Upgrading the LT position....

[BlueThunder]

For the defenders of Matt Light...something to ponder.

2010 Pass Blocking Efficiency: Tackles | ProFootballFocus.com


Should Nate Solder's development as LT be a priority ?

Comments welcome :

 

[Rob0729]

What is there to ponder? That PFF is a crappy site and has no purpose for a discussion on player evaluation. If they thought Tom Brady was the 33rd best player in the NFL last year, they probably thought Matt Light was the 97,565th.

Sorry, but I don't take any analysis seriously that is done through the TV broadcast rather than the "All 22" no matter how good the analyst is. And the PFF analysts aren't that good to begin with.

 

[BradyManny]

All this means is that some guy who has never played football watched Matt Light on a given play and tried to guess whether he did or did not do his job.

From there, he scored him on a scale of -2 to 2.

From there, he drew conclusions about Matt Light's play.

Let's leave the conclusion-drawing to Belichick, please. If Light is amenable to coming back for a short-term deal, I'm sure Belichick would take him. The fact is that Light can probably get more money and more years elsewhere, so it might be the end of the road for him as a Patriot.

It's funny how PFF can say Brady is a product of the players around him yet they rarely rank those players highly. I'm still waiting for their "normalized" (strength of opponent adjusted) data for quarterbacks. I guarantee we'll never get that since it would need to put Brady at the top given he faced a historically difficult schedule of passing defenses when his peers (Manning, Rivers) faced quite the opposite.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Could Ian develop a feature that would visibly topic flag any citation of PFF, sorta like the virus malware site warning that I get when I visit certain sites with pictures of young...well, you know?

 

[Deus Irae]

Could Ian develop a feature that would visibly topic flag any citation of PFF, sorta like the virus malware site warning that I get when I visit certain sites with pictures of young...well, you know?

Or, perhaps, have one large thread which merges all the PFF stuff together. it would make it much easier to ignore.

 

[BlueThunder]

hmmm...hurries, hits and sacks seems pretty objective to me.....

If everyone is graded by the same criteria I'm not sure why the uproar here....

Vollmer is graded as 9th best RT .....

If the OT is supposed to be getting help from the TE or OG on a particular play, that may be a problem....but Mankins and Crumpler on the left side helping Light should be a plus.....

just sayin

 

[townes]

hmmm...hurries, hits and sacks seems pretty objective to me.....

If everyone is graded by the same criteria I'm not sure why the uproar here....

Vollmer is graded as 9th best RT .....

If the OT is supposed to be getting help from the TE or OG on a particular play, that may be a problem....but Mankins and Crumpler on the left side helping Light should be a plus.....

just sayin

I'm guessing that the objections raised have to do with the credibility of any sight that claims Kareem Mackenzie is a better player than Tom Brady.

 

[BradyManny]

hmmm...hurries, hits and sacks seems pretty objective to me.....

If everyone is graded by the same criteria I'm not sure why the uproar here....

Vollmer is graded as 9th best RT .....

If the OT is supposed to be getting help from the TE or OG on a particular play, that may be a problem....but Mankins and Crumpler on the left side helping Light should be a plus.....

just sayin

Because the people doing the grading are not qualified to do said grading. Where did they get their hurries, hits, sacks stats from? If it's legitimate stats, then sure, but then again, I'm sure footballoutsiders has the same stats with better analysis and more in-depth metrics. PFF is pretty much useless.

 

[BlueThunder]

I'm guessing that the objections raised have to do with the credibility of any sight that claims Kareem Mackenzie is a better player than Tom Brady.

Totally agree there

But different criteria were used to evaluate the LT/RT positions...

I guess if the data is bogus, then there's a case....

Are there any other sites that rate the OL...shoot me a link....

BTW..I checked out Footballoutsiders and they have run blocking but not pass blocking criteria for OL

 

[Rob0729]

hmmm...hurries, hits and sacks seems pretty objective to me.....

If everyone is graded by the same criteria I'm not sure why the uproar here....

Vollmer is graded as 9th best RT .....

If the OT is supposed to be getting help from the TE or OG on a particular play, that may be a problem....but Mankins and Crumpler on the left side helping Light should be a plus.....

just sayin

Actually, hurries, hits, and sacks can be very subjective. Many times two linemen will engage a defensive player and the analyst has to assign responsibility to one of them. Many times an OLB or DE will come free, not because the LT isn't doing his job but someone somewhere else down the line lets a defender come through unblocked and the LT has to break from his assignment to get that defender because he has a better shot at a QB. I would argue that most stats having to do with the offensive line is subjective.

Also, PFF use the television broadcast of the games, not the "All 22" that means it is very difficult to compile stats because the television broadcast rarely focuses on the o-line in real time and sporatically does it on replay.

 

[Rob0729]

I'm guessing that the objections raised have to do with the credibility of any sight that claims Kareem Mackenzie is a better player than Tom Brady.

Or Justin Smith the second best player in the NFL for 2010. Ironically, the best player on his team (Patrick Willis) was ranked 24th.

 

[BlueThunder]

Thanks for the explanation Rob

 

[Deus Irae]

Actually, hurries, hits, and sacks can be very subjective. Many times two linemen will engage a defensive player and the analyst has to assign responsibility to one of them. Many times an OLB or DE will come free, not because the LT isn't doing his job but someone somewhere else down the line lets a defender come through unblocked and the LT has to break from his assignment to get that defender because he has a better shot at a QB. I would argue that most stats having to do with the offensive line is subjective.

This was happening a lot with Connolly, especially at the start of the year. Light and Koppen looked far worse than they were actually playing, because they were forced to cover for Connolly a lot. Connolly's play was more solid on the right side, whether do to that being his preference, or due to having gotten more game experience prior to the switch.

Also, PFF use the television broadcast of the games, not the "All 22" that means it is very difficult to compile stats because the television broadcast rarely focuses on the o-line in real time and sporatically does it on replay.

You're overrating the "all 22" requirement for line play, IMO.

 

[Rob0729]

You're overrating the "all 22" requirement for line play, IMO.

The "All 22" isn't perfect, but it is far more effective for evaluation. On running plays, they focus on the RB. On passing plays, they focus on the QB until he throws the ball. Many times in both cases, an o-lineman or two or even three are out of frame.

I'm not really overrating the "All 22". I am actually just criticizing the TV broadcast as an evaluation tool. At least in the "All 22" you can see every player on the field throughout the entire play.

 

[BlueThunder]

Get BB's secret tapes for your eval

 

[Deus Irae]

The "All 22" isn't perfect, but it is far more effective for evaluation. On running plays, they focus on the RB. On passing plays, they focus on the QB until he throws the ball. Many times in both cases, an o-lineman or two or even three are out of frame.

I'm not really overrating the "All 22". I am actually just criticizing the TV broadcast as an evaluation tool. At least in the "All 22" you can see every player on the field throughout the entire play.

You don't need to see all 22 for most line analysis. Broadcast TV is generally adequate to figure out what was going on, within the understood bounds of not knowing the specific play call, especially today, with multiple angles being used on seemingly every replay.

 

[BradyManny]

You don't need to see all 22 for most line analysis. Broadcast TV is generally adequate to figure out what was going on, within the understood bounds of not knowing the specific play call, especially today, with multiple angles being used on seemingly every replay.

You could argue OL play is the only thing you can grade from the TV tape.

But even then, in PFF's case, the people watching it don't know what they're looking for.

Still, without coaches tape, even with OL play you are missing a piece of the puzzle. Belichick has explicitly called the TV tape worthless when it comes to scouting, something the folks at PFF probably don't want to hear.

 

[Rob0729]

You could argue OL play is the only thing you can grade from the TV tape.

But even then, in PFF's case, the people watching it don't know what they're looking for.

Still, without coaches tape, even with OL play you are missing a piece of the puzzle. Belichick has explicitly called the TV tape worthless when it comes to scouting, something the folks at PFF probably don't want to hear.

I'd agree with that. That is the problem with the broadcast is that you don't see the whole picture and a lot of times looks can be deceiving on the broadcast. The most common case of that is on defense where the defender who gets to the ball first is usually blamed for giving up a big play even when you look at the "All 22" and you will see it was a blown coverage from another player.

Unless you can see the player and everyone around them for the entire play on the broadcast, many times what you see isn't what really happened. I know going to the game you get a much different perspective than when you watch the same play on the TV. I do agree that is less with OL than say DBs or receivers, but still happens.

 

[Deus Irae]

You could argue OL play is the only thing you can grade from the TV tape.

Well, I'd argue that and DB play in man coverage when the cameraman follows the routes, but I'm with you here.

But even then, in PFF's case, the people watching it don't know what they're looking for.

Absolutely with you on this.

Still, without coaches tape, even with OL play you are missing a piece of the puzzle. Belichick has explicitly called the TV tape worthless when it comes to scouting, something the folks at PFF probably don't want to hear.

I think BB was exaggerating a bit.

 

[BaltimorePatsFan]

Matt Light may not be the best LT in the NFL but he is still the best tackle that the Pats have right now. Vollmer at LT would have struggled mightily.