Barking up the Wrong Tree...

[AzPatsFan]

No you misunderstand. I am 100% with him on that play (which they made!!!) and would want him to do the same thing. My point was guts. He had them then but he Drafts in fear.

I am not the biggest fan of build through the Draft. Case in point last weekend. What the hell did we build...nada. Are we a better Team today? No. Maybe more depth. 17% is the actual number across the Draft board 1-7. You bench a .170 hitter.

I like to play for this year not 2013 or 2014. I like solid FAs or trades.

DW Toys

"I like solid FAs or trades" So do I. So why are you making such an obnoxious stink about not drafting a pass rush OLB? I'd much rather get a trained NFL veteran who at least knows the NFL ropes and mold him into a 3-4 OLB.

The Trading and FA season has yet to begin. Frankly, I'm eager, and so is Belichick.

All the FA are going to find not many takers at all. If, or rather when, the CAP comes down to anywhere near the figures that are being batted around, ther will crying and gnashing of teeth. The guys who write the checks say they can't/won't write them at the rate they've been doing despite what all the lawyers think. In the final case, they don't and won't have to do so.

The players cut their own throats by not acquiescing in making a bigger pie to share with an extended season. So they will have to share smaller pieces from a smaller pie.

I predict that the FAs are the ones who wil take it in the ear. When half the Teams are way over the reduced cap, there will be lots of high priced veterans and expectant FAs on the outside looking in, wondering how come no one will pay them.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Either you are an extremely bad writer or a not comprehending type of guy.

If you are going to talk about having guys that have to be game planned for, don't use Vrabel in the comment.

"If we had a pass rusher in the game maybe he gets to Manning on fourth down".

Huh? Did you bother to actually watch the game? Fourth down?

The game hinged on the the Tyree miracle catch. Go back and actually watch. There was tons of pressure. In fact, the official has admitted that he almost called Manning in the grasp because there was so much pressure.

The problem was the football was caught after the pass was thrown in duress from so much pressure.

Also, if you are interested in learning something, ya might want to review my post history. It has always been my wish we had personnel in our Dline rotation that can get pressure on the QB.

That's little to do with an "impact player" OLB or whatever the babble is

We have Wright/Pryor/ T Warren all coming back. Isn't it amazing not having three solid pressure guys play against the Jets meant less pressure

Gollyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeee.......

I can't wait till someone blames climate change on the lack of a pass rush.

The game hinged on two Patriots d- linemen who could not get to the passer, hinged on a DB dropping a game winning INT, the game hinged on the O line playing its worst game of the year, but the game really hinged on lack of pressure on Manning and Ellis Hobbs allowing his usual 10 yard cushion. Change any one of those reasons and the Patriots are 4 time Super Bowl champs.

12 sacks are 12 sacks, an offense takes notice of those numbers, so you ban belittle Vrable all you want he was somebody that the Offense had to keep track of, and to say otherwise proves you have no clue what you are talking about. There is a reason that outside pressure is so important, and we do not have any The QB's blind side is on the outside, it is the same reason that left tackles are so well paid. The Patriots defense is set up so that the pressure is applied by the OLB, the nose occupies two players in the middle forcing the running back wide and the ends push their man back into the backfield so that the back has no place to run. The MLB are run support flowing toward the play to make the tackle. The OLB is the guy who has to apply pressure because in many schemes they are the only rushers. Without an effective OLB the Pats have to blitz, something that they got burnt on repeatedly last year because, wait for it...the OLB couldn't rush the passer. The DBs got better last year, because they probably couldn't have gotten any worse. The key was they all hit hard, for the first time in a long time people were concerned about going across the middle on the Pats.

The need to rush the passer is accute and the need to rush the passer from the outside is vital. Without that edge rusher, the Patriots defense ends up being 29the against the pass and I believe last in third down defense.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Colvin and Thomas would seem to undercut your argument.

Perhaps ... but it would be nice to see some attempt at why he devalues the position in the draft. could it merely be that it is too risky?

 

[AzPatsFan]

To follow up, you were singing a completely different tune last year:

Deus,

That is what Belichick did to address the problem in the 2010 draft. He spent a first,and two seconds on these players and positions. Why would you or I, feel the need to do the same thing again, having already done so ?

The only circumstances I could see that is if McCourty, Cunningham and Spikes, all three, pulled a magnificent flameout like a certain Mr. Gholston.

Are you saying that McCourty, Spikes and Cunningham are all losers?

 

[Deus Irae]

Perhaps ... but it would be nice to see some attempt at why he devalues the position in the draft. could it merely be that it is too risky?

I think it's telling that it's the one area of his teams that he spent years deliberately using veterans for, rather than building up through drafting. If I had to guess, I'd say that he definitely prefers veterans, but can't find them in the sort of numbers he used to be able to, because teams became better at managing the cap, and then the cap exploded and it became even easier for teams to hold on to the Vrabels and Colvins of the world.

The good news is that he may be 3/4 of the way towards fixing the starting LB corps, with Mayo/Spikes/Cunningham, although Spikes may always be a problem against the pass.

 

[Deus Irae]

Deus,

That is what Belichick did to address the problem in the 2010 draft. He spent a first,and two seconds on these players and positions. Why would you or I, feel the need to do the same thing again, having already done so ?

He didn't finish the overhaul, that's why. He's still missing one OLB and one DE, and he could have gotten them through this past draft.

The only circumstances I could see that is if McCourty, Cunningham and Spikes, all three, pulled a magnificent flameout like a certain Mr. Gholston.

Are you saying that McCourty, Spikes and Cunningham are all losers?

You are the one making the claim that a rookie would have been useless, not me. You make that claim after defending the Cunningham pick last year, which is hypocritical, unless you think Cunningham was useless last year.

So, was Cunningham useless last year, or was he an upgrade over what was there when he was drafted?

 

[AzPatsFan]

So you opposed the drafting of Cunningham, and feel that he didn't make a whit of difference last year, then?

Well did he? You're the one criticizing for not re-drafting the position, as if he didn't dominate the position. I am not.

 

[Sicilian]

12 sacks are 12 sacks

And Vrabel only did that once, in a year where we were constantly playing with a HUGE lead and had Adalius (a GOOD Adalius) handling more of the coverage duties. Vrabel had 9.5 sacks in one of the super bowl years, but other than that never topped 5.

I loved Vrabel, he was a great all around OLB (could rush, set the edge, AND cover) and smart as they come. But you're making him sound like some demon pass rusher and he never really was.

 

[DW Toys]

"I like solid FAs or trades" So do I. So why are you making such an obnoxious stink about not drafting a pass rush OLB? I'd much rather get a trained NFL veteran who at least knows the NFL ropes and mold him into a 3-4 OLB.

The Trading and FA season has yet to begin. Frankly, I'm eager, and so is Belichick.

All the FA are going to find not many takers at all. If, or rather when, the CAP comes down to anywhere near the figures that are being batted around, ther will crying and gnashing of teeth. The guys who write the checks say they can't/won't write them at the rate they've been doing despite what all the lawyers think. In the final case, they don't and won't have to do so.

The players cut their own throats by not acquiescing in making a bigger pie to share with an extended season. So they will have to share smaller pieces from a smaller pie.

I predict that the FAs are the ones who wil take it in the ear. When half the Teams are way over the reduced cap, there will be lots of high priced veterans and expectant FAs on the outside looking in, wondering how come no one will pay them.

Excellent post. I think we are on the same page. You said it more eloquently than I did. Well played.
DW Toys

 

[Deus Irae]

Well did he? You're the one criticizing for not re-drafting the position, as if he didn't dominate the position. I am not.

You keep avoiding answering the question, and you know that there is more than 1 OLB position. Let me ask again:

So you opposed the drafting of Cunningham, and feel that he didn't make a whit of difference last year, then?

 

[DW Toys]

Deus,

That is what Belichick did to address the problem in the 2010 draft. He spent a first,and two seconds on these players and positions. Why would you or I, feel the need to do the same thing again, having already done so ?

The only circumstances I could see that is if McCourty, Cunningham and Spikes, all three, pulled a magnificent flameout like a certain Mr. Gholston.

Are you saying that McCourty, Spikes and Cunningham are all losers?

If BB likes to shock the world and prove is coaching prowess, he should kick the tires on Gholston. It would piss everybody on this forum off, and then dig into the heart of the Jets if he could salvage him.
Let's face it . The kid is in shock. His will to play has been questioned. He has the right athletic tools. I see no wrong in bringing him in on the cheap when we get to practices.
It's a need. Turning this kid around is something that would look good on BB's resume.

Here is my issue the way BB Drafts besides being scared to make a mistake, He uses that crappy word value. If there are fifty better than the guy you Drafted.....it wasn't value. Ya picked the guy you liked. Why BS everybody?

Solder and Dowling were already Patriots before the Draft started. He manipulated around to see how he could pick them up and what he could add. He had a plan. He thought he would steal a rusher probably in the mid second and got burnt. He thought Sheard or Reed one or the other would surely be there at #56. Value my butt.
DW Toys

 

[patfanken]

I think it's telling that it's the one area of his teams that he spent years deliberately using veterans for, rather than building up through drafting. If I had to guess, I'd say that he definitely prefers veterans, but can't find them in the sort of numbers he used to be able to, because teams became better at managing the cap, and then the cap exploded and it became even easier for teams to hold on to the Vrabels and Colvins of the world.

The good news is that he may be 3/4 of the way towards fixing the starting LB corps, with Mayo/Spikes/Cunningham, although Spikes may always be a problem against the pass.

It also tells a lot more than that DI.

1.Until more colleges start using a 2 gap 3-4 there are always going to be problems projecting how rookies will adapt to the defense we use here.

2. The number of DE/OLB busts over the last few years from the early rounds is enormous. IIRC someone posted a study where there were over 40 DE's from the first 2 rounds. IIRC the study went back 4-5 years looking at guys considered to be pass rushers. Of those 40 odd picks Only 6 had double digit sacks last season, and only 11 had EVER had a double digit sack season, and only about 5 or so had ever done it more than 1 year.

Those are HORRIBLE numbers when you consider the risk factors, and THEN add on the difficulties of learning this particular defense and its myriad of responsibilities to the general difficulties of getting to the passer

3. Even the best pass rushers in Pats history (in the BB era) have had minimal success. Willie McGinest NEVER had a double digit sack season, and only came close ONCE. Vrabel had just ONE (07) and only came close ONE other time. (03). And these are the guys everyone of us who dream of getting a pass rusher hope to find.

4. In an era where 40-50 team sacks is going to get you into the top 5 of the eague, (46 led the league last season - Pats had 34) Having a single individual responsible for over 25% of them just isn't going to happen with THIS defensive philosophy

5. The learning curve to become the kind of OLB that BB covets is a LONG one. Vrabel served a 3 year apprenticeship. Bruschi closer to 5 years. The very fact that Cunningham came right out of the box and had a ton of productive snaps last season was pretty remarkable. That he wasn't horrible and got some consistent pressure on the QB is even more remarkable. He is AT LEAST 2 seasons from becoming a finished product.

6. And on the difficulty of the getting a good FA OLB, you are right it is a lot tougher, but I think you missed the main reason. When the Pats picked up Vrabel in 2001 they were one of 3 teams in the league that used a base 3-4. Entering this season more than HALF the teams in the league will be using a base 3-4. More people chasing the same kind of players, makes it a lot harder to get one.

BTW- the same goes for the draft. A lot more competition for that "tweener" these days

And to repeat, even if he BECOMES the next Vrabel or McGinest he will RARELY, if ever, become the kind of sack guy that people here dream of.

So finally, when BB is trying to decide between a potential great pass rushing threat (whose position bust rate is around 80%) and a potential franchise LT (whose position bust rate is around 10%) who is he going to choose. Or rather who SHOULD he choose.

I wrote a post were I opined that the BEST sack artists in the league have about a 3% success rate. I'm guessing that BB feels better about a getting a tackle who could have a positive impact on over 90% of the snaps he sees, vs a pass rusher who will have a positive effect on about 10%......and that's on a good day.

So getting back to the original point...at last. The chances of the Pats find ing that pass rushing gem we all want is much greater if we get him out of the vet FA pool, rather than from the draft. And as we have seen, even THEN, the odds are small that you will hit gold.

I believe that BB actually doesn't care if he finds a great individual pass rusher. I think he focuses MUCH MORE on how he can get more sacks/QB pressure from the ENTIRE TEAM.

Great individual sackers can be neutralized too many ways. No team in the league over the last decade has put more pressure on the QB consistently and well than the Steelers. And how well has THAT worked out for them when they play the Pats. Even in the few games the Pats have lost in that time period, the Steeler rusher WAS NOT the determining factor.

After the initial outrage, the more I have thought about the more I have come to the conclusion that your draft assets are much better spent on other positions other than on a pass rusher. That doesn't mean NEVER, just the great majority of the time. BB has spent exactly one pick as high as a second (Cunningham) and....so far so good.

 

[AzPatsFan]

You keep avoiding answering the question, and you know that there is more than 1 OLB position. Let me ask again:

So you opposed the drafting of Cunningham, and feel that he didn't make a whit of difference last year, then?

I did not oppose but welcomed the drafting of Cunnigham to improve the general talent level of the OLB group, since high draft pick Sean Crable was not succeeding.

No, rookie Jermaine Cunnigham did not make a significant difference as a "Pass Rusher" at OLB for the 2010 Patriots. He only got one, 1, o-n-e, sack. But he did appear to improve and he might and probably will do better in the 2011 season; and even better in the 2012 season.

I am aware that there are two OLB positions. But the two positions are not the same. The SOLB has a much greater need to be a complete player able to hold the line and control the run, while still being able to pass rush some.

The WOLB or ROLB in the Belichick system has the same needs, but the emphasis swings to being more a Pass Rusher rather then a run defender. The two positions are distinct and different. Although a "complete WOLB" could handle both. In the past decade the only OLB who came closest to doing so was Pfiefer. BB was disappointed AD Thomas couldn't. As for a "complete SOLB", Vrabel was fine.

In practice BB handles the difficulty of finding a complete WOLB, or any other position, by employing platooning and situational substitution; alternating two players with each possessing a certain desired and complementary attribute. Ninkovitch and TBC are such a platooned pairing.

Belichick improved the OLB positions from 30 to 36 sacks/year, with a further improvement to around the targetted 40, the level of the Super Bowl winning clubs, to be expected merely from more experience.

I can see why he turned his prime attention elsewhere, to more urgent problems.

.

 

[Deus Irae]

I did not oppose but welcomed the drafting of Cunnigham to improve the general talent level of the OLB group, since high draft pick Sean Crable was not succeeding.

No, rookie Jermaine Cunnigham did not make a significant difference as a "Pass Rusher" at OLB for the 2010 Patriots. He only got one, 1, o-n-e, sack. But he did appear to improve and he might and probably will do better in the 2011 season; and even better in the 2012 season.

I am aware that there are two OLB positions. But the two positions are not the same. The SOLB has a much greater need to be a complete player able to hold the line and control the run, while still being able to pass rush some.

The WOLB or ROLB in the Belichick system has the same needs, but the emphasis swings to being more a Pass Rusher rather then a run defender. The two positions are distinct and different. Although a "complete WOLB" could handle both. In the past decade the only OLB who came closest to doing so was Pfiefer. BB was disappointed AD Thomas couldn't. As for a "complete SOLB", Vrabel was fine.

In practice BB handles the difficulty of finding a complete WOLB, or any other position, by employing platooning and situational substitution; alternating two players with each possessing a certain desired and complementary attribute. Ninkovitch and TBC are such a platooned pairing.

Belichick improved the OLB positions from 30 to 36 sacks/year, with a further improvement to around the targetted 40, the level of the Super Bowl winning clubs, to be expected merely from more experience.

I can see why he turned his prime attention elsewhere, to more urgent problems.

.

You're trying to use obviously invalid mental gymnastics to justify BB's drafting, and you're arguing against yourself in the process. But, to each his own.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

And Vrabel only did that once, in a year where we were constantly playing with a HUGE lead and had Adalius (a GOOD Adalius) handling more of the coverage duties. Vrabel had 9.5 sacks in one of the super bowl years, but other than that never topped 5.

I loved Vrabel, he was a great all around OLB (could rush, set the edge, AND cover) and smart as they come. But you're making him sound like some demon pass rusher and he never really was.

But if you look at the years that the Pats had a valid outsie pass rush, they either made it to the SUper Bowl or to the AFC Championship.

I believe in BB, he is the best game day coach in the league, BB the GM is just OK. He keeps hinting that the outside pass rush can be taken care of in FA, then when he fails to get a pass rush he makes excuses and says that pressure is just as important as sacks. Bur, as the Super Bowl proved, pressure doesn't do anything to stop a must have forth down play. If the Pats had Willie M in 2007 rushing the passer, Eli would have been down and the Pats would have won. Nothing against the 2007 team, but when they went up against a scheme they didn't expect they got punked. Same thing happened last year against the Jets in the playoff game, the Jets dropped 6, 7, sometimes 8 back and the Patriots refused to take advantage of it, and when the game was on the line, Sanchez had all day to find his recievers. Had the Pteriots had a pass rush they would have won that game. They would have overcome the field goal and dropped TD pass.

The Pats need a big time OLB. It is the missing piece to the puzzle. I do not begrudge Belichick taking a tackle in the first round, although I wouldn't have, but Ras-i Dowling at 33? Not trading up to take D'Quan Bowers in the second round? No linebacker taken until the 6th round, and he is probably training camp fodder. We had two first round picks, we could have taken both Solder and Heywood and then this is an A+ draft. Instead BB trades out of 28, drafts another risk DB at 33 and takes back to back running backs? The best pick of the draft is Ryan Mallett, and he won't take a snap for the Patriots this year.

 

[Synovia]

Well you are missing the point. The point was not for the pats to take the player I wanted. Point was for them to grab DE or the very least the highest rated OLB on their board at that point as they have a need at that position and without compromising Solder and Ras-I picks . More then likely the pats 2nd and Mallet. Browns, Washington were game for trade backs all day.
.

Grabbing one doesn't help unless they grab the right one. Most of them will be busts.


Thats the point. Unless you know which one, you're arguing that BB should probably take a guy who is going to bust.


There's a very real chance that BB had those LBs as all 60/100 type players (to use an arbitrary scale) and had Dowling as a 90/100.

Who do you want, a very good CB, or a LB who will probably never be a good starter?

 

[Synovia]

can we cease the Mankins is on the verge of another hold out" talk. That IS NOT going to happen. He has 10+MM dollars ON THE TABLE. He is not going to walk away from that. For 2011 at least, the issue of who is going to play LG is NOT an issue. Please don't keep treating it like it was. BTW this isn't just directed at you, Shelterdog, but everyone who keeps bringing it up. Its not an issue.

He had 9M on the table last year and walked away from a good chunk of it. Why the hell would he risk injury for $10M when holding out gets him probably 6/$60 next year?


They can't franchise him next year.

 

[Synovia]

You're trying to use obviously invalid mental gymnastics to justify BB's drafting, and you're arguing against yourself in the process. But, to each his own.

Ah Deus, who never actually argues against any points, just makes broad ad hominem attacks.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

He had 9M on the table last year and walked away from a good chunk of it. Why the hell would he risk injury for $10M when holding out gets him probably 6/$60 next year? They can't franchise him next year.

He never had $9M on any table last year. In fact according to his own agent he had at most closer to $6.5M on the table briefly before being tendered at $3.4M which was ultimately reduced to $1.7M. Yet he risked injury to collect less than half of that. Mankins turns 30 next March. OLinemen don't get yet alone collect on 6 year double digit average deals in their 30's, and it's even less likely they will begin to under any new CBA. Most are contemplating voluntary or involuntary retirement by the time they approach their mid 30's. And they absolutely can franchise him next year at 120% since eliminating the tags hasn't even been a topic of discussion in their failed negotiations to date...and his court case if in fact it ever does get heard will drag on into his early 30's.

 

[Shelterdog]

They can't franchise him next year.

If the franchise tag rules are the same next year they certainly can franchise him again. Whether he'd actually play under a tag in both 2011 and 2012 is a different question.