Post game - instant reaction .....relatively

convertedpatsfan said:

It's obvious BB values special teams more than most coaches from having core STers to using stars like Gronk and Jones on the FG unit to having starters return punts. Edelman does it, Welker has done it, and Troy Brown before them as well.

I think we're overlooking the impact of potential big plays. For example, last season there were 36 Patriots punt returns. 4 of them went for 20+ yards. That's roughly 11% "big plays" if you will. This was actually less than 2012, when it was 6 out of 42 for 14%.

Consider the leading rushing team last season, the Eagles, had 19 rushes out of 500 go for 20+ yards, or 4%. Consider the NFL record-setting passing attack of the Broncos had 88 passes out of 675 attempts go for 20+ yards, or 10%.

There are some advanced stats out there that show the significance of big plays in terms of scoring points and winning games which I will look up but I have to run because I am late and my wife is glaring at me for posting about preseason football games instead of running to our appointment. But the point is that the risk is quite well worth the reward when you consider the impact.

Click to expand...

To dumb it down (because that was great work), I'll just say this. Any time you get a chance to put the ball in Edelman's hands you do it.

Just imagine how good this team can be once browner, hightower, mayo, dobson, vollmer and gronkowski are added to the mix.

Only looked at boxscore but ESPN had 2 sacks 3 TFL for C Jones. Hovered over it to be very surprised it was listed as Chris Jones. Only here do i realise ESPN made the mistake.

TommyBrady12 said:

Just imagine how good this team can be once browner, hightower, mayo, dobson, vollmer and gronkowski are added to the mix.

Click to expand...

The thing that last night showed me is that Hightower, Dobson, Browner, and Vollmer aren't likely to be major upgrades over what we have. Gronk and Mayo, however, are beg upgrades, and I think Easley could be as well.

patchick said:

Absolutely. As Pats fans we get so used to picking at the end of each round that we sometimes lose perspective: #62 overall is a perfectly reasonable point to draft a backup QB, especially when your starter is 37 years old. (Peyton's backup was picked at #57.) Early returns suggest the Pats got terrific value for the pick.



I'm sticking to my early prediction that Zach Moore sticks at DE and Smith doesn't. I wouldn't even gloat to the poster who informed me there wasn't any way that would happen.

In fact, I'll go beyond not gloating and eat some crow: I was firmly against Kelvin Benjamin in the draft, and he really impressed me last night.

Click to expand...

Benjamin is gonna be a beast. Let's not forget, he's only 21, and looked very good. Good hands, ran good routes, and can get open deep. I have a feeling if he was there Belichick might have picked him, some had us linked to him. BUT Carolina picked him one slot before our pick.

I like Zach Moore, I think he can be another late round steal. Big body, good pass rush, I think he can learn from Chandler Jones.

pencilneckgeek said:

The thing that last night showed me is that Hightower, Dobson, Browner, and Vollmer aren't likely to be major upgrades over what we have. Gronk and Mayo, however, are beg upgrades, and I think Easley could be as well.

Click to expand...

I agree that more of Browner and Dobson wouldn't have added much.

I agree that Gronk and Mayo would have been major upgrades. I would also think that Hooman would have been a major upgrade.

Also, Cannon played well, but Vollmer is still a major upgrade.

If, and I say if (assuming health) Dominique Easley is as good as advertised, can you guys imagine the havoc Easley and Jones are going to create on the Defensive Line? Two incredibly explosive athletes with Rob Ninkovinch acting as a bookend gives much hope and optimism for a penetrating pass rush.

TommyBrady12 said:

Just imagine how good this team can be once browner, hightower, mayo, dobson, vollmer and gronkowski are added to the mix.

Click to expand...

Gronk and Dobson are 2 big targets that are playmakers. There was a reason Dobson started getting favored by Brady over KT and that will continue. Dobson will be our best outside wr IMO.

ausbacker said:

If, and I say if (assuming health) Dominique Easley is as good as advertised, can you guys imagine the havoc Easley and Jones are going to create on the Defensive Line? Two incredibly explosive athletes with Rob Ninkovinch acting as a bookend gives much hope and optimism for a penetrating pass rush.

Click to expand...

To say nothing of what happens when they don't double team Wilfork.

FWIW, the Seahawks are experimenting with Pro Bowl safety Earl Thomas returning punts. Thomas had a 59-yard return in last night's pre-season game.

Also, on the topic of explosive plays, here's a good study on DeSean Jackson's impact for the Eagles:

Replacing DeSean Jackson's explosive plays will be nearly impossible for the 2014 Eagles | philly.com

There's a lot there, but near the bottom, it shows all 26 of Jackson's 20+ yard catches and what happened on those drives. The end result? 17 TDs, 7 FGs, 2 missed FGs. Each one led to at least a FG attempt.

Now the explosive plays don't guarantee points, and the Patriots were a prime example of that last season as we really struggled to generate many big plays due to the learning curve of all the kids, yet we still finished with a top-3 offense. But it certainly makes life a lot easier for an offense to score.

Brian Billick came up with a TOXIC differential formula (called Fox Tox when he was with Fox Sports) which tracked the difference in turnovers and explosive plays. It's an overly-simplified thing but surprisingly holds up pretty well.

'Toxic differential' an essential indicator of success in NFL - NFL.com

Toxic Differential: 2013 NFL Season | Sporting Charts

Here's an interesting breakdown done by a Steelers fan (I know) of the Toxic stats compared to Super Bowls. It holds up surprisingly well.

Explosive Plays, Takeaways & Toxic Stats in Super Bowls | Steelers Depot

I am huge on what Easley will bring to this team. A 3-4 with Easley-Vince-Kelly in the middle sounds AWESOME!

Slagathor said:

I am huge on what Easley will bring to this team. A 3-4 with Easley-Vince-Kelly in the middle sounds AWESOME!

Click to expand...

Especially when there is a 5-man rush with Jones/Nink. Hard to believe that teams will be able to beat Revis, Browner, Mayo, Collins, and our safeties in the time allotted to the QB with that crew coming after him.

Slagathor said:

I am huge on what Easley will bring to this team. A 3-4 with Easley-Vince-Kelly in the middle sounds AWESOME!

Click to expand...

No way is Easley a fit for a 3-4 scheme, too undersized. The only way he plays on a 3 man is on a 3-3-5 or some nickel configuration.

Clutch-On-Tap said:

No way is Easley a fit for a 3-4 scheme, too undersized. The only way he plays on a 3 man is on a 3-3-5 or some nickel configuration.

Click to expand...

He's not undersized if he is standing next to Vince and Kelly, while the 2 OLBs are the same as our 4-3 DEs, although if he's asked to 2-gap, it won't be playing to his strengths. In that 3-4, he's essentially subbed in for the smaller Hightower (albeit at a different position), relative to the base 4-3 we've expected. I agree that if he needs to 2-gap against the LT, he could have trouble keeping Mayo clean behind him, but if he's playing between Vince and Chandler, he's going to have a lot of help at the point-of-attack, if an offense decides to go after him.

pencilneckgeek said:

He's not undersized if he is standing next to Vince and Kelly, while the 2 OLBs are the same as our 4-3 DEs, although if he's asked to 2-gap, it won't be playing to his strengths. In that 3-4, he's essentially subbed in for the smaller Hightower (albeit at a different position), relative to the base 4-3 we've expected. I agree that if he needs to 2-gap against the LT, he could have trouble keeping Mayo clean behind him, but if he's playing between Vince and Chandler, he's going to have a lot of help at the point-of-attack, if an offense decides to go after him.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and that's the gist of my point, you can put him on the line, but don't expect him to 2 gap.

Didn't get to post this yesterday, but I watched the game and don't see why people are writing off Jordan Devey. The kid actually played extremely well for most of the game. Especially considering he was going up against Star Lotuleilei quite a bit. The one position he should not play is LT. That is where he was the worst. Yes, he had the 1 misque where he stepped on Brady's ankle and he got steam-rolled once by Lotuleilei, but beyond that he did extremely well. He should be a solid reserve lineman for the Pats.

And, as I said before, I can't see Wendell making this team unless Stork goes on the IR.

pencilneckgeek said:

He's not undersized if he is standing next to Vince and Kelly, while the 2 OLBs are the same as our 4-3 DEs, although if he's asked to 2-gap, it won't be playing to his strengths. In that 3-4, he's essentially subbed in for the smaller Hightower (albeit at a different position), relative to the base 4-3 we've expected. I agree that if he needs to 2-gap against the LT, he could have trouble keeping Mayo clean behind him, but if he's playing between Vince and Chandler, he's going to have a lot of help at the point-of-attack, if an offense decides to go after him.

Click to expand...

Why wouldn't you just put him over the G in a 4-3, where he would be best suited?
I think Easley will not see a ton of time in the base but will play a lot in nickel and dime.
That could give him as much as 75% of the snaps without using him on first down against teams that like to run.

Clutch-On-Tap said:

Agreed, and that's the gist of my point, you can put him on the line, but don't expect him to 2 gap.

Click to expand...

The tough projection is that when the Pats run their hybrid 3-4, the 5-tech generally 2-gaps, whereas the 3-tech can either 1-gap or 2-gap. You want size inside at 3-tech on running downs (i.e., Kelly, Worthy), which means that Easley will be put in a tough spot. My guess is that we see more of Easley at 2 or 3-tech in passing situations, and that Chris Jones or Vellano play more early downs at 3-4 DE. Or perhaps BB has something new and exiting up his sleeve.[emoji41]

AndyJohnson said:

Why wouldn't you just put him over the G in a 4-3, where he would be best suited?
I think Easley will not see a ton of time in the base but will play a lot in nickel and dime.
That could give him as much as 75% of the snaps without using him on first down against teams that like to run.

Click to expand...

I would put him there, but absent a 4-3 look in preseason, I'm trying to get our shiny new square peg into a well worn round hole.

DEVEY
I agree. For me, the question is whether he is our starting RG.

WENDELL/STORK
So, your position is that if Stork isn't ready to be the Game Day back immediately, he should placed on IR? The alternative is to carry Wendell until Stork is game ready, and perhaps make the decision after game 4. In this scenario, we would carry 9 OL's and cut down 8 if Stork is ready.

DaBruinz said:

Didn't get to post this yesterday, but I watched the game and don't see why people are writing off Jordan Devey. The kid actually played extremely well for most of the game. Especially considering he was going up against Star Lotuleilei quite a bit. The one position he should not play is LT. That is where he was the worst. Yes, he had the 1 misque where he stepped on Brady's ankle and he got steam-rolled once by Lotuleilei, but beyond that he did extremely well. He should be a solid reserve lineman for the Pats.

And, as I said before, I can't see Wendell making this team unless Stork goes on the IR.

Click to expand...