Welcome to PatsFans.com

Discussion Topic

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by AndyJohnson, Jul 7, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I could see this going either way, either as a good topic or a total failure, so we shall see. I know my opinion and am interested in everyone elses.

    The heart of the question is whether good players overcome weaknesses and liabilities elsewhere or whether the lack of weanesses equal the overall strength of a good team.

    A couple things to consider:
    -If I have the best DRE and the worst DLE in the league, my run D figures to be below average because there are going to be a whole lot more runs going to my R than my L.
    -On the other hand, if I am average at both what the other team will do may be less predictable.
    -The players surrounding a player will affect their play.
    -On average, half of the players on the field are below average. That means if your team is 11 average players you better at 5 spots, worse at 5, and the same at 1 as your opponent, and by definiition you have no liabilities.

    So, the questions are:

    -If you fielded a full team of exactly average players, would you be a good, bad or average team.
    The obvious answer is average since your players are average but what I'm looking for it the cumulaive effect of having no bad players at all on the field, so the second, more telling question is how would that team compare to:

    A team with half the players being the best at their position and half being the worst in the league.

    Discuss....
  2. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,626
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +12 / 1 / -2

    My Jersey:

    I don't believe it works that way.

    on defense, poor individual play can easily be exploited until that player is replaced.

    look what NT did for the pats between 2002 and 2003.
  3. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Doesnt work what way? I was asking which is better.

    Are you saying a team of average guys beats a team that has half great players and half awful ones?
    Or are you saying good NT play made everyone else better?
  4. Calciumee

    Calciumee PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    4,598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    This is an interesting point.

    I would say that it could be better in some games, and worse in others. It would all depend on the players they were against.

    If you had an average front seven, against an under average O-line, the average DBs will seem alot better than they are. Whereas, if the front seven were against an elite O-Line, and couldn't get near the QB, the average DBs could be made to look very poor.

    If you cannot protect your QB, your elite WRs won't be able to show as often, and if you have all the time in the world, and the ability to be an ok QB, your below WRs can look better than they are.
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2010
  5. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,626
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +12 / 1 / -2

    My Jersey:

    I'd take the team of average players ...... half great ones and half lousy ones leaves half of a field that can easily be exploited.

    I just used an example of what having a hole in one spot can do. having holes in 5 spots makes the greatness of the other 6 irrelevant. at least on defense. on offense, it is a little different.
  6. JR4

    JR4 In the Starting Line-up PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,733
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    It seems there a critical point. If you have too many serious weaknesses
    the best coach in the world won't be able to make a winning team.
    A weakness in a player has to be covered some way. I think this is
    where BB shines. He seems to know his players and has adjustments if
    he see a team is doing things to exploit it.
    (exception Pats-Giants superbowl)
    But even BB can't win if he has a team with too many weaknesses.
  7. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I am going to be a jerk and not really answer your exact question.


    I will take a team with no weaknesses over a team that is more top heavy but has weaknesses. I will not however agree that a team of all average players would beat a team with half studs and half duds as I think Brady to Moss would happen all day vs 11 average oponents even if the other 9 were duds and you are giving the benifit of some stud OLinemen.


    So I guess my answer is that the less weaknesses you have the better the team will be however you will never compete if you can match up vs the stars in this league.
  8. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    But remember we are saying every player is average. Average isnt bad.
    SO in your example, theoretically, Brady and Moss would produce their 'average' not totally dominate like their best game of the season.

    Taking it a step further:


    The all average team Can hold their own against your strength and exploit your weakness while the good or bad team will dominate you in some areas and get dominated in others.
  9. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    A pressure defense is better with 6 great players. A gap control defense is better with 11 average ones.

    A rookie coach with simple schemes wants the 6 great players on offense. An experienced coach with a complicated offense would do well the 11 average players on offense.

    Coaching and schemes...it's what makes the NFL special.
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2010
  10. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Interesting.
    I tend to think a lack of liabilities is more likely to succeed that a wealth of strengths coupled with equal liabilities for the same reason.
    You cannot control where the other team will attack you.
  11. TommyBrady12

    TommyBrady12 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    it depends on the coach - see 2001 patriots.
  12. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    2001 Patriots are at the heart of this.
    I think they were as close to the team with no liabilities and no overwhelming strengths as I have ever seen.
    As it occured, I felt that each part of the team could be used to exploit a weakness on the other team, to have an advantage against a medicore opponent in that area, but not be weak enough to get dominate by the best of the best.
    If you remember back, one of the cliams to fame was that we could play whatever style the opponent led us to want to.
  13. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    i dont think you followed my logic

    brady and moss are on the team of 5 great and six bad so why do they play average.

    my point is that if you give me 5 great and six crappy i dont care who the other 3 greats are brady and moss duo would torch a team of all averages
  14. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I'm saying that Brady and Moss would produce about what they do on average against a group of aerage players. The fact that you have 5 or 6 liabilities oin the field probably means they play worse. Where do you hide them? Give me 1 or 2 awful OL and I will make sure Brady never gets the ball to Moss. Put them at receiver and I take away Moss, then what do you do? and so on
  15. Gwedd

    Gwedd PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    4,896
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    No Mood
    I respectfully disagree. The team with all average players will, in almost every case, trump a team that is unbalanced.

    The problem with the Brady/Moss example is that it makes you a one-dimensional team. No matter how good the receiver is, or how magnificent the QB, the average guys know that that is where the ball is going. You become predictable, and the average team can find a way to counter that.

    With a team of average players, they can each find a way to support the others on the field. they become interchangeable and can spell eachother.

    The team with some great and others below average will end up draining it's talent through over-work because they will be getting NO support from the below-average guys. The Great players have to make a play EVERY time in order to carry the lesser players.

    Respects,
  16. AzPatsFan

    AzPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    5,736
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    That is easy. Three Superbowl victories and 4 appearances in 9 years...

    BB plans his teams and CAP expenditures to have no liabilities and still no liabilities even after losing starters, to injuries...
  17. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Thats the way I see, and to take it a step further, from about the end of 2004, the cap constraints took over the team building philosophy.
    Essentially to keep the team together after the 3 Vinces in 4 years would have required exceeding the cap by millions and millions. Naturally, that also means that to replace the players we could not afford to keep with equal players would also exceed the cap by millions and millions. We were drafting at the end of each round.
    It was virtually impossible, without just a bunch of dumb luck, to prevent the liabilities from happening. IMO, BB saw this coming, saw that under those cap constraints he needed to approach it differently and set out to build a team around its greatest strengths. We became a passing team, with huge resources spent on receivers. We tried to keep the front 7 together and overcome the weaknesses that were created in the secondary.
    Aside from the 2007 season when we essentially became so good at one thing that no one could stop and we almost went undefeated, the gradual trend of deteriorating by having more and deeper liabilities is clear. Its also clear to me that the trend has been reversed and we are heading in the other direction because we have turned the table on being able to afford our talent. Ironically, much like 2002, 2010 was a down year that was necessary for this transition.
    Frankly the biggest difference between the 2010 Pats and better versions was the remarkable disappearance of clutch play. That is a sympton of turnover.
    I think that 2007 disguises the trend but the Pats declined slowly and steadily from 03-04 to 10, and I see 10 as the start of the move in the opposite direction, altough, as is often the case, the results belie the changes that will lead to the turnaround.
  18. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    so what kind of performance do the average guys give you?:D:D:confused:
  19. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    In normall circamstances I agree but in the guidelines set forth by Andy

    I am fielding a team under his assumption if I have the best at one spot I have the worst at another.

    so 5 best 5 worst and one wild card VS a team of all average.

    Now 5 best are Moss, Brady, 2 of the best OL and either the best RB or best TE (for this I will take the TE).....how do you stop this with an average pass rush, an average secondary, and average LB play? scheme all you want you need talent to stop talent.....


    good thing is that in the NFL you can play the best of both and try and get the best talent while simaltaneuosly trying to eliminate your biggest weakness and in esence trying to create little or no weakness. Our team is evidence of this
  20. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    Huh what wait so except for arguably one of the greatest teams ever the team was trending down.
  21. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    You would have the 3 worst OL in the league, the worst RB and the worst WR opposite Moss.
    I jam and double Moss, hell, I can double the TE too, and then I blitz the hell out of you right over the 3 worst OL in the NFL.

    Thats the point, the best lineman in the NFL doesn't do you any good if the worst OLs guy is sacking your QB.

    I think you are drastically underrating the average player.
    As I tried to explain before. Brady and Moss on average face an average defense. So against an average defense they are not going to light it up, not any more than they light up all of the teams they play.
    The fact that you are putting 5 terrible players out there with them most likely means they would do a lot worse than they currently do, because those 5 players are going to get dominated.
  22. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Well that is kind of my point. I am going to use my capable average team of players to exploit the opponments weaknesses, no matter what they are. And when they look for my weaknesses, I don't have any, so my capable, average players will hold their own against what the opponent is best at, and dominate them where they are weak.
  23. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    we have not played an average schedule for like 10 seasons as we have been playing first place schedules every year.

    Also how does your logic apply to the bench? because in theory your 53 would be as good as your best and I wouldnt ever have to put my worst on the field or I would have to do it very rarely.
  24. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Dude, its a concept to discuss not an alternate universe, you should be able to answer the questions as well as I could. I would assume that your backups are a step down from starters.
    And the difference between an average schedule and a first place schedule is 2 games, and historically last years records have no correlation to this years, meaning in reality first place teams don't play harded schedules any more often than they play easier ones.

    The basic concept here is do you want a team with a couple of studs carrying it, with sucky guys around them or a balanced team that isnt outstanding at anything but isnt bad at anything either.
  25. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,626
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +12 / 1 / -2

    My Jersey:

    you can have crappy players in places on offense and still be effective.

    you can have a crappy OL and still score your share of points.

    if you have a crappy DL, you won't stop anyone from scoring points.

    holes on defense are exploited and much harder to scheme around. offenses can scheme around weaknesses much easier.
  26. Frezo

    Frezo Rookie

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #50 Jersey
    If BB is coaching both teams, the average team wins because it will be likely that BB would have 11 coach-able players. If, let's say, Wade Phillips is coaching both teams then the outcome would be a toss up because the average team would more likely be out of position to deal with the BIG plays from the 5 great players who can rely more on their pure talent. If Rex Ryan is coaching both teams utility poles within a one mile radius of the stadium will tilt inward.
  27. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +20 / 1 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I think I am answering your question....you aren't comparing my team to yours fairly. You wouldn't have a team with no weakness you would have a team with virtually all weakness...your team would consist of back ups and boderline starters mine would have some of the best in the league some average and some of the worst on the bench.
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2010
  28. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    No. My team, by the definition of the question, would be averae at everything and have the league average starter at every position. That is the 16th or 17th best QB, RB, etc. I would have no weakneses, that was the point. You would be trading weaknesses for strengths.
    Lets use the secondary as an example.

    Rank all of the starters in the league.
    I would have say, the 16th and 48th best and you would have the best and the worst. In other words both of mine are capable and you have one that is great and one that is poor.
    Same with safeties, I get 2 quality guys you get one of the best and one of the worst.

    I agree that if you thought the parameters where that my starters were the average player ON A ROSTER my team would be awful and lose every game, but I am saying the starters are average STARTERS.
    That means that, on average half of my guys are somewhat better than the guy across from them and half are somewhat worse, but I sacrifice being dominant at anything for the sake of not being dominanted by anyone.
  29. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,845
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    On the other hand, if you have crappy players on offense it can take away from your strength. For example you need every block to run the ball. You can have 4 OL pancake their guys and it means nothing if the 5th allows a tackle for loss.
    On defense you can mitigate the weakness maybe a little better.
    If you play 2 gap you have 2 players responsible for each gap so a bad player in between 2 good ones could be hidden. In a one gap, like the Indy D, you accept bad plays in order to get one good one to kill a drive.
    If your weakness is coverage you can play a lot of zone to mitigate it.

    Not saying I disagree, just looking at the opposite viewpoint.
  30. patriot lifer

    patriot lifer Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    the bottom line is always going to be whether or not the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I remember Fred Taylor commenting on the Jaguars in his final year with them. He said that the team was the most talented one that he had been on that didn't perform well. A team could have all average players, but if they aren't the "right 53" as BB would say, then they will be mediocre. Conversely, if they're the "right 53" then they will outperform the "sum of the parts." Same goes with having some really good players, and some lousy ones. If there's synergy, the team will flourish, which is the goal of every head coach and gm. So to answer the original question, I don't think it matters.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page