Idle thoughts – Post Euphoria edition

Just a collection of varied thoughts concerning the NFL and the Pats off season

I. Here is a thought I have been wanting to talk about for a while. I can’t help noticing a significant change in how the NFL passing game is changing.

If you watch the Pats you can’t help notice that Brady is looking for the receiver who get the most “separation” on the pattern. He is always throwing to the “open man” OTOH, more and more I watch teams like the Ravens and Seahawks be very successful, not throwing the “open man” but the tallest one.

They have concluded that between the chances of THEIR guy coming down with the ball, PLUS the chances of getting a PI call, throwing to a well- covered receiver is now worth the risk, as long as the ball is thrown deep enough.

I see this strategy starting to spread around the NFL And while I do see the Pats occasionally participating in this on occasion, I don’t think they give up their passing philosophy entirely. The Pats aren’t afraid to go against the whatever the current craze is in the NFL. They might see this an opportunity to have a greater opportunity to grab those small quick receivers that are likely to be passed over for the latest 6’5 guy.

The Pats prove that there is a place in the league for the Edelman's Welkers, and Amendolas, but to use them well you have to have a very skilled QB with great decision making skills. OTOH to run the "chick and duck" requires a less skilled guy.

However, the need for more length at the DB positon is STILL going to be a huge priority going forward. The number of big WR’s seems to keep growing in every draft, while the number of DB’s over 6’2 is still extremely rare.

II, .I don’t think that people realize how difficult what Brady and the Pats did in the superbowl really was. The chances of being able to throw the ball THAT often and complete so many passes really isn’t that great. 4 LONG drives for TD, plus another that ended in the pick is outstanding.

So many things can go wrong. Maybe the QB is inaccurate, or the receiver drops the ball, the QB misreads the D, the receiver misreads the D, any one of 11 guys get a penalty, any one of 11 guys screw up their assignment, and any one of 11 guys simply get beat by their opponent. On those last 2 drives the Pats lined up 15 time and avoided ALL the above mentioned pitfalls, and scored the 2 game winning TD’s

III. As the chances of us losing Shane Vareen seem to grow by the day, the thoughts of who replaces him grow as well. Here are 3 options, one of which is out of the box.

a. Chris Johnson – IIRC Johnson has decent hands, great explosiveness and speed, and is a much better runner that Vareen. Granted I have no idea what kind of a pass blocker he is, or how smart. If those 2 questions were answered, I think he’d be a good alternative who would likely cost $2MM/yr or less

b. Josh Boyce - Yeah, you heard me correctly. I was thinking that the way we use Vareen he’s much more a receiver than runner, probably 80-20%. So why not Boyce. They are both about the same size and strength. Boyce was known for his YAC in college, so we know he’s got some RB skills.

Right now Boyce is buried down the Pats WR depth chart, so why not a minor position change, especially since 80% of the time he’s be doing exactly what he’s been doing his whole career. Besides you can’t beat the price. Let he and White fight it out. I find it hard to believe he’d be a worse runner.

c. And then there is CJ Spiller. For some reason I have always liked this kid. He’s an explosive runner. He catches the ball well. And he can be used on special teams. If you are going to pay for a 3rd down RB, I’d rather it be Spiller than Vareen.

IV. After studying the info that Miguel has been dispensing, I am confident that the Pats will be able to resign Revis, McCourty, one RB, and get Solder’s cap number down with a long term deal. I also believe that by the time TC comes around, the Pats will also get some cap relief from reworked deals with Mayo, Connolly, and Amendola. Plus cap space from Wilfolk’s new deal or release. Then when all is said and done, the key elements will be back with the team along with enough cap space that signing a guy like Ayers or another mid-level guy would be possible as well.

V. I am firmly on board with the following draft strategy.

1. DL first, and I weigh heavily on an interior DL player. It HAS to be our top priority. Unfortunately outside of QB’s, IMPACT DT’s are by far the hardest commodity to find. Granted you can find “decent” guys all over the place as our “success” with Siliga, White, and Villano has shown. However if you want an “impact” guy you either have to have a top 15 draft pick of be willing to take some risk.
2. OL – Of course I’d be OK with taking a offensive lineman in the first, if I was sure he’d be an opening day starter and a significant upgrade over our current OG’s But the chances of finding THAT player after #32 is a lot greater than finding that “impact” DT.
3. Edge rusher – Supposedly this is one of the deeper areas of the draft this year and I have heard there will be some good options out there right into the 3rd round.. Now keep this in mind, I have great hopes that one or both of Moore and Buchannon can develop into that #3 DE/OLB that we’ve been looking for, for over 2 years. Still it doesn’t hurt to add to the competition.
4. TE- I know most would put RB up there, but sorry guys, but RB’s can be found anywhere. They are even more abundant that WR’s and a lot less expensive. TE’s on the other hand, are much rarer. Understand I am talking about find a TRUE TE, not one of those “Flex Ends” OTG is always talking about. I think we have that covered in Wright
5. After that flurry of picks at the end of the 3rd and top of the 4th (3 picks in about 7 slots) I’m hoping we will have hit all the boxes checked,, so, after that, we can use the rest of our picks moving up in other rounds, out to the next year, or on very high risk/reward injury or character guys regardless of position.

VI. I haven’t mentioned Deflategate in this post because it’s been talked to death on its board. There really isn’t anything to say until Welles comes in with his report, which we pretty much all know what he will say……and I doubt any of us will be totally happy. But here’s hoping I’m wrong

VII. Interesting to see how BB’s proposal to be able to challenge any play is getting traction this off season. I’m constantly surprised that the major objection is that it would make the games longer.

That’s so wrong. HC’s would still only have 2-3 challenges, and they have to get the first 2 right in order to even get a 3rd challenge. Game lengths won change a bit. If it helped getting this rule passed, I’d be OK with doing away with the option of a 3rd challenge altogether

OK that’s long enough. I guess I can get some of my other thoughts in during the discussion.

I'm especially intrigued by points 6 and 8

In serious response to point 3 of your draft strategy, while an edge rusher would be nice, if it's possible to nab another true linebacker I think that would work just as well. Having another Mayo type (less talented obviously, but that style), would free up Hightower and Collins to rush more, and I believe both can be used on the edge effectively in pass rush situations. It's a good thing, as it opens up draft flexibility.

Post Euphoria? Hell, I'm still walking around with a smile on my face. You can get over that, I'm going to cling to it as long as I can, and if that means training camp or opening day, so be it!

That Super Bowl put so much to rest, I just have a feeling of inner peace that doesn't seem to be in any hurry to go anywhere and that's just fine by me.

In response to your thread title...



Been waiting for that since I was a freshman in college...feels good

Under your scenario, I could see RB not being a high draft priority. As I understand, you expect us to sign one of our two running backs and likely pick up in free agency. As far as TE, posters don't like Hooman. Apparently, Belichick likes Hooman in his roles, as a blocker and as a backup. Obviously, when Hooman is a backup, we move to much more of 3 WR offense.

We all seem to want a quality backup who can start if Hooman is injured, and be a good enough blocker to start in our two TE sets. If the players is ONLY a backup to Gronkowski, then he'd have to be our 4th TE and be inactive in almost every game. So, sure, we should look for a draftee who can replace Hooman (or even Wright). We should always look for upgrades. But this isn't 2014, when we had ZERO healthy TE's signed (Hooman was a RFA). We now have three signed for 2015.

Thoughts:
1. Gronk at 6'6" or is it 6'7"? Is our tall option where even when he's covered you can throw him open due to catch radius.
2. Browner proved his worth. Even with all the regular season penalties. In the Super Bowl he got flagged one time and in general the Super Bowl was not a flag-fest.
3. Not concerned about RB or TE as a top draft priority. My top draft priorities DT/OG. We carried Jordan Devey all year and may lose Dan Connolly. We had Joe Vellano on the roster too. And may lose Alan Branch.
4. Post-euphoria? I re-watched the Super Bowl for the 5th time last night. I am still euphoric!

We do have a 6th round RB from last year's draft on our IR list too. Tyler Gaffney should be able to come back and show his stuff or the Pats wouldn't have claimed him off of waivers in the first place.

[QUOTE="bresna said:

We do have a 6th round RB from last year's draft on our IR list too. Tyler Gaffney should be able to come back and show his stuff or the Pats wouldn't have claimed him off of waivers in the first place.

Click to expand...

Between Blunt, Grey, Gaffney, Boldin and Devlin, the Pats are probably better off to start than a lot of teams. Also the Pats, lets face it, are a pass first team, who seeks balance from the run game more than they seek yards. A guy who can get the short yard and score on the GL CONSITENTLY, and doesn't have many negative plays, is more valuable to the Pats than the guy who ends up running for 1200 yds, but has negative plays, and can't get the tough yards consistently.

Sure they'd like to have a real talent, that's why they trade for Dillon and drafted Maroney, But they can get by in their offensive system with a decent running game. They got 4 good years out of their investment in the 2o11 draft. My guess they keep one of them....and my guess right now, it will be Ridley, because Ridley loves it here and they can get him back for close to the vet minimum.

Given they style of RB's they already have on the roster, they probably would rather have Vareen back, but not at the price he's looking at. Besides there will be a lot of veteran guys out their. IIRC, the Panthers just released one of their RB's/

Sicilian said:

I'm especially intrigued by points 6 and 8

Click to expand...

Wiseass.

There is talk in this forum about possibly cutting Wilfork to save cap space, if he does not agree to a pay cut. Is there a Wilfork back up on the roster who can contribute at his level? By his level, I mean the actual play and the snap count. If there isn't one, then where would we get his replacement? Draft is a hit or miss, you have to be lucky to land a player of Wilfork's caliber. A free agent would like Pot Roast will cost a ton of money - there goes the cap savings. Will some one educate me on thought process behind the thinking that Wilfork may get cut?

IndianPat said:

There is talk in this forum about possibly cutting Wilfork to save cap space, if he does not agree to a pay cut. Is there a Wilfork back up on the roster who can contribute at his level? By his level, I mean the actual play and the snap count. If there isn't one, then where would we get his replacement? Draft is a hit or miss, you have to be lucky to land a player of Wilfork's caliber. A free agent would like Pot Roast will cost a ton of money - there goes the cap savings. Will some one educate me on thought process behind the thinking that Wilfork may get cut?

Click to expand...

ANALYSIS
Wilfork is not worth $8.5M to the patriots.

PLAN
Re-sign Branch and sign a draftee, and use the SEVEN million dollars of savings to sign a player or players who might help the team. Heck, the 2015 charge for McCourty would be about $7M. Who would you choose? Wilfork or (Branch and McCourty)?

bresna said:

We do have a 6th round RB from last year's draft on our IR list too. Tyler Gaffney should be able to come back and show his stuff or the Pats wouldn't have claimed him off of waivers in the first place.

Click to expand...

Here's an interesting take on Gaffney from last year:

I have to say I'm kinda shocked by the fact that there hasn't been a SINGLE comment on the topic that got me to write this post in the first place. Am I the ONLY one who think this shift in passing game strategy is fascinating ?

What Russell Wilson was able to do in the superbowl was remarkable. He only completed 12 passes, and yet nearly won a game against a defense that did a far better job than the 24 points they gave up would indicate. I mean, think about it. I would be surprised if Wilson threw more than 5 passes to receivers who be considered open in the traditional sense. The rest were thrown to guys who were covered. Guys that Brady probably would have ignored......And yet you can't say that he didn't have a successful night throwing the ball, both effectively and efficiently.

I thought the Pats defensive plan was brilliant and executed as well as one could expect given who you were playing against and the conditions they were playing under. Yet it was the Seahawk passing attack that led to most of their scoring. THAT's why I think this fairly new phenomenon needs to be discussed......or not.

I'll add a slightly different perspective on the phenomenon you describe: It's not so much a shift in the passing philosophy, but a catering to the current skillsets of modern quarterbacks. Look at the better pocket QB's who are still around: Brady, Manning, and I would include Luck and Rodgers (who are both good in the pocket but have superior mobility as well). They don't typically make the throws you're describing.

But for any team that doesn't have a top notch QB, or has a QB who's best attribute is mobility and not pure reading/throwing, those throws are crucial. They're not going to find the open receivers the same way a Brady or Manning will, and so the plays are designed to take advantage of size mismatches. The current trend of mobile QB's has made this change a lot more prevalent, and meanwhile the new rule emphasis' have allowed that style to thrive more than it would have say ten years ago.

Sicilian said:

I'll add a slightly different perspective on the phenomenon you describe: It's not so much a shift in the passing philosophy, but a catering to the current skillsets of modern quarterbacks. Look at the better pocket QB's who are still around: Brady, Manning, and I would include Luck and Rodgers (who are both good in the pocket but have superior mobility as well). They don't typically make the throws you're describing.

But for any team that doesn't have a top notch QB, or has a QB who's best attribute is mobility and not pure reading/throwing, those throws are crucial. They're not going to find the open receivers the same way a Brady or Manning will, and so the plays are designed to take advantage of size mismatches. The current trend of mobile QB's has made this change a lot more prevalent, and meanwhile the new rule emphasis' have allowed that style to thrive more than it would have say ten years ago.

Click to expand...

I was waiting to see if this would come up. I'm glad that it did.

There was a time that a team could win a SB without a good to great QB. The Polianization of the passing rules has changed that dramatically. Now it's much more difficult to win without a great performance from the QB.

The best part of all is that the rules were altered to help teams compete against the Pats defense, but have now helped the Pats offense. Once again Brady and Belichick win.

It's fun being on top.

1960Pats said:

I was waiting to see if this would come up. I'm glad that it did.

There was a time that a team could win a SB without a good to great QB. The Polianization of the passing rules has changed that dramatically. Now it's much more difficult to win without a great performance from the QB.

The best part of all is that the rules were altered to help teams compete against the Pats defense, but have now helped the Pats offense. Once again Brady and Belichick win.

It's fun being on top.

Click to expand...

I see it a little differently. I don't think Joe Flacco wins the Super Bowl without the current rules. I don't think Russell Wilson wins the Super Bowl without the current rules (and that defense). What's amazing is that Belichick has been able to rebuild this team to combat the current rules, and Brady has been able to thrive in his own way despite them.

WRT the recent exploitation of the rules for PI, you must be wrong because as everyone knows Belichick finds all the loopholes and is always pushing the envelope and trying to find ways to work the rules in any way possible to get an advantage, because he cannot win by just playing honest football.

-Signed,
That one jackass from every other team's message board who gets his opinion about the Patriots from the anal fissures at ESPN.

Sicilian said:

I'll add a slightly different perspective on the phenomenon you describe: It's not so much a shift in the passing philosophy, but a catering to the current skillsets of modern quarterbacks. Look at the better pocket QB's who are still around: Brady, Manning, and I would include Luck and Rodgers (who are both good in the pocket but have superior mobility as well). They don't typically make the throws you're describing.

Click to expand...

This is EXACTLY my point. Finding a truly elite QB is the hardest thing to do in sports. You'd be hard pressed to find more than 5 in the entire league. However if you build a team around the "chuck and duck" strategy (BTW someone should figure out a better name for it), you don't need a QB that skilled in making decisions. All you have to do is throw to a spot, and then let the receiver or ref take over. Now a QB who is the next level down can be effective because clearly it's a lot easier to throw to a covered receiver and hope for the best, than try to figure out who is going to get open. In THAT world, Joe Flacco,, and Eli Manning (both good but not elite QB's) can become a superstar.

I think one of the reasons we don't see Brady doing that much, because he'd have to unlearn 15 years of training NOT to throw to covered receivers, All his instincts would be fighting him. He'd literally have to re-train himself to make that kind of throw with the kind of conviction that turns them into completions.

It's not like those throws that Wilson made weren't skillfully thrown, but a lot of decision making issues have be taken out of the equation. In this system the QB merely needs to throw to a spot. In this system the QB position relies more on physical skills than mental ones. So in a league that is desperately try find 32 quality QB's and FAILING badly, anything that might make the hardest position in professional sports easier is something that is going to be looked hard at.... and thus needs to be discussed

Let's look at this "chuck it up" philosophy from a statistical viewpoint. Assume you are on your own 40 yard line and you throw a 50 yard attempt.

Your points expectation before the throw (assuming first down) is about 1.8 points.

On a completion to the 10-yard line or a pass interference call, your expectation is now 4.5 points. On an incompletion there is a small change in expectation to say 1.7 points (guessing here). On an interception without runback there is now a -0.9 expectation.

So just guessing as to the probabilities of these outcomes (feel free to suggest improvements here):

Completion: 30%
PI: 15%
Incompletion: 45%
Interception: 10%

Yields expected points on the play of: (0.3+0.15)*(4.5-1.8) - 0.45*0.1 - 0.1*(1.8+0.9) = .90 points or nearly the same as a 20 yard completion.

If instead of a first down, it's a 3rd and long, then the expected gain is larger (as the starting expectation would be considerably lower).

Point expectations from here:

http://www.nflstatsblog.com/2011/08/fun-fact-chances-of-scoring-based-on.html

(The Patriots have higher point expectations than these, which drops the advantage of such an attempt).

Please check my math and adjust the probabilities as you see fit!