Curran: Pats' reliance on the run may not be a good thing

[letekro]

Give me Anquan Boldin and keep the rest of the 49ers pass offense, if you ask me. He's the reason that Colin Kaepernick can move around and sling it. Boldin is a very special big, physical receiver with great hands who can out-muscle anybody for the ball in space. The Ravens would have won their division if they'd kept Boldin.

But you know what? None of this matters.

The Patriots have to game plan for the Broncos defense who will not have their best pass rusher and have a weak secondary, especially if Brady is looking at Quentin Jammer and Champ Bailey in their nickel defense.

Neither of those guys can risk pressing at the line of scrimmage lest they get burned deep, and neither one of those guys can stay with Amendola, Edelman, Vereen or KT in space. With the Patriots' running game the way it is, the Broncos will have a very hard time dropping anybody into coverage to help out.

I would anticipate a pretty "efficient" passing attack next week under the circumstances.

I don't disagree with you about the Broncos game. We can stress their defense with our run game and passing options, limited though they may be.

And I love Boldin, but Kap stunk up the joint until Crabtree came back, even though Boldin was healthy. It is the combination of Boldin (crossing routes), Crabtree (outside the numbers), and Davis (seam routes), that is difficult to defend.

 

[primetime]

Pats are down to three slot receivers.

They're really not. Amendola, Edelman, and Collie are all more than capable of playing outside and I don't think the drop-off from Thompkins to Collie is a drop-off at all. Collie and Thompkins are the same size, for what it's worth.

 

[letekro]

And I have told you that is idiotic.



I did not appeal to statistics. I used them in response to your argument that the games vs the Panthers are part of your reason. Clearly they support the opposite of your argument.


You are trying to slice and dice and end up with 3 plays all season to make your argument.
First, the passing game sucks.
Then, you can't count Cleveland because it was prevent defense
Then you can't count Miami because of an injury.
Then you can't count any games Gronk played in.
So sooner or later you find an excuse for every game that doesnt fit your mold.



Your intention is to dodge reality, make excuses for what doesn't support your predetermined conclusion and dance around everything else.
There are zero games that support your conclusion.

Read my posts, homie. I'm giving you Cleveland and Miami. As I've said six times, if those are the shining examples of our gronkless pass offense, I have concerns.

And as to why Gronkless games shouldn't be counted, do I really need to explain why??

There are reasons to be concerned. They are borne out by the stats (which you ignore), which show a lack of efficiency, and they are borne out on the field, where receivers are not running free on standard dropbacks (which you either ignore or aren't seeing).

 

[ivanvamp]

Exactly on point. Big trouble next week if the Pats get behind.

Like earlier in the year when they were down 24-0 and still won?

FWIW, here's Brady's numbers against Denver in his last four games vs. the Broncos:

12/18/11, at Den: 23-34 (67.7%), 320 yds, 9.4 ypa, 2 td, 0 int, 117.3 rating
1/14/12, vs Den: 26-34 (76.5%), 363 yds, 10.7 ypa, 6 td, 1 int, 137.6 rating
10/7/12, vs Den: 23-31 (74.2%), 223 yds, 7.2 ypa, 1 td, 0 int, 104.6 rating
11/24/13, vs Den: 34-50 (68.0%), 344 yds, 6.9 ypa, 3 td, 0 int, 107.4 rating

AVERAGE GAME: 27-37 (72.9%), 313 yds, 8.5 yap, 3 td, 0 int

So am I worried if Brady "has" to throw? Um……no.

 

[primetime]

My description of the passer efficiency rating is essentially correct. Do you prefer QBR, because Kapernick wins there too, 68-61. My suspicion is that your belief is that only statistics that back up your worldview are relevant, but hope springs eternal that you'll prove me wrong.

While passer rating is an actual index that is the results four mathematical equations added together, QBR is just completely made up.

Brady was 6th in DYAR, and Kaepernick was 8th this season (FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | QUARTERBACKS 2013). While still imperfect, this is a better statistic than passer rating and substantially better than QBR. The difference isn't that great and when you take Kaepernick's running versus Brady's into account, the actual difference is negligible.

 

[ivanvamp]

Guys, what we're seeing in the Patriots is, for the most part, exactly what I've been longing for for about 4 years now: A power running team that still has the best QB in the world operating efficiently, and a playmaking defense with athletes all over the field.

Are they at full strength? Clearly, no. But they've shown that, even without Gronk, they can win almost any style of game - running, passing, making big plays on defense, in any kind of weather. They can get up big and hold a lead, or they can come back from a big deficit.

Doesn't mean they'll win in Denver, but I think this team has the ability to beat any of the other three remaining teams.

 

[Ring 6]

My description of the passer efficiency rating is essentially correct.

No it really isnt.

Do you prefer QBR, because Kapernick wins there too, 68-61. My suspicion is that your belief is that only statistics that back up your worldview are relevant, but hope springs eternal that you'll prove me wrong.

QB play is not effectively judged by statistics, especially without any context. Simple as that.

Most quarterbacks that throw it 50+ times in a game are going to finish with 300+ yards, so I'm not really persuaded by the yardage totals in the MIA and CLE games.

Wait. You are discussing whether the Patriots can be effective in a game where they have to throw a lot, and yards, first downs, and points where they have to throw a lot are irrelevent?
You made the statement they didnt move the ball. So 450+ yards and 30 1st downs in each game are irrelevant facts?

Again, that was the best they've been through the air without gronk, and in my view, it wasn't very good. If you think it was very good, then we just have a difference of opinion.

Yes I think over 450 yards of offense and 30 first downs is in fact moving the ball very well.
If we must throw this week and we end up with over 450 yards and 30 first downs, we will win the game.

 

[Ring 6]

Read my posts, homie. I'm giving you Cleveland and Miami. As I've said six times, if those are the shining examples of our gronkless pass offense, I have concerns.

And as to why Gronkless games shouldn't be counted, do I really need to explain why??

There are reasons to be concerned. They are borne out by the stats (which you ignore), which show a lack of efficiency, and they are borne out on the field, where receivers are not running free on standard dropbacks (which you either ignore or aren't seeing).

Which games exactly are you saying the Patriots lacked efficiency.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Guys, what we're seeing in the Patriots is, for the most part, exactly what I've been longing for for about 4 years now: A power running team that still has the best QB in the world operating efficiently, and a playmaking defense with athletes all over the field.

Are they at full strength? Clearly, no. But they've shown that, even without Gronk, they can win almost any style of game - running, passing, making big plays on defense, in any kind of weather. They can get up big and hold a lead, or they can come back from a big deficit.

Doesn't mean they'll win in Denver, but I think this team has the ability to beat any of the other three remaining teams.

Nailed it.

Now we all understand that losing Hernandez and Gronkowski and a dozen other guys on offense and defense wasn't part of the game plan... but Belichick DID purposefully assemble a high quality RB by committee that works and where guys can remain fresh - basically 3 specialist RBs

The ONE time I've truly been flabbergasted by McDaniels horrendous play calling this season, if memory serves, was the Carolina game where he inexplicably abandoned what had been proven a strong running game (101 yard, Blount lead the pack with 49 yards - great average from RBs - just a lot fewer carries)

Using the run to set up the pass is I think in part what allowed Amandola and Edelman to be open for the big plays they were - because otherwise those guys are both going to be draped with coverage if they're being looked to as the first option as opposed to the run.

Overall I'm less concerend about our offense for the next game - and need to be more concerned about the defense. No offense to our D or the Colts, but if the Colts had a QB like Manning under center (or at least one who didn't give up so may picks), it would have been a totally different game.

 

[letekro]

Which games exactly are you saying the Patriots lacked efficiency.

Since gronk went down the passing game has not been efficient. For the most part, the passing game has not been efficient without gronk in recent times.

MIA and CLE were the best of the lot but it wasn't pretty and the pass efficiency numbers were right at the league average over the course of those 2 games.

 

[letekro]

Like earlier in the year when they were down 24-0 and still won?

FWIW, here's Brady's numbers against Denver in his last four games vs. the Broncos:

12/18/11, at Den: 23-34 (67.7%), 320 yds, 9.4 ypa, 2 td, 0 int, 117.3 rating
1/14/12, vs Den: 26-34 (76.5%), 363 yds, 10.7 ypa, 6 td, 1 int, 137.6 rating
10/7/12, vs Den: 23-31 (74.2%), 223 yds, 7.2 ypa, 1 td, 0 int, 104.6 rating
11/24/13, vs Den: 34-50 (68.0%), 344 yds, 6.9 ypa, 3 td, 0 int, 107.4 rating

AVERAGE GAME: 27-37 (72.9%), 313 yds, 8.5 yap, 3 td, 0 int

So am I worried if Brady "has" to throw? Um……no.

Why respond to me here. The Pats are dominant with Gronkowski. I know this. But he's not playing right now.

 

[Ring 6]

Since gronk went down the passing game has not been efficient. For the most part, the passing game has not been efficient without gronk in recent times.

MIA and CLE were the best of the lot but it wasn't pretty and the pass efficiency numbers were right at the league average over the course of those 2 games.

Since Gronk went down, the Patriots have averaged 34.5 ppg. Thats pretty efficient.

 

[letekro]

Since Gronk went down, the Patriots have averaged 34.5 ppg. Thats pretty efficient.

They've been great. As you know, my concern was about the passing game, not the rest of the team.

 

[ALP]

This offense doesn't have a choice, we need the run to be successful

 

[ivanvamp]

Why respond to me here. The Pats are dominant with Gronkowski. I know this. But he's not playing right now.

How many points do you think the Patriots will score this weekend?

 

[Ring 6]

They've been great. As you know, my concern was about the passing game, not the rest of the team.

The passing game is a large part of that. You cannot put up those points if your passing game fails. Back to the start. Running because you can is not a damnation of the passing game,its a gameplan choice heavily related to conditions and opponents, and game situation.
Of course, you used the 49ers scoring 23 points yesterday as proof Kaepernick is better than Brady, so who knows what twist will come next.

 

[letekro]

The passing game is a large part of that. You cannot put up those points if your passing game fails. Back to the start. Running because you can is not a damnation of the passing game,its a gameplan choice heavily related to conditions and opponents, and game situation.
Of course, you used the 49ers scoring 23 points yesterday as proof Kaepernick is better than Brady, so who knows what twist will come next.

Pretty brazen statement considering I repeatedly said Brady is better. Like your alter ego Deus, you show no interest in pursuing intellectual honesty, so here I get off this crazy train

 

[letekro]

How many points do you think the Patriots will score this weekend?

Don't know. You should ask NostraJohnson, or after yesterday, NostraIan (couldn't resist)

 

[Ring 6]

Pretty brazen statement considering I repeatedly said Brady is better. Like your alter ego Deus, you show no interest in pursuing intellectual honesty, so here I get off this crazy train

Actually you are right you said Kaepernicks passing offense is better than Bradys. I see it as the same thing, since both are equally bizarre.
You have changed from supporting a column saying the excellent running game may be a problem, to discounting games because they were good games and you want to prove the sky is falling, to using 23 points scored in 2 games as proof SF passing offense is better, to saying the pass offense has been poor while the team scored 34.5 ppg, to God knows what will come next.
You are entitled to your opinion, and you are not required to have one that is consistent with the facts. It would just make the discussion easier if you stayed in one place.
In any event, I feel more confident in my opinion after this discussion than before it so thanks for exposing your point of view.
I see no point in beating the dead horse.
But hey thanks for deteriorating into personal insults, that was special.

 

[Ring 6]

Don't know. You should ask NostraJohnson, or after yesterday, NostraIan (couldn't resist)

Pretty funny how you are the guy saying you know what will happen, yet you throw a personal attack at me. Stay classy leterko. Or get classy I should say.