If there are two defensive players in the back field that helps recovering fumbles. Pressure causes more poor throws which helps secondaries catch footballs.
I agree with you. It can absolutely be just as effective. But in this particular case I would still rate corner ahead of defensive end as a need.
That, IMO, is a very good point. The Dolphins have gotten away with a secondary that is unusually weak across 2/3rds of it, and half of an awesome pass rush, in part because offenses don't feel the need to put their foot on the gas against us. Even though we are good at stopping the run, they are able to stick with it.
The thing about the CB position is that the guys who are considered the best or most talented are often among the worst in terms of production/impact on the field in terms of passer rating allowed. And often even the guys who grade out as among the best in terms of PFF's subjective rankings often have poor stats/metrics. There are potential reasons for that, including pass rush, being matched up against top WRs, etc., but there's really not even much connection between the presence of top CBs and overall team pass defense. For example, among the CBs with the worst passer rating allowed this year are Vontae Davis, Asomugha, Morris Claiborne, Aquib Talib, Chris Gamble, Rashean Mathis, etc. Jason McCourty has the 6th highest PFF rating but has an opposing passer rating of over 100 and allows 67% of the passes thrown to his man to be completed. The Eagles have a few "elite" corners but have the 3rd worst passer rating allowed in the NFL. The Jets lost the consensus best CB in football but their pass defense numbers really haven't seen much of an effect. Yeah, they dropped from 3rd in passer arting allowed in 2011 to 5th this year, but that's a pretty small drop. The Chiefs have the NFL's worst pass defense in terms of passer rating allowed even though they have 2 top 35 rated CBs by PFF. The Browns have 2 of PFFs top 15 CBs but their pass defense is middle-of-the-pack right near the Dolphins'. The Raiders have 2 of PFF's top 33 rated CBs and their passer rating allowed is second worst in the league. Yes, this is all anecdotal and their are many possible explanations, but the point is that having top CBs often doesn't have a huge impact on pass defense numbers/production. The Dolphins rank 12th in passer rating allowed despite having such a low number of INTs (which, as many studies have shown, is mostly luck). How much of an impact would replacing someone like Nolan Carroll with someone like DRC make in terms of team pass defense? I'm not sure. Having DRC (even paired with Asomugha) hasn't done much for Philly's team pass defense (3rd worst) despite having what PFF ranks as the top pass rush in the NFL. The bottom line, to me, is that the tangible effect of having great CBs seems to be somewhat smaller than one might expect.
Gotta be DE for how much of an effect it will have on our passrush and for how stupid we'd be not to get someone to put opposite of Wake before he gets too old. CB we def need at least more depth there but I'm wondering what's going to happen w Marshall.
Not necessarily. Take the Jets for example. They may not have a huge statistical drop off, but having Revis on the field allows Rex Ryan to do a great deal more things with his defense. They haven't blitzed nearly as often since he's been out, and their run defense has suffered since they can't run blitz or cheat safeties up as much. I also wouldn't use Philly as much of an example, as many people think Asomugha has basically been a shell of his former self. What I do think is important these days is good CB depth, and safties and linebackers that can cover. Even when Revis was healthy, you could move the ball through the air on the Jets by attacking the middle of the field.
I'm not sure what the basis is for your statement that they don't blitz as much or that their run defense has suffered. From the games I have seen the Jets are still blitzing a lot. Comparing their blitz rates in the last 3 games to games 12-14 last year, the Jets are actually blitzing more this year than last. And I think it is a huge reach to suggest the difference in the run game is due to being without Revis. Even if Asomugha hasn't been his former self, they still have DRC and Brandon Boykin, who according to PFF has been pretty good. Yet their pass defense sucks.
We need secondary players who can play the ball, our defensive backs have had poor ball skills since the days of Pat and Sam it seems. We need a "playmaker" mentality. I don't know exactly what that is but it seems we just don't make plays (Cam Wake excluded). I think a little luck would help as well.
How many Revis' do you think are out there? Do you see one in the draft? That's one of the things I've been saying for a while now. Sure, a HOF type talent at almost any position can have an impact, but it's rare to find one of those guys. The Raiders, Eagles and Chiefs are examples of the kind of impact you can expect from making CB your top priority. You may get some statistical love from PFF, but your pass defense will show little impact.
I didn't read these articles, but I recall an analysis several years ago that concluded that luck was about 25% of the outcome. That number feels about right to me. My impression is that the better team wins about 75% of the time and about 25% of the time you end up with a WTF outcome.
Right, but if luck were 25%, then you would end up with WTF outcomes less than that amount. Consider that luck goes both ways. The better team wins about 75% of the time. But some of that 75% is when the better team is the luckier team as well. This jives with the fact that really nobody can predict straight up winners more than 70% of the time in the NFL:
I am not disagreeing that we have a lack of playmakers/talent in the secondary. We 100% need imrpovement there which will hopefully help increase turnovers. I just think that we also need a pass rush. Wake can only do so much alone. Having increased pressure on the QB will lead to more sacks and poor throws.
My bad. Their blitz percentage ranks 12th in the NFL, which is the same ranking as 2011. Still, a lot of what Ryan tries to do depends on his CB's. He gets away with it now because Cromartie has picked up his game with Revis out. But I do think the run defense has shown to be better when Rex has Revis working on an island and Cromartie able to man the other side.
Again, I'll bang the drum for Dashon Goldson in free agency. I think he and Reshad Jones would make a pretty nice tandem. I certainly wouldn't be disappointed with Elam or Thomas either though.
No, but he's rushing 86.9% of his snaps. It's not like he's playing Koa Misi's role in the base package. It's mostly 3-3 Nickel with the occasional 3-4 thrown in. All the edge rushers do it though. Vs. the Jaguars it was Cameron Wake way more than the others.
Maybe it was just me, but it seemed like Cameron Wake dropped into coverage quite a bit more than usual against Jacksonville and they tried rushing Vernon from Henne's backside - especially in the 4th quarter. I wonder if that's something that was game planned specifically for Jacksonville, or if it's something we'll see more of going forward. I think the 3-3 nickel and 3-4 have been more prevalent the past few games than earlier in the season. Sign of things to come for next year? Also, it looked like Josh Kaddu got some run time in Cam Wake's spot the last drive that Jacksonville had.
Yeah I just edited that post lol, Wake was in on 40 passing snaps and rushed 30 and dropped 10. Most of the time I notice the 3-4 stuff at least it seems like Wake is off of the field and it's the other edge rushers. I'm kind of curious how much Wake being strictly a left side guy restricts some of the stuff Coyle wants to do.
Reactionary time and instinctive responses are absolute traits..which proves to me that other teams can be better than others.
That's an interesting thought regarding Wake. Just from watching the Bengals as often as we see them here, it seems like they are pretty stringent with keeping Michael Johnson and Carlos Dunlap at RDE and LDE respectively. Occasionally Johnson will line up and roam around sort of like how JT used to and how Rob Ryan has been using DeMarcus Ware and Anthony Spencer...but those snaps are pretty few and far between and only in obvious passing situations. I wonder if that's almost to act as a quick spy and then rush as their ILBs - Burfict and Lemur - who are in on passing downs, aren't all that athletic if there was ever a draw/QB draw. If Miami does move Jared Odrick inside to DT full-time and they add someone in the mold of Michael Johnson and/or develop Olivier Vernon opposite Wake in base packages, does that then allow Coyle to be more creative? You could involve more 3-4 fronts, and sort of do what Dick LeBeau (one of the 4 guys Colye mentioned his defense comes from I believe) does in Pittsburgh with Harrison and Woodley and keeping them strictly on one side of the formation regardless of where the strength call comes from. I think you could certainly do that with Misi/Vernon/Odrick opposite Wake. I think, for instance, you could also do that with Alex Okafor if you drafted him, but if it's someone like Dion Jordan/Barkevious Mingo, I'd think you'd probably start him off as a sub guy - sort of the way Seattle uses Bruce Irvin, thus limiting the flexibility.
What about looking at Dashon Goldson coming out of San Franciso? Contract expires this year and would be an awesome pairing with Reshad Jones. Having two great safeties does make the corners' jobs a lot easier and allows the front 7 to be more aggressive. Might be too expensive though and not the best use of resources if we can move Marshall over to safety. Just putting the thought out there, wondering what everyone thinks.
Oh cmon. That's nonsense. This is football, a game build around skill, talent, and execution. What you're essentially saying is there's no correlation between a guy with good hands & good ball skills and a guy with poor hands & poor ball skills b/c they'll both come down with passes at the same rate. So tell me then, how do Ed Reed and Charles Woodson combine for 37 INTs since 2009 while Clemons & Smith combine for 8? Dumb luck? Random chance?
Your underlying assertion of turnovers being more due to chance than skill is inherently flawed and misrepresented. If a defense only creates 16 turnovers, it's most likely b/c they didn't have the skill to create a greater number than what naturally occurs beyond random chance, whereas a team like Green Bay gets those random chance turnovers while ALSO adding a couple dozen "skill created" turnovers like Charles Woodson has frequently contributed to. Let's look at this in better light: Based on this random luck model, each team should receive roughly as many base turnovers (luck turnovers) as the next. So in that regard we should be able to divide these 52% "luck turnovers" by all 32 teams in order to give us a proper baseline for drawing a legitimate conclusion from. So let's do that. Last year saw 810 turnovers (25 average per team). 52% = 421 "luck" turnovers... leaving 388 from skill and "created opportunity". (that's a lot of turnovers by skill if I do say so myself) If you appropriately divide those 421 by 32 teams, you get 13 "luck" turnovers per team. So that's your baseline--> 13 "luck" turnovers per team. Therefore, teams who are deficient at creating turnovers will be closer to baseline of 13. Whereas, teams with skill and opportunity to create turnovers will start at the baseline of 13 and dip into the 388 pool, with the greater the ability to create turnovers the more they dip into the 388. If they're average in skill & opportunity they'll boost those 13 to around 25. Meanwhile the top 10 teams will get it to roughly 30 and above. Secondly, here's why your assertion is flawed WADR. If 52% of turnovers are by luck, that still leaves 48% by skill.... and obviously not every defense possesses the same skill. Skill means skill, so you can't divide all 388 skill turnovers among 32 teams like you can with "luck/chance". In 2011, the bottom 10 teams averaged 18.4 turnovers (meaning 13 by luck, 5.4 by skill). That's 29% from skill/opportunity, far lower than the 48% average. Therefore this 29% is inherently skewing the overall "48%" perception by making it seem as though skill & opportunity are less of a factor, when in reality teams like New England have operated at a 64% skill/opportunity rate the past 2 years (72 turnovers. 46 by skill/opportunity, 26 by luck). So, New England operates at a 35% higher skill rate than the bottom 10 team average, which for N.E translates to 17.6 more turnovers per year. Furthermore, I'm not sure why you're treating 388 skill/opportunity turnovers as if they're nothing when they're quite significant. Considering those 388 TOs do NOT involve luck, you either HAVE THE SKILL to eat into those 388 or you don't.
Were you not in a conversation regarding takeways being mostly due to luck/chance while other posters were arguing the strong involvement of skill, ability, and coaching? (See your below posts.) I simply changed "all outcomes" to "all turnovers" so that we'd know what you're talking about.
So then why when you split seasons in half and correlate teams with themselves regarding turnovers do you come up with relatively weak correlations? Do the teams with greater skill suddenly get unskilled, and vice-versa?
It's a good thing a season isn't 8 games, isn't it. And to answer your question-----no, skilled guys like Ed Reed don't suddenly become go from unskilled to skilled just b/c he has 1 INT through the first half of a season and then 8 in the second half..... or Charles Woodson having 2 in a season's first half and then 6 in the second. Will you now proceed to tell me, while looking like a fool in the process, that Reed & Woodson either became unskilled or their turnovers are all from chance? I guess it's by chance, too, that Hartline only has 3 TDs in 3 years, eh? That's really why you're responding this way in this thread---- because you're subconsciously attempting to remove aspects of accountability from defensive players in order to rationalize Hartline's scoring deficiency. If a pass hits a DB in the hands and he drops it, it's not by chance, it's b/c he flat out drops it. If you routinely can't fall on a loose ball, it's not b/c of chance, it's b/c you keep ****ing it up. If you cause 19 fumbles and only pick up 3, would you say that 13.6% is = to the random chance of 50%? How about causing 17 fumbles and only grabbing 3? How does that 15% compare to the random chance of 50%? How about the Patriots causing 82 and recovering 44
You have a problem of believing in your own theories when they're totally unsupported, or even controverted, by objective evidence, and then you make yourself look like a fool when you continue to cling to them even after they've been shown to be incorrect. On top of that, you do it in a condescending manner, as though one would have to be a moron not to believe what you're purporting that's been proven totally false. "Don't believe in objective REALITY. Believe in ME! And if you don't, you're a MORON!" It's the mentality of a cult leader, believe it or not. I've given you several chances to escape my ignore list, but at this point I'm done for good. This is obviously part of your character that isn't going to change anytime soon. Enjoy yourself, and have a wonderful life.
LOL. Wake up the presses. Shouright has just proven Ed Reed to be a total luck machine when it comes to turnovers. That's right, all 74 of 'em from luck, which must also mean his 7 career touchdown returns occurred b/c he luckily ran the right f****ng way, too. Because I refuse to accept this steaming pile of poo as "evidence", I am officially a cult leader. Anyone care to join me? Feel free to grab some chips and cookies on the way in. The Baltimore Ravens are already here drinkin' the Kool-Aid, understandably so considering they've paid him $44 million to do a job based on chance. Brady & Belichick just showed up, too <meh>. Now it appears there's a longgg line of quarterbacks and coaches waiting to get in, so make sure to bring a pen and paper with you. Looks like a good day for autographs. ONOZ, I'm on Shou's ignore list. Someone please point me to the nearest sidewalk curb to perilously heave myself from. Bon voyage.
Great post. This really got me thinking, and wondering how important CB is. Is it worth a #13 overall pick (Banks, Milliner)? If you're right, I'd expect that defenses now conede more yards in the air than they used to. Playing a bend-but-don't-break pass defense, while hoping for INTs or redzone stops. I decided to test this hypothesis (as a way to indirectly test your idea that CBs now cannot impact defense as much as they used to). I looked at it historically, expecting defenses now to give up more yards than in the past: Yds Given Up Per Game (Passing) - Top Three Pass Defenses 2012 181,191,198 2011 172, 185, 190 2010 178, 189, 192 2009 154, 184, 186 2008 157, 180, 182 2007 171, 173, 177 2006 151, 159, 178 2005 168, 172, 178 2004 161, 162, 164 2003 164, 169, 169 2002 156, 182, 187 2001 176, 179, 180 (Miami was #1) 2000 151, 163, 168 1999 167, 179, 180 1998 170, 172, 176 1997 157, 165, 176 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 154, 158, 161 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 165, 181, 184 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 114, 144, 148 (Miami was #1) The #1 Pass Defense today, the Pittsburgh Steelers, giving up 180.6 yards in the air each game, would only have ranked the #7 passing defense in 1982. This, imo, tends to support Rafael's position that NFL defenses are somewhat accepting the idea that offenses WILL move the ball on them in the air. That it's a given that CB's cannot totally shut down passing attacks anymore. Thus, more yards are going to be given up, and the priority is to at least end drives with turnovers, or at least redzone stops where a compressed field makes passing inherently more difficult for the offense due to reduced space. The new pass defense must be judged more on TDs allowed and INTs created, rather than yards given up. The old 'bend-but-don't-break defensive philosophy is almost becoming league-standard for pass defense. Also interesting is that when you look at today's leading pass defense, the Pittsburgh Steelers, you have two excellent safeties in Ryan Clark and Troy Polamalu (whose play has fallen off the past few years, but who is still an excellent Safety). The cornerbacks, meanwhile, are Ike Taylor (good, but not great), Keenan Lewis (emerging), Ryan Mundy and Curtis Brown (neither of whom I know squat about. Yet, surprisingly, Pittsburgh ranks fairly low in team sacks and does not have a single player in the top 25 most productive pass rushers (sacks, QB hits and QB hurries) listed by PFF as of Nov. 30th. I expected a great pass rush to be part of this top ranked pass defense... thus suggesting the importance of a pass rushing DE/OLB to impact pass defense. So what does this tell us about which positions are most important to pass defense? I thought it would show that Pass Rush was the number one factor, but I can't reconcile that hypothesis with finding this year's #1 pass defense lacking much pass rush. They even rank #27 in INTs, so we can;t say that's the key to their success. What that suggests is that Safeties are preventing giving up the big play but perhaps the quality of their corners is indeed a big factor in limiting the TDs and yards given up. Obviously other factors, like playing softer coverage to give up small yardage receptions and avoid being burned for big plays could be a coaching influence on these results, separate from talent. The truth is, after looking at this data, I am STILL unsure how to prioritize CB-DE/OLB Pass Rusher - Safety in terms of Pass Defense. If anything, I probably think Safeties are a bit more important than previously.
Both of those guys do their best work coming up around the LOS to make plays. Not sure they'd be such a great fit in the same secondary.
Question to Shou. (if anyone would like to quote this for me so he can see it since I'm on his dreaded ignore list, please feel free. lol) If takeaways are due to chance as he purports, and the nature of chance inherently means a 50-50 coin flip, then please explain the following 3 years of stats.[TABLE="width: 300"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]Fumbles Forced[/TD] [TD="align: center"] Recovered[/TD] [TD="align: center"] %[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: right"]Patriots:[/TD] [TD="align: center"]82[/TD] [TD="align: center"]44[/TD] [TD="align: center"]54%[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: right"]Dolphins:[/TD] [TD="align: center"]58[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14[/TD] [TD="align: center"]24%[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] A) How does he use "chance" to explain the variance of 24 forced fumbles between us and New England? B) If fumble recoveries are due to chance then how can a team flip the proverbial "turnover" coin 58 times and only land on "fumble recovery" 24% of the time? If they were due to chance, then we should see roughly 29 of of our 58 being recovered, which is a far cry from 24%. What Shou doesn't understand is that some fumbles are inherently more opportunistic than others. There are opportunistic type gang-tackling, rip & strip, ball-punching techniques that some defenses execute more effectively than others. Obviously, in these instances, having a greater percentage of defenders around a ball means a greater chance of recovering it. Duh. Maybe Shou doesn't understand how this whole "chance" thing actually works. There are also players skilled at creating fumbles where the ball NEVER has a chance to bounce the offense's way b/c it's in the defenders hands before it hits the ground. I'm guessing he was picked last in PE on a daily basis and never actually put on a pair of pads b/c anyone who's played the game understands this stuff. Hey SHOU, was this Charles Tillman INT due to "chance"?.... or was it ****ing skill?! [video=youtube;kSgLNeuV_tM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSgLNeuV_tM[/video] Hey SHOU, at the 2:01 mark, was this an "accidental" forced fumble by Tillman... or was it skill?! Then back it up to the 1:47 mark and see how many Bears vs Titans are around the WR as he's getting stripped. 6 BEARS vs 1 TITAN. Does a 6:1 ratio support your basic argument that each fumble recovery is as much due to chance as a flip of a coin? [video=youtube;PBjxZes4PPs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBjxZes4PPs[/video] Same Titan game. Skip to 2:53 through 3:03. Tillman punches out ANOTHER ball. Not only do you see Tillman's SKILL involved, but you see how the chance of open-field fumble recovery can favor the DEFENSE because of the sheer numbers involved. Again it's 6 BEARS vs 1 TITAN. [video=youtube;PBjxZes4PPs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBjxZes4PPs[/video] But wait, Tillman's not done in this game!! Skip to the 3:39 mark. This one is features 3 BEARS vs 0 TITANS around the loose ball. 3 Tillman forced fumbles in one game!!.... with a total of roughly 15 Bears vs 2 Titans around the ball. [video=youtube;PBjxZes4PPs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBjxZes4PPs[/video] Clay Matthews strip-fumble TD. Shou, does Minnesota have a 50-50 chance of recovering this fumble when it never leaves Matthews' hands? [video=youtube;49wEr2le4G0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49wEr2le4G0[/video] Like I said, apparently picked last in PE. Constantly. Clueless that football involves skill & talent and that some players possess more than others.
I think the problem is that your definition of #1 defense was still based on yards. Shouldn't you be using points since you theorized that maybe a defense should be judged on TDs and TOs? Personally, I would probably start by judging a defense on points allowed. I think that incorporates TOs and TDs allowed, but also rewards defenses that make plays to get off the field too. It also dings those high risk defenses that may get many TOs but also give up too many big plays. And historically, yards allowed has been all but meaningless in terms of win correlation. Here are the top 5 defenses in the league in terms of points allowed: SF Seattle Chicago Atlanta Denver Among those, SF and Chicago are top 10 sack teams, but the other three are in the bottom 10 in terms of total sacks. Interestingly four of the five teams did have at least one guy among the sack leaders. Chicago was the exception as Peppers was a little lower this year (although he still had 8.5 sacks). I wonder how the pass pressure numbers correlate? That might be more telling than just limiting it to sacks.
Are these strictly pass defense numbers, or total? I can't see the point in muddying the water by including rushing TDs.
Agree with respect to Jones, disagree with respect to Goldson. Yeah, he makes a lot of plays against the run close to the line, but for the most part, from what I've seen of San Fran play, he's hardly every lined up as an in-the-box safety. That's Donte Whitner. Goldson just plays the run very aggressively, and pretty well for that matter, as we saw first-hand a few weeks ago. I think the beauty of Coyle's system is that there's not really a true free or true strong safety, and that's where I think Goldson could come into play. It's really more a left and a right safety, sort of like what Pittsburgh does; just without so much freedom given to a guy like Jones, where as Troy Polamalu is more free to roam and make plays. Overall, I think he fits what Coyle does a lot of in this defense. If Miami is looking for a true deep, center-field type of guy, Goldson's probably not at the top of the list, but in this scheme, I think he's an outstanding fit if the price is right. He'd be a veteran presence as well, especially if Sean Smith doesn't get re-signed. You'd be left with Reshad Jones and maybe Dimitri Patterson as your most experience players.
