Bill and Special Teams Binkies

[Chevy]

Oh, Bulimia.

Great restaurant, but the line for the bathroom was amazing.

 

[Hyped]

I have made similar arguments in the past using Mike Bartum from the late 90's as an ideal ST player....someone who could ALSO play TE if needed.

But then again...if you were a GOOD TE, the coaches wouldn't let you play ST's....wait...they did let Gronk break his arm....

Hmmm...it's football...whatever...and I love Slater, baby!!!!

 

[slam]

Like I said to DB, its 44 plays out to 2005. That's 2.2%. That 1961 offensive and defensive plays, and 44 KO's and punts that had to be covered. Do you really think that Bill can't coach up 2 other guys who can do as well or nearly as well as Davis and King for those 44 plays?

Apparently not, since he never tries cutting the Davises and Kings from the squad to ask the Phillip Dorsetts and Duron Harmons of the world to play 300 snaps of special teams in any given season.

Also, are we SURE the Patriots are really that out of line with the league? Clicking on any Patriot's Snap Count page, we see 3 or 4 players who we can call Special Teams Aces, position players with 200+ snaps in Special Teams with negligible snaps playing a position. In 2020, we have Bethel, Slater, and Cody Davis. If we go to other teams, can we find teams with no Aces? Let me look at some of the more respected 2020 teams:

• 2020 Steelers: Jordan Dangerfield, James Pierre. Probably Derek Watt and Sean Davis, who have 52 and 57 position snaps to go with 213 ST snaps apiece. Possibly Justin Layne who had 261 ST snaps but also 117 defensive snaps.
• 2020 Chiefs: Armani Watts, Antonio Hamilton, Dorian O'Daniel. Maybe Anthony Sherman who had 63 offensive snaps to his 256 ST snaps.
• 2020 LA Rams: Nsimba Webster, Patrick Natrez, JuJu Hughes, Xavier Jones: All with 178 or more ST snaps w/ few others.
• 2020 Ravens: Old friend Jordan Richards, Anthony Levine, Kristian Welch. Maybe Justice Hill with 73 position snaps to 192 ST snaps.
• 2020 Bills: Jaquan Johnson, Andre Smith, Taiwan Jones, Tyler Matakevich with 72 defensive snaps to 343 ST snaps.

Are we arguing about a false narrative, that BB is out of step with league practice? I'm not finding a team with in which the ST snaps are absorbed by players with regular roles in the offense or defense. In every team some 3 to 5 players seem to have their primary job being ST Ace who play the field only as much as Matt Chatham ever did. The three Bills players I listed with some position snaps, for instance, had most of their snaps in their meaningless Week 17 game. Are there really teams without a core of ST specialists?

 

[PScottman]

Instead of percentage of overall plays, I look at it from a "One win can be the difference between playoffs and not. A title or not."

Even as recently as the Rams Super Bowl, it can be argued that with the rest of the game stalemated - it was special teams that facilitated that close win - and the Rams were no slouch with Hekker in the field position game. If the Patriots are not as strong and specialized with special teams aces - is the result likely the same?

Are there many other plays (maybe a pick-6?) that swing and or seize momentum more than a kick or punt runback for a TD?

I do agree that the kick off game is a mere fraction of what it used to be, but what about punting and punt coverage re: field position? From my perspective the majority of games are won and lost on a couple plays per contest (regardless of sport). Throwing out the Alabama vs Southwestern New Mexico University School of Interpretive Dance early year complete talent disparity beat down examples in the sports world, conversely, the NFL's parity remains pretty steady. The Hoyer brain freeze vs KC. The Cam Buffalo fumble. And in one or two games per year those plays are special teams plays. Two games last year might have been the difference between playoffs and no playoffs.

Just a different perspective on it.


Lastly, add in also that it could be argued that after Williams, Bethel had the best back up outside CB play of camp - so maybe it's even one less "specialist only" decision this year for that ST group.

 

[venecol]

I was as well.... UNTIL I saw the PS roster. All the players I would have rather seen on the 53 instead of Davis and King made it to the PS. I think the criticism is valid, and Bedard wrote a good piece on it, BUT..... the PS moves make it all moot.

I agree the criticism is valid. Clearly the majority of ST players come from either the D or O groups. Question is why not have more of these players that actually contribute in the other phases play more ST snaps.

Gunner may have been pro bowl or whatever but the below stats hardly warrant not having a better WR #4 on the team over him. The one TD was hardly needed in that blowout win.

 

[venecol]

There’s method to Belichick’s ST madness beyond just getting better field position through better ST play.

You would think having 4 or 5 ST only players on the roster would mean less positional depth, but one of the strengths of this team over the years has been its depth. I’ve come to the conclusion that having the large number of dedicated STers the Pats usually carries actually increases the quality of their positional depth.

Having 4 or 5 guys who play on the kick and punt coverage and return teams lessens the contributions needed to those units from the position groups and allows the Pats to keep higher quality backup players at their positions rather than having lesser quality backups who are also able to contribute ST units.

For instance with this year’s team, other than JJ Taylor possibly having a returner role, the first 4 RBs will have minimal participation on STs. If Brandon Bolden didn’t play all 4 teams and play them well, you might not be able to keep a James White because you’d need another RB who could play a larger role on STs.

If you didn’t have Matt Slater, you probably couldn’t get away with having your 3 top WRs play no role on the teams at all. Your 4th receiver might be chosen for his ST play rather than just his ability to backup the starters.

If you didn’t have Brandon King/Cody Davis, you would not be able to get away with having 3 TEs on your roster none of whom is a contributor on STs.

This makes no sense since most of ST snaps are by guys that play on the O and D. Why not all then (with the obvious exceptions for punters, et al).

 

[DaBruinz]

Extra points have NOTHING to do with the issue of keeping King and Davis. The FACT is, on that is indisputable, was that the Pats had to cover just 44 KO's and punts over the course of the past season. And I was was wrong. It wasn't 6% of the plays from scrimmage. It was 2.2% of the 2005 plays. Keeping King and Davis to play those 44 plays is ridiculous.

Hey, listen, I hate that the NFL emasculated the kicking game. It was one of those areas, that Bill could out coach other teams. But the NFL in its infinite idiocy felt that they had to dumb down the game to keep Bill from embarrassing them too often. So the kicking game is just about who can make FG's and extra points and those 44 punts and KO's that are returned.

So you tell me, DB, are those 44 plays out of 2005 worth 2 roster spots? You mean to tell me that there aren't 2 other players who have additional skills who can't do as well? C'mom Man

Maybe this year with the expanded PS it doesn;'t matter. But eventually it will and we will lose more guys like Langhi (assuming he's actually gone.

PFK - I love you man, but you are way off on your numbers. WAY OFF. The Pats had 397 special teams snaps. Of which, Cody Davis was on the field for 256 of them (64.48%)

This 44 number you put up is bogus. Why? Because you still have to put your coverage guys out there for ALL the Kick-offs and ALL the Punts. They're part of the reason that opposing teams only had 12 punt returns on 55 punts. They're the reason that they allowed only 32 Kick returns and held opponents to a 21.3 YPR. And let's be honest. The number of TBs on kick-offs doesn't tell the whole story there. It doesn't mention how many of those kick-offs were downed by the return man in the EZ because the coverage was so good that he decided not to run it out?.

Dumbing things down the way you have and pretending like these guys are seeing very little in terms of playing time is disingenuous. If we go with your explanation, then you are also saying that guys like Slater and Bethel are also extraneous and should be replaced.

Guys like Bethel, Slater, King, and Davis are WHY opposing teams have so few punt returns against the Pats. It's not just Bailey's kicks. It's their coverage.

You have Kick-offs, Kick returns, Punts and Punt Returns that these guys are an important factor. I'm honestly surprised that you are so dismissive of this.

 

[mgteich]

This makes no sense since most of ST snaps are by guys that play on the O and D. Why not all then (with the obvious exceptions for punters, et al).

OPTION 1
have backup position players be backup STers

OPTION 2
have top STers with less need for position players that weaken the special teams and risk injuries (weakening their position)
=========
THIS BOARD OVER TIME
1) Slater should be cut because he can't contribute at a position.
2) Slater is OK.
3) Slater and one more top special teamer are OK.
4) perhaps 3 are OK (Slater, Bethel, and Davis or Gunner)
5) perhaps Bolden and Gunner are OK too, even though they have ZERO chance of the 53 except for ST's
6) perhaps Belichick is right on King (and so now there are 6) back up to Belichick's norm of 5-7.
====================
Some still are in Phase 3 in their acceptance of Belichick's norm of 5-7 STO's. For me, Belichick has almost always has had 3 players listed as defensive players who are STO players: a front 6/7 player, and 2 db's (now Bethel, Davis and King)

He has a couple of blockers/protectors/gunners listed as something else (now Slater and Bolden)

Occasionally, Belichick has used a roster spot for a returner (now Gunner)
============
Either folks don't value STer's (and Special Teams) as much as Belichick, or they have an easier time making up mock rosters with 3 STO's instead of 5-7.

 

[stinkypete]

Committment to good special teams has been an under the radar reason why this team stayed so good for so long. The Patriots have the best record in one-score games (0.667) since 2000. On a per snap basis there are probably more game altering plays on punts and kickoffs than on offense or defense. In a one-score game, a single game altering play, or the prevention of one, is the difference between winning and losing.

The 2018 super bowl is a great example of special teams winning a game. The San Diego playoff game is 2006 is another one. Think back to how different 2013 would have been if the special teams were just ordinary, of how anxious we got every time we received a punt in 2016.

 

[Steve102]

Nice to see special teams getting some love in this thread.

 

[PScottman]

Some still are in Phase 3 in their acceptance of Belichick's norm of 5-7 STO's. For me, Belichick has almost always has had 3 players listed as defensive players who are STO players: a front 6/7 player, and 2 db's (now Bethel, Davis and King)

I would posit there is room in the middle of this discussion: Slater and Bethel to me are the real straws stirring. I'd have no issue with getting another DB or LB instead of King.

 

[Kasmir]

For what it's worth DVOA posits that Special Teams account for on average 13% of a team's success (or failure), with their rule (now) being that the ratio is 4:3:1 Offense : Defense : Special_Teams.

Football Outsiders Basics (a.k.a. "Pregame Show") | Football Outsiders

A basic introduction to what we've learned since we started Football Outsiders in 2003.

www.footballoutsiders.com

With the Pats having had the #1 ranked Special Teams last year, their numbers work out to that being worth 2 games last year, i.e. with average Special Teams last year's record would have been 5-11.

Jake Bailey was worth one win and Gunner was worth one win

 

[Wozzy]

PFK - I love you man, but you are way off on your numbers. WAY OFF. The Pats had 397 special teams snaps. Of which, Cody Davis was on the field for 256 of them (64.48%)

This 44 number you put up is bogus. Why? Because you still have to put your coverage guys out there for ALL the Kick-offs and ALL the Punts. They're part of the reason that opposing teams only had 12 punt returns on 55 punts. They're the reason that they allowed only 32 Kick returns and held opponents to a 21.3 YPR. And let's be honest. The number of TBs on kick-offs doesn't tell the whole story there. It doesn't mention how many of those kick-offs were downed by the return man in the EZ because the coverage was so good that he decided not to run it out?.

Dumbing things down the way you have and pretending like these guys are seeing very little in terms of playing time is disingenuous. If we go with your explanation, then you are also saying that guys like Slater and Bethel are also extraneous and should be replaced.

Guys like Bethel, Slater, King, and Davis are WHY opposing teams have so few punt returns against the Pats. It's not just Bailey's kicks. It's their coverage.

You have Kick-offs, Kick returns, Punts and Punt Returns that these guys are an important factor. I'm honestly surprised that you are so dismissive of this.

I would just add the Cody Davis was all but leading the team in special teams snaps until he missed three games due to injury around mid season. He seems to be the replacement for Nate Ebner.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Punt coverage is still a huge factor.
And returns in general can turn a game around, even if big ko returns are on the rare side now.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Look at the 2010 Chargers, who missed the playoffs.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

this has nothing to do with how good Davis was. The question that Bedard asks is the value of having a guy like Davis who isn't seeing the field on defense unless there is a DIRE emergency on the team at all. Due to all the rules changes as it pertains to special teams, its value has been vastly diminished. Relatively few KO's are being returned. Punters are so good that even that part of the game has lessened. Bedard gave the percentages, but the fact remains clear. The Kicking game (outside of FG's) is not longer "one third of the game" In fact IIRC, it's barely 6% of the game. That's how many plays guys like King and Davis factored in on. Hard to believe that if Bill only kept 2 "ST guys" he couldn't find replacements to do that job among the players he kept that CAN contribute to the offense and defense.

Of course what happened with the PS, pretty much every thing I just posted became moot.

It's never been literally one-third of the game, but it's pretty consistently been about 1/6 of the snap count.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Instead of percentage of overall plays, I look at it from a "One win can be the difference between playoffs and not. A title or not."

Even as recently as the Rams Super Bowl, it can be argued that with the rest of the game stalemated - it was special teams that facilitated that close win - and the Rams were no slouch with Hekker in the field position game. If the Patriots are not as strong and specialized with special teams aces - is the result likely the same?

Fun fact: in SB53, the Rams had more players who played primarily or exclusively on ST than the Pats did.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

The new Practice Squad rules do make the last few roster spots less valuable. So maybe the delta from including a high-level specialist on Special Teams compared with a generalist that also contributes on defence is worth the roster spot. Maybe Bill actually knows what he is doing.

 

[slam]

Fun fact: in SB53, the Rams had more players who played primarily or exclusively on ST than the Pats did.

I've now looked at the snap counts of every team in 2020, and can conclude that only two teams had fewer than 3 players who were Special Teams Only position players. I defined that as players who had significant ST playing time (150+ snaps) but whose median snap count in his nominal position was 3 or less. The two teams were GB and NYJ. 11 had 3 ST only players. The rest had 4 or more, up to 7 for Denver. NE had 4 last year.

My spreadsheet:


This whole discussion is based on false assumptions, that Belichick is some outlier. He is not.

 

[venecol]

For what it's worth DVOA posits that Special Teams account for on average 13% of a team's success (or failure), with their rule (now) being that the ratio is 4:3:1 Offense : Defense : Special_Teams.

Football Outsiders Basics (a.k.a. "Pregame Show") | Football Outsiders

A basic introduction to what we've learned since we started Football Outsiders in 2003.

www.footballoutsiders.com

With the Pats have the #1 ranked Special Teams last year, their numbers work out to that being worth 2 games last year, i.e. with average Special Teams last year's record would have been 5-11.

Jake Bailey was worth one win and Gunner was worth one win

Sounds like mumbo jumbo.