Giant Advantages ?

[Watson's IQ]

If we are talking about running games, and how teams are playing now, why isnt our running game a tremendous advantage? We have run the ball better than the Giants in the playoffs....against better teams.

He would prefer to compare how the Giants are running now against how Maroney ran earlier in the year. If it benefited his argument for the Giants for it to be the other way around, that's how he'd present it. He's been cherry picking his stats since the first post, and despite us repeatedly calling him on it, he doesn't seem to understand why it's a joke.

Still, arguing with him is a good way to pass the time.

 

[bradmahn]

Plaxico Burress had four catches for 84 yards and two TDs against the Patriots. His two TDs came against players not named Ellis Hobbs (and actually on the final TD of the game, his defender fell down). Ellis had good coverage on Burress on the 52 yard reception, but there was that height thing. Burress had another ten yard catch in that drive (the first of the game) and didn't get anything against Hobbs FOR THE REST OF THE GAME. In fact Hobbs intercepted a ball thrown to Burress. Height is the only advantage Burress had on Hobbs and it helped him once in sixty minutes of football. If Hobbs is covering Burress for the majority of this game and allows two receptions and intercepts a ball I'll be happy with his performance.

 

[Watson's IQ]

I see you too suffer from "reading too much between the line syndrom".
I am saying the combination of Bradshaw/Jacobs is far far better than
Jacobs alone or Bradshaw alone. The sum is greater than the parts...

In the first game you faced Jacobs alone... this time you won't be so lucky.



The Bucs, Pack, and Cowboys all have better run defenses and give up fewer yards per carry compared to the Pats. If the Giants get 37 carries against the Pats looke for close to 150 yards and fairly good convincing win.

I feel there is some chance they can do that against your run defense... the problem is when your offense starts controlling the clock and scoring points you can't afford to keep running the ball.

I thought if you had time to sleep on it, you wouldn't be so out of your mind, but that's clearly not the case. You're back for more.

STOP CHERRY PICKING STATS!!!

If you want to talk about how well Jacobs and Bradshaw work in tandem NOW, compare that to how the Patriots run defense is playing NOW. To do anything else is the height of idiocy.

 

[Oswlek]

The Bucs, Pack, and Cowboys all have better run defenses and give up fewer yards per carry compared to the Pats. If the Giants get 37 carries against the Pats looke for close to 150 yards and fairly good convincing win.

It seems that someone needs to bone up on "causation" and "correlation".

The Giants will only run for 37 times if their defense stops NE and their passing game puts some points on the board.

 

[Watson's IQ]

Furthermore, if you want to look at how well the Giants running game is playing NOW with Jacobs and Bradshaw, than please also mention how the Patriots running game is playing NOW with Maroney and Faulk.

Hint: Pretty damned well.

 

[leek21]

It is you that seems to want some and ignore others. We are asking you which one.

BTW, the reason that NY was able to rush so much was because NY was able to shut down GB's and Dallas' offenses. If they can hold NE to 20 points, then they deserve to win. But there is some real questions as to whether NY can do so. If NE scores more than 30 points, NY won't be able to run that much and stay in the game.

I agree, if NE's offense scores early and often Giants would be foolish to try to continue establishing a running game. They would be forced to go to the air... and would likely lose that match up.

If things go the Giants way.... then Giants offense controls the clock with a power running game and short passing attack. This will keep Brady off the field and hope the Giants D can come up with some big stops or a turnover.
Reverse the TOP from last game to Giants 36.5 minutes PAts 23.5 minutes and there is little chance for the Pats to win.

That's the best chance the Giants have.... lucky for the Giants they do have a good run offense and the Pats run defense isn't their strongest point.

 

[Ring 6]

I see you too suffer from "reading too much between the line syndrom".
I am saying the combination of Bradshaw/Jacobs is far far better than
Jacobs alone or Bradshaw alone. The sum is greater than the parts...

In the first game you faced Jacobs alone... this time you won't be so lucky.



The Bucs, Pack, and Cowboys all have better run defenses and give up fewer yards per carry compared to the Pats. If the Giants get 37 carries against the Pats looke for close to 150 yards and fairly good convincing win.

I feel there is some chance they can do that against your run defense... the problem is when your offense starts controlling the clock and scoring points you can't afford to keep running the ball.

Do you realize how ludicrous your comments are and do them on purpose?
You are telling me now that your secret weapon to beat the best team ever is a back running back taking carries away from your starter?
By the way it worked better ONCE, against the Bills.

The Bucs, Cowboys, and Packers only have better run defenses than the Pats in your mind, and in your narrowly defined stats. What was the avg yards per rush those teams allowed when ahead by 21 points? That is the only way you are going to run on this defense, when WE WANT YOU TO, and that is where the unreliable ypc stat comes from.

You wont run 37 times. If you try to do that you will be off the field because you cannot sustain drives.
Almost every team we have faced have tried to run the ball and eat the clock. None have been successful. Your offense is FAR from impressing me that it can be the one that will. We have faced many better offenses this year who could not do what you are sure yours will.

 

[Watson's IQ]

I agree, if NE's offense scores early and often Giants would be foolish to try to continue establishing a running game. They would be forced to go to the air... and would likely lose that match up.

If things go the Giants way.... then Giants offense controls the clock with a power running game and short passing attack. This will keep Brady off the field and hope the Giants D can come up with some big stops or a turnover.
Reverse the TOP from last game to Giants 36.5 minutes PAts 23.5 minutes and there is little chance for the Pats to win.

That's the best chance the Giants have.... lucky for the Giants they do have a good run offense and the Pats run defense isn't their strongest point.

Oh, so it's that easy? I swear you get more unbelievable by the post.

Since you refuse to acknowledge the ways in which several of us have pointed out the obvious flaws in your logic, and prefer to keep hammering home the same initially incorrect points, I really don't see any way we can reason you into using some stats which actually correlate to one another.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree, if NE's offense scores early and often Giants would be foolish to try to continue establishing a running game. They would be forced to go to the air... and would likely lose that match up.

If things go the Giants way.... then Giants offense controls the clock with a power running game and short passing attack. This will keep Brady off the field and hope the Giants D can come up with some big stops or a turnover.
Reverse the TOP from last game to Giants 36.5 minutes PAts 23.5 minutes and there is little chance for the Pats to win.

That's the best chance the Giants have.... lucky for the Giants they do have a good run offense and the Pats run defense isn't their strongest point.

First of all, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHO THE GIANTS ARE PLAYING AGAINST?
You have a better chance of getting 5 kick return TDs than you do of controlling the ball for 36.5 minutes.
We did that in the first game BECAUSE WE ARE BETTER.
Ironically, if you were to do that, you would still lose, because our 23.5 would be quick scoring drives. You would be playing from behind and eating the clock, which is what we want when we have an imsurmountable lead.

I give you credit for trying, but the Giants have absolutely zero chance to win this game. They simply are not good enough.

 

[Watson's IQ]

I give you credit for trying, but the Giants have absolutely zero chance to win this game. They simply are not good enough.

That's not helping. The Giants DO have a chance to win. What we've been trying to make him see is that most of the "advantages" he is concocting do not in fact exist in the present matchup. Sometimes, the better team in every way loses, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that the Giants could pull it off. But it won't have been because they're "better" in any of the ways Leek is suggesting.

What I'm really up in arms about is him repeatedly molesting (can't thing of a better word for it) the stats to try and make them say what he wants them to say.

 

[Oswlek]

I agree, if NE's offense scores early and often Giants would be foolish to try to continue establishing a running game. They would be forced to go to the air... and would likely lose that match up.

If things go the Giants way.... then Giants offense controls the clock with a power running game and short passing attack. This will keep Brady off the field and hope the Giants D can come up with some big stops or a turnover.
Reverse the TOP from last game to Giants 36.5 minutes PAts 23.5 minutes and there is little chance for the Pats to win.

That's the best chance the Giants have.... lucky for the Giants they do have a good run offense and the Pats run defense isn't their strongest point.

But you don't reverse the TOP by running, you reverse it by stopping NE's offense. Even when NE is pass heavy, they still run a lot of time off the clock.

 

[Watson's IQ]

But you don't reverse the TOP by running, you reverse it by stopping NE's offense. Even when NE is pass heavy, they still run a lot of time off the clock.

It sounds like a Steelers fan talking about "smash mouth, control the clock" football when he talks like this. It's been 18 games and some people still haven't figured out that the Patriots eat clock with their passing game better than most teams do with running the ball. How some haven't figured out that Tom Brady's high completion percentage correlates to the clock running absolutely boggles the mind.

 

[TruthSeeker]

The EXACT same arguments were made by Cowboy fans... they beat the Giants twice, statistically had a better offense... and a fairly equal level defense. They couldn't get past the numbers.

The EXACT same arguments were made by Green Bay fans.. they beat the Giants in the regular season, statistically had a better offense.. and fairly equal level defense. They couldn't get past the numbers.

We understand, you've seen this happen twice in a row and the Giants ended up winning a close game against the Cowboys and an OT game against the Packers.

For us at patsfans.com, this is the nineteenth time in a row we've had fans come in and tell us why their team will win (usually with optimistic assessments of their teams and lack of understanding of the Patriots). Please forgive us if it appears we've run out of patience.

 

[Deus Irae]

That's not helping. The Giants DO have a chance to win. What we've been trying to make him see is that most of the "advantages" he is concocting do not in fact exist in the present matchup. Sometimes, the better team in every way loses, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that the Giants could pull it off. But it won't have been because they're "better" in any of the ways Leek is suggesting.

What I'm really up in arms about is him repeatedly molesting (can't thing of a better word for it) the stats to try and make them say what he wants them to say.

He's a troll. He's just not cussing while he's trolling. Don't waste your energy getting 'up in arms'. Engage him realizing that he's not looking for a real discussion, and view it as the time killer that it is.

 

[Watson's IQ]

He's a troll. He's just not cussing while he's trolling. Don't waste your energy getting 'up in arms'. Engage him realizing that he's not looking for a real discussion, and view it as the time killer that it is.

Oh, I acknowledged about 15 pages ago that he's revealed his true "trolling" colors when he continued to ignore the rational arguments presented to him in favor of his own, even after their flaws were pointed out.

As you said, just killing time now, but it's more fun to hammer on a Giants fan who sticks around for it than to read about Tom Brady's ankle for another 5 days.

 

[leek21]

I'm fine using both. But what I'm not fine with is you saying the Giants are a much better rushing team with Bradshaw and Jacobs (meaning, late in the season) but then insist on pitting that against rush defense stats for the whole season.

If you want to talk about how the Giants are playing NOW (Jacobs-Bradshaw), compare it to how the Patriots are playing NOW (good run D in the playoffs). If you want to talk about how the Giants played all season, compare it to how the Patriots played all season. Just don't mix and match, it's the very definition of cherry picking, and it's utterly laughable.

Let me break it down so you can understand:

1) Giants have had a significant change in the past 5 weeks to their running game. ie. Jacobs is now sharing carries with Bradshaw.
=> Feel free to use the Giants regular season stats if you insist. I don't mind, and have never protested against it.

2) Patriots have not made any significant change to their run defense.
=> I used the Pats regular season stats because they are more represtantive then 2 games.

Your protest to me seems like frustration as opposed to sound logic.

 

[Watson's IQ]

Let me break it down so you can understand:

1) Giants have had a significant change in the past 5 weeks to their running game. ie. Jacobs is now sharing carries with Bradshaw.
=> Feel free to use the Giants regular season stats if you insist. I don't mind, and have never protested against it.

2) Patriots have not made any significant change to their run defense.
=> I used the Pats regular season stats because they are more represtantive then 2 games.

Your protest to me seems like frustration as opposed to sound logic.

Your points make the implication that changes in the way a unit plays are only based on changes in personnel. That's dumb.

The Patriots run defense was never as bad in the first place as people claimed. As many have pointed out, and you've conveniently ignored, many of those stats were accumulated late in games when the Patriots were basically conceding rushing yards.

Furthermore, if you want to talk about how the Giants run defense displays a different dynamic with Bradshaw and Jacobs sharing carries, than you also have to acknowledge that the Pats run defense has clamped down when it counted most.

Another point you've yet to touch on in your "cogent" analysis. For all your talk of the Giants strong running game, the Patriots have had SIGNIFICANTLY more production out of their running backs so far in the post-season than the Giants have. This is not a coincidence, but the result of a specific strategy of holding Maroney back to keep him fresh for the postseason.

 

[RayClay]

I realize the fact New England is a great team, that being said the Giants do have some advantages over New England:

When Giants are on Offense:

1) Run Jacobs and Bradshaw. Jacobs is 264 pounds and 6"4. In front of Jacobs the Giants have FB Madison Hedge**** who is 6"3 and 266 pounds.

How will your old linebackers stand up to that kind of pounding ?

Also don't forget Giants have Bradshaw a small, quick, yet powerful running back. He missed the first game against NE, but will be playing in the SB.

Advantage Giants.

2) If the running game gets going it will open up the play action pass. Boss, Toomer, and Smith will be open on the short passes as your LBers will be too concerned about the running game. Can you say "play action pass" ?

Advantage Giants

3) Hobbs vs. Burress. A total mismatch. Hobbs is too short to cover Burress.
Burress will be a deep threat all game, even if he doesn't make one deep catch.

Advantage Giants.

4) Steve Smith is a rookie who was injured for a good part of the season. He is coming on strong and can make clutch receptions. Can Gay and/or Meriweather keep up with him ?

Advantage Giants.

When the Giants are on Defense:

Your offense is too damn good, not much teams can do to stop it.
However Giants do have some advantages:

1) Strahan, Osi, and Tuck. All great pass rushers. Giants might be able
to get pressure on Brady and force him to rush his throws.

Not really an advantage against your OL, but it could be.

2) Giants have great depth and CB. Madison, Webster, Ross, Dockery and McQuarters. All of these guys could be starters and have started throughout the season. Dockery is expected back for the SB.

Dockery is small and quick, a perfect player to lineup against Welker. Dockery missed the first game and Welker had a big day.

Moss was contained by Madison in the first game until he got injured... then Moss lit up the Giants. Madison will be back for the SB.

Stalworth/Gaffney vs. Ross/Webster is a draw.

Obviously NE gets the overall advantage

3) Watson/Maroney/Faulk as receivers.... this is what the Giants must stop and the Giants LBers are great at coverage. Lucky the Giants have extra CBs to help contain Faulk.

Advantage NE.

4) Maroney vs. Giants Rush defense.

Giants rush defense is solid.

Advantage Giants.



Should be a close game: Giants 38 New England 34

Giants have a great pass rush. You're getting over excited otherwise.

If they want to pound it up the middle, playing right into our hands. Our DLine is huge, young and talented and players get stronger in their 30s-40s, not weaker.

Little running backs can be a problem, but do you seriously think your tandem is better than Taylor and Drew of the Jags? Check their results and get back to me.

 

[TripleOption]

Let me break it down so you can understand:

1) Giants have had a significant change in the past 5 weeks to their running game. ie. Jacobs is now sharing carries with Bradshaw.
=> Feel free to use the Giants regular season stats if you insist. I don't mind, and have never protested against it.

2) Patriots have not made any significant change to their run defense.
=> I used the Pats regular season stats because they are more represtantive then 2 games.

Your protest to me seems like frustration as opposed to sound logic.

If the Pats want to stop the run, they do. Case in point: Your Giants.

Now let ME break it down so YOU understand:

The Giants are going to lose. I know it, you know, and most importantly, the Giants know it.

Now GFY.

 

[RayClay]

You have an excellent point.
While we were setting an alltime NFL record for point differential, and playing games with TREMENDOUS leads on opponents, we were easy to run on WHILE PLAYING PREVENT DEFENSE.
I wold expect once we are up about 35-7, your vaunted running game will get a very nice yards per carry.

Saved me a post.