There was an error in this gadget

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Moorehead to return?

Reserve DT Kindal Moorehead may be a target to keep, says Darin Gantt of the Rock Hill Herald.

Gantt makes good points (and points similar to my own statements in reference to Rucker within the past week) about defensive linemen getting snapped up - so now in addition to the franchised and locked up ends, some tackles have been signed to extensions as well leaguewide - which won't just keep Rucker, but Moorehead as well.

It seems plausible, but amongst a bevy of problems with Moorehead over the past few years, it doesn't make much sense from this vantage point.

The biggest problem is that, with Jordan Carstens coming back, and a threesome of Jenkins/Kemoeatu/Damione Lewis aboard already, the team has Lewis to do Moorehead's job better than Moorehead can, and will theoretically roster 5 DT. One will undoubtedly be unable to dress most of the time, meaning you'll have to choose between Carstens and Moorehead weekly. As well, if the team were to keep 9 defensive linemen (as they typically do), it would make much more sense to have five ends than five tackles, given Mike Rucker's injuries.

As well, the team has bigger needs to deal with, most notably getting deals done with higher profile guys to gain cap space. And finally, a veteran to be the 4th or 5th DT making the 5th year vet minimum or greater, is a lot more expensive than the requisite rookie deal if the team did in fact feel that they needed a 5th tackle.

Add in Moorehead's propensity to have odd occurrences and injuries at the onset of training camp (it seems as if Moorehead got stung by a bee at least twice in four years, and started slow every year), and it just seems a misplaced priority. It's hard seeing the team not being able to do as well as Moorehead in the lower tiers of the free agent market, or seeing them go in with four veterans (three well-paid) and not be deep enough.
Post a Comment