if it's even considered. IMO best case is that he comes off of the PUP list midseason, and slowly works himself back into the action. I would not be surprised one little bit if he didn't play a down this year. That's probably more likely than him being ready opening day.
Don't get me wrong I want him back ASAP, but I'm just being realistic. Once the Doctor OK's him it still will take some time for him to get anywhere close to top form.
i don't think the texans would allow him out to play on opening day. unless a magical hand of healing has passed over him and he is actually and truly 100% it would be dumb to send him out to battle.
hell, if he's that close to being ready on opening day i don't see the PUP list as necessity. don't they have to wait until week 7 to return? if he's feeling good and is only 2 or 3 more weeks away i say screw the PUP list and just play him when everyone is comfortable.
for the record though, i think he does hit the PUP list. like it or lump it we don't need half of dunta robinson. we need the man himself, as himself. i'm alright with however bennett/reeves/molden play to begin the year.
That may be what he wants, but I would be absolutely shocked if it's even considered. IMO best case is that he comes off of the PUP list midseason, and slowly works himself back into the action. I would not be surprised one little bit if he didn't play a down this year. That's probably more likely than him being ready opening day.
Don't get me wrong I want him back ASAP, but I'm just being realistic. Once the Doctor OK's him it still will take some time for him to get anywhere close to top form.
Uhh, yeah. I also said:
I think the team may not let him, though and make him take the safe, cautionary road to returning....
and you pretty much said the same thing. At some point, it won't matter what the MRI's or the doctor says they will have to go with what Dunta says. If he says he's ready, they'll have to trust him..... IMO, he's going to play this year - maybe not opening day, but sometime during the year.....
papabear
06-09-2008, 10:06 PM
Uhh, yeah. I also said:
I know and I wasn't attacking your comment....I just don't think that Dunta has any shot of playing on opening day regardless of what he says right now. I'm glad to see he's taken the attitude that he's going to work his tail off and get back on the field.
At some point, it won't matter what the MRI's or the doctor says they will have to go with what Dunta says.
i disagree like 6 bajillion percent. i'll take the prognosis of a highly trained professional using a big fancy machine over the word of a highly paid athlete in a contract year. 80% of dunta robinson is not that great of a corner. we need the man himself, as himself.
i disagree like 6 bajillion percent. i'll take the prognosis of a highly trained professional using a big fancy machine over the word of a highly paid athlete in a contract year. 80% of dunta robinson is not that great of a corner. we need the man himself, as himself.
He's 80%? I didn't know that. When is he going to be 100%?
dude, i'm just guessing. we all know he wouldn't be 100% if he walks out onto the field the first sunday, my point is we need 100% dunta...not anything less.
dude, i'm just guessing. we all know he wouldn't be 100% if he walks out onto the field the first sunday, my point is we need 100% dunta...not anything less.
And my point was, at some point it doesn't matter what the doctors or the MRI's say. (you know, the part where you disagree like 6 bajillion percent?) At some point, they are going to say, "We've done all we can, it's up to you, now, to rehab/work your way back".
It just amazes me to read in the various internet forums how everybody knows the fate or what is best for Dunta. Some have him as Boselli vers 2.0 - never to play again and some have him coming all the way back to 100%. Lots of in between. Some say he'll play but never be 100% again.
Everybody is guessing. Only Dunta, if he's honest with himself, can say where he is really at.
Reports coming out say he's out there running around at practice, now. If you put any stock in what McClain says, that at practice, he's looking good but still having trouble with lateral movement and turn-and-run... that Dunta is saying, "October" and the team is saying, "November". With 3 months still to go, he (McClain) doesn't doubt that he will return this year.
http://www.chron.com/sports/
Go to the Justice/McClain Audio links in the lower right and click on "Texans confident about Season". Dunta info is about half way through.
cadams
06-11-2008, 04:25 PM
Go to the Justice/McClain Audio links in the lower right and click on "Texans confident about Season". Dunta info is about half way through.
i don't disagree with you on your assesment of duante, but this is the wrong crowd to use those two dingleberries as sources.
i don't disagree with you on your assesment of duante, but this is the wrong crowd to use those two dingleberries as sources.
I'm not a big fan of either but actually, I'd rather listen to someone that has been to a few OTA's rather than someone that has been to zero OTA's.
And my point was, at some point it doesn't matter what the doctors or the MRI's say. (you know, the part where you disagree like 6 bajillion percent?) At some point, they are going to say, "We've done all we can, it's up to you, now, to rehab/work your way back".
yea there is a point where what the doctors say doesn't matter. it's after they give him clearance to play with the team. it's after he's rehabed and worked his way back, so as long as they feel he is healthy he can play...i'm not sure where you think dunta's opinion comes in but he's not going to be able just tell the texans medical staff to shove it and go play because he thinks he can...unless he doesn't want his money.
It just amazes me to read in the various internet forums how everybody knows the fate or what is best for Dunta. Some have him as Boselli vers 2.0 - never to play again and some have him coming all the way back to 100%. Lots of in between. Some say he'll play but never be 100% again. I'm a big hypocrite.
Everybody is guessing. Only Dunta, if he's honest with himself, can say where he is really at.
pppppppppsdfakld......so we're not allowed to talk about it even though i just said i was guessing at his current health?
by the way, MRI machines and degrees in such matters hold a fairly weighted portion of the general opinion of this person. in fact, DUNTA CAN'T PLAY UNTIL THEY CLEAR HIM. i think they matter just a weeeeee lil' bit. there are reasons why athletes don't treat themselves, i know, that's weird but i swear it's true.
Reports coming out say he's out there running around at practice, now. If you put any stock in what McClain says, that at practice, he's looking good but still having trouble with lateral movement and turn-and-run... that Dunta is saying, "October" and the team is saying, "November". With 3 months still to go, he (McClain) doesn't doubt that he will return this year.
http://www.chron.com/sports/
Go to the Justice/McClain Audio links in the lower right and click on "Texans confident about Season". Dunta info is about half way through.
you're looking to JOHN F*CK*NG MCCLAIN for information about lateral movements and being able to turn or run? that's your whole problem right there son. besides, you just give us the business about "everybody knows what's best for dunta" and then give like one of the worst sources in the history of sources as your definitive stamp of righteousness? please.
yea there is a point where what the doctors say doesn't matter. it's after they give him clearance to play with the team. it's after he's rehabed and worked his way back, so as long as they feel he is healthy he can play...i'm not sure where you think dunta's opinion comes in but he's not going to be able just tell the texans medical staff to shove it and go play because he thinks he can...unless he doesn't want his money.
See: Spencer. I'd say the doctors have done all they can do with him. Is he not "cleared"? Can he still do his job? Who makes that determination? At this point, I'd say it would be up to he and the coaches.
pppppppppsdfakld......so we're not allowed to talk about it even though i just said i was guessing at his current health?
Sure you can. Guess all you want - that's what these forums are for. Some use inside info and facts to form their opinions - others just blabber out whatever comes to mind....
by the way, MRI machines and degrees in such matters hold a fairly weighted portion of the general opinion of this person. in fact, DUNTA CAN'T PLAY UNTIL THEY CLEAR HIM. i think they matter just a weeeeee lil' bit. there are reasons why athletes don't treat themselves, i know, that's weird but i swear it's true.
See my first reply.
you're looking to JOHN F*CK*NG MCCLAIN for information about lateral movements and being able to turn or run? that's your whole problem right there son. besides, you just give us the business about "everybody knows what's best for dunta" and then give like one of the worst sources in the history of sources as your definitive stamp of righteousness? please.
Jeez, take a valium - that last hyperbole got away from you.
Son? Eheh, judging from your responses, I'd say I'm probably twice your age.
Re: McClain, sure, as mentioned, I'd rather hear what he has to say rather than someone typing from their work computer. He does have about 30-some years reporting on sports and he is not always wrong (and I can't believe I'm defending him). Did you even go listen at the link I posted?
This is my last post on the subject. Your floor.
Bigtinylittle
06-12-2008, 05:49 PM
I don't consider McClain a football genius, but I respect him for what he is: a guy who likes football, has a few sources but not as many as he'd like, and a guy that as far as I can tell doesn't just make stuff up. As a source, I'd but him well ahead of some of the radio sports jocks in Houston.
One of the reasons Dunte was written off at the time he got his injury is the total hamstring tear. But from what I have been hearing, the hamstring operation was a total success. If that is true, then what Dunte is dealing with is just a normal ACL tear with a little extra rehab time because of the hamstring thing. If that is the case, then he should be able to play pretty well this year and be fully or almost fully as good as he was before in another year or so.
See: Spencer. I'd say the doctors have done all they can do with him. Is he not "cleared"? Can he still do his job? Who makes that determination? At this point, I'd say it would be up to he and the coaches.
i don't think they've cleared him for contact have they? i could be wrong but i'm pretty sure all he's done is individual workouts to this point. just like my boy dunta. they both need the MEDICAL CLEARANCE before "i'm good to go" means anything to any coach.
who makes the determination? the doctors.
Sure you can. Guess all you want - that's what these forums are for. Some use inside info and facts to form their opinions - others just blabber out whatever comes to mind....
talked yourself into a circle here. more like the olympic games logo: circles in circles.
Jeez, take a valium - that last hyperbole got away from you.
Son? Eheh, judging from your responses, I'd say I'm probably twice your age. jeebus h. rodriguez, if i call you my dawg are you gonna tell me that you're not a dog? if i call you a homie are you gonna tell me you're at work?
Re: McClain, sure, as mentioned, I'd rather hear what he has to say rather than someone typing from their work computer. He does have about 30-some years reporting on sports and he is not always wrong (and I can't believe I'm defending him). Did you even go listen at the link I posted?
This is my last post on the subject. Your floor.
just because john mcclain has been a terrible sports reporter for 30 years it doesn't make him any more right about anything. you don't want sports opinions from somebody who doesn't get paid to opine on sports (i.e. me)? that's just fine. but excuse me if i'm not going to take analysis on running from a guy who probably hasn't seen the lower half of his body without the aid of a mirror for the same 30 years.
There was a time, back when we still had the old Houston Post, McLain actually had to work a little bit, and had some good years along with the Luv Ya Blue teams. However, now that he's self styled himself a little short fat strutting "general", those days are sadly gone. RIP.
i'll just have to take your word for it NBT. i still can't get the image of mad tv's impression of kenny rogers out of my mind when john mcclain talks.
But back to Reeves. Iwill be watching closely to see how he looks in our system. He supposedly sucked in the Cowboys. His forte is supposedly bump and run, and being physical on the receivers. We sure need him to hold the rope......at least until Dunta can get back.
There are still a lot of sports writers out there who say our secondary sucks. Well that was last year. I really think the safeties will be better and deeper. The CB's however, I'm holding my breath and waiting?
from what i've heard we've signed reeves as like a "change of scenary will be better for him" type. it makes me glad to hear he is a physical corner, he's got good size and speed which you would expect from an nfl corner. physical and aggressive play like that would really give some new adjectives to use on our defense. vanilla, soft, and bend but don't break are getting really old.
i agree with you the safeties should be better but they couldn't have been much worse. do they make our secondary fearsome? nope. i think the corners should be fine as long as reeves isn't petey-v.2. bennett should be a key component in his 2nd year if he continues his playmaking. plus we have a hungry dunta waiting to get back to action!!
Yeah, the vanilla soft, and bend but don't break are Richard Smith's legacies to date. The truth is, Kubiak told him to play conservative because he wasn't real confident of the RBs, or the offensive line. I hope with coach Gibbs running the ZBS, he will have the faith to run a more aggressive defense. That is one of the things I will be watching for very closely this season.
Nconroe
07-13-2008, 06:27 PM
I thought the vanilla defense was partly due to dline, maybe front seven, couldn't bring enough pressure consistently. And we needed to get taller and faster, and let some of experience develop, and keep away from injuries, all of which are starting to show up, so, here's hoping for an improved looking defense and secondary.
Dancerdog
07-14-2008, 12:24 AM
I would expect Dunta to be back the week after the bye. At least according to what word is coming out of the Texans organization. I sure hope he returns to his old self. That injury was horrendous.
coloradodude
07-14-2008, 12:39 AM
About Dunta...that was a terrible injury. Anyone that is counting on him ever regaining his original speed is deceiving themselves. Provided he does come all the way back (minus the former super speed) he is still great in run support and screwing with the receivers at the line.
About Reeves...don't be shocked if this is his last year with the Texans.
popanot
07-14-2008, 01:26 PM
Way to stay postive there, CD. ;)
painekiller
07-14-2008, 03:28 PM
Way to stay postive there, CD. ;)
Think about it. Bennett and if the preseason press is correct, Molden should be the starters at some point this season. Dunta would only be expected to be a nickle back if his injury has slowed him, other wise he is pushing the two young CBs.
So Reeves is here this season as insurance, if Molden does not progress and/or Dunta does not make it back, only then will Reeves be here next season.
So if Reeves has a resurection, and Moulden is as good as we thought, and Dunta does come back good as new, we will have an embarrasment of CB riches. Ever thought about that?
cadams
07-14-2008, 04:11 PM
So if Reeves has a resurection, and Moulden is as good as we thought, and Dunta does come back good as new, we will have an embarrasment of CB riches. Ever thought about that?
i have dreamed of it. and it is a very good dream
Joshua
07-14-2008, 05:05 PM
About Dunta...that was a terrible injury. Anyone that is counting on him ever regaining his original speed is deceiving themselves. Provided he does come all the way back (minus the former super speed) he is still great in run support and screwing with the receivers at the line.
About Reeves...don't be shocked if this is his last year with the Texans.
To me, these two statements seem to be somewhat contradictory. If Dunta comes back as only a shell of his former self, I would think that this would virtually guarantee a spot for Reeves.
coloradodude
07-14-2008, 09:21 PM
Think about it. Bennett and if the preseason press is correct, Molden should be the starters at some point this season. Dunta would only be expected to be a nickle back if his injury has slowed him, other wise he is pushing the two young CBs.
So Reeves is here this season as insurance, if Molden does not progress and/or Dunta does not make it back, only then will Reeves be here next season.
Seriously, I wasn't trying to bring anyone down. Dunta's injury is a bad one which causes speed to evaporate. Granted there have been major advances in the medical field so anything's possible. Dunta has heart in my book, it just may take another season of work to get back his speed. But honestly, 4.3 speed is gonna be a memory. 4.40 or 4.45 is more realistic. But that ain't bad considering his ability to jam at the line and run support. Just watch how well his fantastic technique gets even better. Remember Rod Woodson after his injury? Slower but more dangerous.
But on the bright side, our front office has done some positive actions on its own in the drafts. Bennett and Moulden are young and will get tested but if they live up to their tangibles and learn the technicals of the position, we could all be satisfied. I know I for one love the competition at CB.
Reeves will do alright but he has proven one thing...you need a safety behind him. As painekiller brought out, he's insurance, not the answer.
painekiller
07-15-2008, 01:10 AM
So if Reeves has a resurection, and Moulden is as good as we thought, and Dunta does come back good as new, we will have an embarrasment of CB riches. Ever thought about that?
Every day, and as cadams said, it's sweet.
when has running in a straight line really fast with no pads on ever mattered on a football field? it's not even his straight line speed that we should be worried about, it's his quickness from 0 to max speed. if his acceleration is suffering that's when recievers are gonna be able to create a little more space for the catch. if he's able to regain his burst he'll pretty much be the same player....as long as he can still hit like dunta!
bennett...man...i don't know what to say about him. he looks like he's all ready for a 10 int year and bursting onto the scene and all that...but at the same time it's his 2nd year blablabla...just go fred, go!
i hope molden is able to contribute, i know we gave reeves a boatload of money but i would rather see this guy progressing and doing well than reeves trying to prove it was dallas, not him.
edo783
07-15-2008, 08:28 AM
If Reeves is just insurance, the team needs to get a different insurance agent, because that is some high priced stuff. IMO, I don't think they see him that way. I look for him to play 3-4 years for us and then probably Mouldon steps in. If Mouldon beats him out that will be great, but expensive.
cadams
07-15-2008, 08:35 AM
man, everyone talks about us givign reeves a boatload of money, but i just dont think that is the case. i could be wrong, but the way his contract was structured i remember it looking like a good deal for the texans. if he performs he will get all of that money (and in the market today, 20 million isnt much for a cb who is performing). if he doesnt, the texans can get rid of him after a year or two without much of a cap hit.
Keith, you are the cap guru, does that jive with what you think?
papabear
07-15-2008, 08:55 AM
man, everyone talks about us givign reeves a boatload of money, but i just dont think that is the case. i could be wrong, but the way his contract was structured i remember it looking like a good deal for the texans. if he performs he will get all of that money (and in the market today, 20 million isnt much for a cb who is performing). if he doesnt, the texans can get rid of him after a year or two without much of a cap hit.
Keith, you are the cap guru, does that jive with what you think?
That's kinda the way I understood it as well....we could cut him relatively pain free after one year, or if he plays well he gets his 20 million....again not that outrageous for a CB.
painekiller
07-15-2008, 09:05 AM
man, everyone talks about us givign reeves a boatload of money, but i just dont think that is the case. i could be wrong, but the way his contract was structured i remember it looking like a good deal for the texans. if he performs he will get all of that money (and in the market today, 20 million isnt much for a cb who is performing). if he doesnt, the texans can get rid of him after a year or two without much of a cap hit.
Keith, you are the cap guru, does that jive with what you think?
Keith had this to say on 4/26/08 (http://inthebullseye.com/forums/showpost.php?p=158&postcount=39)
Reeves signed a 5-year contract that included a $4 million signing bonus ($4MM / 5 yr = $800k/yr prorate). He also got an addition $2 million as a roster bonus on this year's cap, which is the reason why cutting him after this year or next would be less painful... that extra $2MM won't need to be spread over future years.
2008: $1MM base, $800k prorate, $2MM roster = $3.8MM cap hit
So getting rid of Reeves after just one year would mean ($800k * 4 years) $3.2 million in dead money. If taken as a June 1, 2009 cut, that would mean $800k on the 2009 cap and $2.4 million on the 2010 cap.
They structured the contract so Reeves could be a one year rental, or a long term answer. This is not Rasputin's team anymore.
Joshua
07-15-2008, 09:21 AM
For what it's worth --
"Antwaun Molden could also see playing time early. Last season, the coaches eased cornerback Fred Bennett into the defense, but Molden is already ahead of where Bennett was at this time last year. Molden has very good technique and is a bigger cornerback, who will complement Bennett well on the field."
http://ind.scout.com/a.z?s=113&p=2&c=769287
so let me make sure i understand this. reeves is going to make about 3.8 mil, right? what he did to get that much?
so we gave him a boat load of money, we are just bringing it in on 5 different boats?
papabear
07-15-2008, 11:00 AM
so let me make sure i understand this. reeves is going to make about 3.8 mil, right? what he did to get that much?
so we gave him a boat load of money, we are just bringing it in on 5 different boats?
I think the franchise tag for CB's was something like 9 million....so he's not getting paid like a top five corner. Is he getting more than he deserves? Yep, but so does just about any free agent under thirty with some skill. If he doesn't work out he guts cut after this year. 800k in 2009 and 2.4 in 2010 against the cap....not a big deal in the grand scheme of things for NFL salary cap.
McNair might not like spending six million or so on a guy who was only here one year and didn't play well, but that only affects his pocketbook....not the cap situation down the road.
Bigtinylittle
07-15-2008, 11:26 AM
It is pretty easy to see what he did to get that money. Last year the Texans overpaid Black by quite a bit. That's because they had a desperate need for backup help at LT. They could have gone with someone else at backup LT who was already on the team, such as Frye. They chose to go with someone who had a proven track record of several less than stellar years starting in the NFL, and not go with a total unknown. LT is a position which demands lots of dollars, even for mediocre play. So Black was overpaid by quite a bit. The Texans were buying insurance. Now that they have brown, Black is no longer needed and he was cut.
The situation at CB is almost identical. They are buying insurance. That's the way they operate If they could have bought somebody they thought was better for less money, they would have. Is Reeves being overpaid by a lot? I imagine he is, though time will tell. Could the Texans have gone with the untried Molden and saved a lot of money? Yes, but that's not the way Kubiak operates. Will Molden beat out Reeves early in the season and show that we had unnecessary insurance? Perhaps.
But ask yourself this question: are the Texans sorry they bought insurance at LT last year? I doubt it. And if Molden turns out to be a stud, I doubt that the Texans will be sorry they gave Reeves the contract they gave him. It's an insurance policy.
cadams
07-15-2008, 12:36 PM
as crazy as this sounds, 3.8 million for an average starting cb isnt really overpain in the nfl these days
coloradodude
07-15-2008, 02:08 PM
I can tell you guys that I'm not upset at all for the signing of Reeves. But we better have some responsible safeties on the field. Not just for him but for Bennett and Moulden as well.
Go back to Koobs history with the 49er's and the Broncos. You can name the safeties. I look forward to the safeties presence being felt in games soon. He knows and understands their role so count on that position sending someone to the PB this year or next...imo.
cadams
07-15-2008, 03:44 PM
if the moves work out that we made this year, i fully expect we will go after a quality safety in next year's draft or free agency
painekiller
07-15-2008, 04:25 PM
if the moves work out that we made this year, i fully expect we will go after a quality safety in next year's draft or free agency
Here's is my early guy to watch. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCGLk4mKnho) William Moore #1 Mizzou. FS speed and range with SS size and hitting ability. What a piece to add to our defense. Oh dreams....
6'1'' 225 4.47 speed. that's pretty good tangibles for a safety to go with the couple of devastating hits (and int ability) on that video! dreams indeed!
i'm not trying to get down on the signing and beat up on reeves but you know a signing could've been better when the two ways it can turn out for the better are 1) if the guy actually plays well or 2) a rookie beats him out.
Bigtinylittle
07-16-2008, 09:20 AM
If Smith and Kubiak are as good at judging talent as I am thinking and hoping they are, then signings like Reeves will probably become rarer. But remember this: They took over a team two years ago that was almost completely depleted of talent, especially good second-team talent. It's rally amazing how far Casserly ran the Texans into the ground.
So you have to see the Reeves deal for what it is. Kubes/Smith can only build up the roster so much at a time. After the first five draft picks each year, a team is probably operating on luck more than anything. Sixth and seventh round picks usually don't contribute much in the NFL, even as backups.
So Kubes and Smith only have 5 draftees a year to add. Significantly, almost every one of those choices has contributed so far. That's what makes me so optimistic about the Texans. If the guys running the organization are astute judges of talent, then a consistent winning program is almost inevitable.
The key is, it is probably going to take some time. We still have a lot of holes to fill. And losing players like Spencer and possibly Robinson doesn't make it any easier.
If we don't need or want Reeves next year, the dead money after one year for his contract, as I understand it, is only 3 million or so. That is cheap considering he is a cornerback.
In evaluating whether it was a bad deal, the only thing to consider is whether we could have gotten Reeves for a lot less, or whether we could have gotten a better deal by going with another cornerback. Whether Reeves is being overpaid for the production he will give us is really irrelevant to the situation. The only thing worth considering is what were the alternatives. We were very thin at CB without Dunta, and Smith/Kubiak did something about it.
At this point, I'm thinking CB probably won't be one of our very weakest positions. Considering that it is one of the most critical positions on the field, that makes me happy with the deal.
If Smith and Kubiak are as good at judging talent as I am thinking and hoping they are, then signings like Reeves will probably become rarer.
it's about 1 a year for them. it's not terrible but it's not like the "meh" contracts are non-existant.
So you have to see the Reeves deal for what it is.
i think you should probably look at what we are saying before you go on another 7 paragraph schtick. i don't think anyone here is out-of-the-know on this. reeves was plan b in case plan a fell through. maybe it was "insurance", maybe it was a little bit of overplanning.
If we don't need or want Reeves next year, the dead money after one year for his contract, as I understand it, is only 3 million or so. That is cheap considering he is a cornerback.
In evaluating whether it was a bad deal, the only thing to consider is whether we could have gotten Reeves for a lot less, or whether we could have gotten a better deal by going with another cornerback. Whether Reeves is being overpaid for the production he will give us is really irrelevant to the situation. The only thing worth considering is what were the alternatives. We were very thin at CB without Dunta, and Smith/Kubiak did something about it.
how is contract not a factor in this? because there were alternatives to reeves? wouldn't alternatives make variables like contract terms more relevant? if reeves was considered by a majority of people to be a below average corner in the wrong system who has some workable skills, am i misrepresenting him with that statement? we gave him a deal for an average starting corner...because he deserved it? because that's what they needed him to be? or because the better corners wanted more money? i'm guessing it was the latter. smithiak knew it was taking a corner, upper round of the draft too. my guess is they were down to charles godfrey or molden, regardless they knew the hole was going to be covered with a decent prospect. so why overpay for a guy you expect to be a spot starter/dime corner (if molden turns out well and dunta returns on time)? filling the 4th hole down isn't near as important or pressing as filling one of the two starting holes.
At this point, I'm thinking CB probably won't be one of our very weakest positions. Considering that it is one of the most critical positions on the field, that makes me happy with the deal.
man why don't me and you just have a big disagreeing session? haha...
considering our best CB won't be around for a while, our 2nd best CB has a ton of potential to prove, our 3rd CB is widely known as a piece of toast, and our 4th is a rookie who also has potential the only other group i would put lower on the totem pole is RB.
Bigtinylittle
07-16-2008, 11:26 AM
I'm not quite sure what you are saying. You seem to think Kubiak made the wrong move. Do you think we should have gotten an elite corner? You say getting Reeves might be overplanning. What is it exactly that you would have done?
From what I have been able to gather about Reeves, he is fast with good hip turn, it is just that he likes to free lance too much and doesn't stay within the defense called. That may not be exact, but that is the inference I get from all the Dallas negativism. Of course I think our defensive secondary coaches are better than those of Dallas, so I think they will be able to get Reeves to buy in to the plan better than Dallas did. Having said that, I am going to be a little nervous about Reeves until he seems to prove himself in our system. It is good that we have a youngster like Moulden waiting in the wings.
Joshua
07-16-2008, 03:29 PM
I didn't watch the Cowboys enough last year to give a learned opinion on Reeves (not sure that's even possible from watching a TV broadcast, even if I had the expertise/inclination). However, one point which might bear considering is the fact that Reeves was the obvious #2 corner across from Newman. Thus, teams are likely going to go at him more often. Throw in Roy Williams as your over-the-top help (and the fact that the rules and officiating favors the offensive player) and he was made to look bad simply by the volume of plays he was in.
I guess what I'm saying is that, because of the rules currently in place, I think most corners (with the exception of the truly elite) can look pretty bad if teams target them. If you have one corner who is generally considered to be good and teams shy away from him, the other corner is almost always going to get burned from time to time, unless he's truly special. It's one of those cases where preception becomes reality. I think most corners in the league could be exposed if teams made a concerted effort to go after them. Thus, playing with a good corner who teams avoid can make you look worse than you are (in comparison to other corners) for no other reason than you're the one in the cross-hairs.
Bigtinylittle
07-16-2008, 05:04 PM
Joshua; I agree 100% with what you are saying. It's probably best to keep a bit of an open mind about Reeves. We should be able to tell how good he is after the first few games. If he's no better than Faggins, then the Texans made a big mistake and will probably throw in Molden right away.
I'm not quite sure what you are saying. You seem to think Kubiak made the wrong move. Do you think we should have gotten an elite corner? You say getting Reeves might be overplanning. What is it exactly that you would have done?
nah, i won't call it a wrong move but i do think it was overplanning. we basically went after a mid to low level cb, gave him a pretty decent contract (that is fair for both sides, i didn't realize before this thread how favorable the texans made it for themselves) when we all knew that CB or LT was going to be one of the 1st 2 picks in the draft. and look, we got a guy i'm positive they had a huge target on with our 2nd pick and he's turning a few heads already.
so, what would i have done? maybe go after a guy who immediately starts without question (probably spend a little extra to get it) and target someone else with the 3rd round pick spent on molden? maybe a DE or a Safety? i don't know, i'm not upset or anything about reeves but if he proves to be unnecessary or just plain bad then keith will have part of an answer to his question of months past: what exactly has smith done as GM? not given out stupid contracts, for one.
i still think the CB group is among the worst on our team though. dunta's return will help, an actual defensive system will help, new coaches will help, better and more consistent pass rush will help but i'm not going to count on them to change games much. that way i won't be disappointed in mediocrity and will be pleasantly surprised with any break-out performances cough::fred::cough
papabear
07-17-2008, 08:23 AM
nah, i won't call it a wrong move but i do think it was overplanning. we basically went after a mid to low level cb, gave him a pretty decent contract (that is fair for both sides, i didn't realize before this thread how favorable the texans made it for themselves) when we all knew that CB or LT was going to be one of the 1st 2 picks in the draft.
That's my major problem with your logic. We all thought the Texans were going LT or CB in the first (the Texans probably were planning on it too) but you can't ever count on anything in the draft. Even if you get the player you want there's no guarantee that he will work out. Taking that a step further and assuming that a player or players will be there when your pick comes up is a crap shoot at best.
I think the Texans treated it perfectly. They set themselves up so that they didn't HAVE to take any position on draft day. All the holes might not have been filled the way we would like, but there wasn't any position that was a must in terms of finding an opening day starter. Waiting until draft day to find a starter is how you end up giving up too much to trade up for a player like Jason Babin.
That's my major problem with your logic. We all thought the Texans were going LT or CB in the first (the Texans probably were planning on it too) but you can't ever count on anything in the draft. Even if you get the player you want there's no guarantee that he will work out. Taking that a step further and assuming that a player or players will be there when your pick comes up is a crap shoot at best.
if we all, including the texans, thought along those lines then you have a problem with my, the texans, and your own logic.
molden may have been on the short list, maybe he works out maybe he doesn't we don't know-the draft is a crapshoot-yadayada-i get that...but how can you say that knowing that reeves has a pretty not-so glimmering history to rewrite? how is he to be more counted on as a known, sub-par quantity than a guy who hasn't had a chance to prove anything good or bad?
I think the Texans treated it perfectly. They set themselves up so that they didn't HAVE to take any position on draft day. All the holes might not have been filled the way we would like, but there wasn't any position that was a must in terms of finding an opening day starter. Waiting until draft day to find a starter is how you end up giving up too much to trade up for a player like Jason Babin.
i can't say anything to that, it's a great point. like i said, i'm not upset about having reeves especially after realizing the texans ability to get out from under the big number on the contract but he's got a few things to prove just to be useful to our team. that doesn't exactly spell confidence to me, for a guy who is most likely starting in pittsburgh.
hell, if nothing else he gets petey out of the mix...not quite worth 3 mil but it's a start.
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.