My knock on Maroney and the offense

[Ring 6]

The clandestine way the Pats run their organization is way overstated. Media people do get information from sources and stuff does get leaked from inside the confines of the walls of Gillette. The Pats are more tight lipped than virtually any organization in the league, but it is impossible for them to plug every leak out there.

OK, so give me 3 examples of where the media was able to report what the coaching staffs opinion of a player was. Not reporters saying what they think, but actual OPINIONS of players by the coaches that got to the media.
If it is 'way overrated' 3 should be easy for you to find.

 

[supafly]

I stand corrected on Ellis. However,stats do not tell the whole story. First and foremost, the team was helped by getting to face some of the worst run defenses in the league. They only played 5 games against "top 10" Run Defenses. They hung 257 yards on the Broncos (30th) and 277 yards on Oakland (27th) for a total of 534 yards. That was 23% of their rushing yards for the year in 2 games. If you add in the KC game and the 2 Buffalo games, then you have another 438 yards. Almost 1000 yards in 5 games against some of the worst run defenses. Am I supposed to be impressed by that? Should anyone?

I see where you are going with the bad rushing defensive team thing, but you can only play the schedule they give you. I am sure over the past 50 yrs we have faced some bad run defenses too, but didn't put up top 3 franchise running numbers. Like I said, I see your point--but it's not their fault they had a couple big rushing games, and I'm sure it's happened plenty of yrs in the past.
So yeah, maybe you should give them a little bit more credit. I know you can only tell how good you really are by playing top tier defenses, but it was still a very impressive rushing performance. I don't know if blaming our softer schedule is really fair, because the team still overcame a lot.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

This post is 100% gossip and conjecture.
Please show me a viable source that reports what the COACHING STAFF tells Maroney that he fails to follow.
Please show me anywhere that he has been shown to not follow the play the way it is drawn up. Show me anything that says he 'is always going for the homerun'.

Not of this is backed by a sliver of evidence, and none of it is even true either.

First of all I posted that this was purely observation.

Secondly, anouncers, writers, and radio guys talk to players, coaches and team personel throughout the season, not necessarily only the air. If a writer tallks to multiple players and he is told that Maroney doesn't hit the hole he is supposed to hit that classifies as inside info but not info that can be attributed. When I watch a game and the national broadcasters mention the same thing in multiple games it is either an issue that they all see or it is something that has been mentioned to them. Add in the writers who critique the games and claim the same tendency, and the radio guys whose job is to critique the game and says the same thing and you have a trend. The idea could be a case of group think, or it is a case of somebody or somebodies telling the same story to multiple people.

Either way, it is a problem that has become fairly obvious. Maroney is a very talented back who has not lived up to his potential. The NFL is full of those types of people. Some of them are due to injury, some are due to lack of listening skills and some are a combination of both. If I had to guess, Maroney's problem is the injury classification. But that doesn't mean I don't think there is a possibility he just doesn't do what his coaches want him to do.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Why does Morris have to be "#1"? Maroney and Morris have nearly identical rushing stats when you take out the stat padding games.

Just that Morris was #1 at the end of last season and Maroney is coming off of surgery. I believe that the Pats want Maroney to become the undeniable #1 back on the team, but he has to do something to prove he is up to the job.

 

[Ring 6]

The clandestine way the Pats run their organization is way overstated. Media people do get information from sources and stuff does get leaked from inside the confines of the walls of Gillette. The Pats are more tight lipped than virtually any organization in the league, but it is impossible for them to plug every leak out there.

I think you are also misrepresenting the point.
To say the organization is 'clandestine' and things 'get leaked' is not really what we are talking about here.
We are talking about a philosophy of coaching a team that includes the belief that you evaluate, teach and coach players by communicating with them about their strengths, weaknesses, areas to improve, etc, and that there is no purpose in sharing player evaluation, coaching and teaching issues with a reporter.
Your approach sounds like there are many reasons that coaches would want to tell reporters what their assessment of players are, and the Pats police them to make sure they don't go and do that.
While, in fact, there is no motivation for the coaches to share evaluations and opinions of players with the media.
There is no 'leak to plug' there is simply a sound philosophy that it is silly to discuss coachings opinions of players with the media.

 

[Rob0729]

OK, so give me 3 examples of where the media was able to report what the coaching staffs opinion of a player was. Not reporters saying what they think, but actual OPINIONS of players by the coaches that got to the media.
If it is 'way overrated' 3 should be easy for you to find.

1.) Michael Felger saying that the Pats were going to draft Ty Warren. Said that they love that guy and were going to draft him with one of their two first rounders.
2.) Doug Gabriel was benched because he did not take criticism of how he fumbled the ball well.
3.) Michael Felger stating in the Chad Jackson's rookie season that the coaching staff felt he had maturity issues
4.) Michael Holley stating the Pats would draft Mayo. Granted he portrayed it as opinion, but it was clear that it was inside information
5.) Michael Smith stating that the coaching staff felt Brady was ahead of schedule (also reported by Charlie Casserly, Shira Springer, and others).

Do I need to go on? Those are the ones I came up with off the top of my head. I'm sure I can go back and find more. You were right. It was pretty easy.

 

[DaBruinz]

Flawed. Any player or team that compiles impressive stats will compile more against bad teams and less against good teams. If you play 16 games in a 32 team league AVERAGE would be to face the 31st or 32nd, AND 29 or 30 AND 27 or 28 AND 25 or 26 AND 23 or 24.
In other words, it would be average to play 5 games against the bottom 10 teams in the league.
If you do, then how can you belittle the stats because of the schedule?
How many do you want them to play against 'top 10 defenses'? 5 is exactly what it should be, meaning based upon that one criteria their stats are on an even playing field, schedule-wise.

Andy - please show me where they take into considering the law of averages when scheduling the season. You and I both know that they don't.

Another thing to take into consideration, Andy, is that I was looking at the RUN DEFENSE portion of the game, not the overall defense. The numbers I used came directly from NFL.COM. Reality is that just because a team has the best run defense doesn't mean it has the best overall defense. Look at New England. They had the 10th rated defense in the league, based on yards allowed. Yet they were ranked 11th against the pass and 15th against the run. The Vikings had the #1 rushing defense, but the 18th passing defense.

Yes, in a perfect world, it would all balance out. But this world isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

And its not flawed to discard numbers that are significant aberrations. And that is what I did with Maroney and Morris. And, in doing so, what was found? That they have nearly identical stats except for receiving. Morris gets more receptions while Maroney has the higher Yards per reception.

 

[Ring 6]

First of all I posted that this was purely observation.

Secondly, anouncers, writers, and radio guys talk to players, coaches and team personel throughout the season, not necessarily only the air. If a writer tallks to multiple players and he is told that Maroney doesn't hit the hole he is supposed to hit that classifies as inside info but not info that can be attributed. When I watch a game and the national broadcasters mention the same thing in multiple games it is either an issue that they all see or it is something that has been mentioned to them. Add in the writers who critique the games and claim the same tendency, and the radio guys whose job is to critique the game and says the same thing and you have a trend. The idea could be a case of group think, or it is a case of somebody or somebodies telling the same story to multiple people.

Either way, it is a problem that has become fairly obvious. Maroney is a very talented back who has not lived up to his potential. The NFL is full of those types of people. Some of them are due to injury, some are due to lack of listening skills and some are a combination of both. If I had to guess, Maroney's problem is the injury classification. But that doesn't mean I don't think there is a possibility he just doesn't do what his coaches want him to do.

You have again said nothing.
You ramble on about where you might hear such a thing, when it has never happened.
There are zero real, unimaginery, non-madeupbyyou cases where anyone has said Laurence Maroney refuses to follow the coaching staff's direction.
Certainly if it has 'become fairly obvious' you could cite a REAL EXAMPLE rather than listing the kinds of examples there would be if they did exist.

As far as living up to his potential, that would depend on what you consider his potential.
I have never considered him to have the potential of being the only player in the NFL immune to being injured.
I did not consider his potential in his rookie year to be more than what he accomplished as a RB sharing a starting job as a rookie
I did not consider his potential as a 2nd year player to be greater than the starting RB, and leading rusher, with some very impressive statistics on the highest scoring offense in NFL history.
And, again, I didnt consider his potential in 2008 to be an immunity from being injured.

 

[Ring 6]

Just that Morris was #1 at the end of last season and Maroney is coming off of surgery. I believe that the Pats want Maroney to become the undeniable #1 back on the team, but he has to do something to prove he is up to the job.

He has had the job for 2 years, then was injured. What does he need to prove?
At the point that he was injured he had proven it. When was it disproven?

 

[supafly]

Simon, A very intelligent opinion I will give you that. I take issue with your statement that Maroney has "great vision". In fact, his major issue is vision. He lacks it which is what gets him into trouble. He runs into the backs of lineman because he lacks it. How many times have you Simon yourself said when watching him run, if he could cut one lane to the left or right off of that block, he's gone. Whatever system we are running and that is open for debate here, he just does not fit. Talent? Yes. Speed? Yes. Great kid? Yes. Vision? terrible and please you show me where anyone in this organization has commented on his great vision. Goes down after the first hit? All the time. Plays hurt? Definitely not. If your hurt, your hurt but will yiou play in pain? no.

I see him gone after this year and that is a shame. He was drafted to replace Dillon and he is not that type of runner. They got Taylor to play in front of Maroney, not behind him. I do not question the kids make up but it is the square peg into the round hole. No one on this forum will argue the fact that there is a problem with this kid. The major excuses have been our O-Line and injuries. Isn't it time for agonizing reappraisal? This kid has not been anywhere near a first round value. I will say it...he has been a first round mistake by the scouting department. We needed a back that year and has been stated that if you draft for need, be 100% sure in the first round.

I would love to see the kid succeed. But isn't it a fair statement to say if you could trade him for value now before his reputation erodes further, you do it? If he sits on the bench, and he will if Taylor, Morris and Faulk are healthy, he will not get enough touches to resurrect himself. One poster amazed me and said we should keep him on the roster to return kicks. A first round RB struggling for touches returning kicks? Didn't we draft that stud Slater to do that? Another poster said third down back to replace Faulk? Besides catching on third downs you have to stay in and block which is what Faulk does very well. Maroney has yet to throw a block here. It was never his job.

His dancing has landed him forth on the depth chart. Would you agree that is where he sits?

O.K. Simon, you are the G.M. Someone offers you a third round pick for Maroney (Texans, Eagles, Cards, etc.). You know you can draft a Pat White, Rashad Jennings, Andre Brown, Eric Wood, T.J. Lang, Jasper Brinkley, Ingeseius, Kruger etc. with that pick. None are a guarantee I agree, but would you not consider that knowing again full well that he is gone in 2010?
DW Toys

DW-
Yesterday your main idea was to trade Maroney for Adrian Wilson, one of the top 3 safeties in the game. Your point was that he felt slighted due to AZ focusing current issues on Dansby (major franchise tag cap hit) and Boldin. (wants new contract or trade) You also claimed that the crazy AZ fanbase was not wanting Adrian Wilson around, for whatever reason.

Let's just say that I think your trade scenarios are getting a little far fetched.

 

[Rob0729]

I think you are also misrepresenting the point.
To say the organization is 'clandestine' and things 'get leaked' is not really what we are talking about here.
We are talking about a philosophy of coaching a team that includes the belief that you evaluate, teach and coach players by communicating with them about their strengths, weaknesses, areas to improve, etc, and that there is no purpose in sharing player evaluation, coaching and teaching issues with a reporter.
Your approach sounds like there are many reasons that coaches would want to tell reporters what their assessment of players are, and the Pats police them to make sure they don't go and do that.
While, in fact, there is no motivation for the coaches to share evaluations and opinions of players with the media.
There is no 'leak to plug' there is simply a sound philosophy that it is silly to discuss coachings opinions of players with the media.

And coaches discuss opinions with the media all the time including the Patriots. Much of it is off the record, but it does happen. There is even less of a reason for the Patriots coaching staff to give out opinions of who they are interested in drafting a week before the draft and I gave you two examples of the Pats sharing that information to the media through sources.

People forget that Michael Holley had full access to meetings, coaches, strategy sessions, etc. when he wrote Patriot Reign and many player evalutions made it to the book. Some with direct quotes from Belichick.

Belichick never talks on the record about players unless it is praising or just boilerplate stuff. But the Patriots have used the media in the past to get their message out there through sources and many times you have people on the staff who like to talk. Look at Matt Walsh. He loved to open his mouth even when he was with the Patriots. You don't think there are other guys in the organization who like to talk too.

What if NEInsider from the ESPN board is legit. That is an example of someone in the Pats organization bypassing the media all together and spilling the beans if true. For the record, I have serious doubts though.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy - please show me where they take into considering the law of averages when scheduling the season. You and I both know that they don't.

Another thing to take into consideration, Andy, is that I was looking at the RUN DEFENSE portion of the game, not the overall defense. The numbers I used came directly from NFL.COM. Reality is that just because a team has the best run defense doesn't mean it has the best overall defense. Look at New England. They had the 10th rated defense in the league, based on yards allowed. Yet they were ranked 11th against the pass and 15th against the run. The Vikings had the #1 rushing defense, but the 18th passing defense.

Yes, in a perfect world, it would all balance out. But this world isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

And its not flawed to discard numbers that are significant aberrations. And that is what I did with Maroney and Morris. And, in doing so, what was found? That they have nearly identical stats except for receiving. Morris gets more receptions while Maroney has the higher Yards per reception.

I think you totally missed the point.
The point is that if you only played against poor competition then a statistical skewing may be legitimate.
My point is that you haven't show the competition to be subpar.
You said ONLY 5 games against top 10 defenses and one game each against #27 and #30.
There are 16 games in a 32 team league.
That means you play half the teams. You should play half the top 10 teams. We did, by your own words. We should play 2 of the bottom 4 and 3 of the bottom 6. You cited 2 of the bottom 6.
My point is your reasoning why the stats are skewed because of 'poor competition' is actually proof that the competition was average, not poor.

 

[DaBruinz]

I see where you are going with the bad rushing defensive team thing, but you can only play the schedule they give you. I am sure over the past 50 yrs we have faced some bad run defenses too, but didn't put up top 3 franchise running numbers. Like I said, I see your point--but it's not their fault they had a couple big rushing games, and I'm sure it's happened plenty of yrs in the past.
So yeah, maybe you should give them a little bit more credit. I know you can only tell how good you really are by playing top tier defenses, but it was still a very impressive rushing performance. I don't know if blaming our softer schedule is really fair, because the team still overcame a lot.

One of the things that I have learned is that BB compares apples to apples and is much more of a statistics guy than people realize. Management Secrets of the New England Patriots supports this idea.

I am not taking away from the fact that it was a good year rushing. But I also put it in perspective.

 

[DaBruinz]

I think you totally missed the point.
The point is that if you only played against poor competition then a statistical skewing may be legitimate.
My point is that you haven't show the competition to be subpar.
You said ONLY 5 games against top 10 defenses and one game each against #27 and #30.
There are 16 games in a 32 team league.
That means you play half the teams. You should play half the top 10 teams. We did, by your own words. We should play 2 of the bottom 4 and 3 of the bottom 6. You cited 2 of the bottom 6.
My point is your reasoning why the stats are skewed because of 'poor competition' is actually proof that the competition was average, not poor.

While there are 16 games in a season, you only play against 13 of the 32 teams. You also have more of an impact on the 3 teams that you play twice and it can help to raise or lower their defenses.

So, no, they don't play half the teams. Also, I did not say they played half the top 10 defenses. I said they played 5 games against "top 10 run defenses" There is a difference. One that I am surprised you have tripped up on.

I'm sorry, Andy, but you've mis-read two things said by me and, from where I sit, it makes your supposed point invalid.

You've also chosen to poorly attempt to spin what you said to try and cover up the fact that you mis-read what I stated.

 

[fair catch fryar]

It is still to be determined what Fred Taylor has left, but I'm optimistic with the potential that our "RB by committee" has for this year and I think Maroney can have the biggest year of the backs. Health of course being their biggest adversary.

 

[supafly]

One of the things that I have learned is that BB compares apples to apples and is much more of a statistics guy than people realize. Management Secrets of the New England Patriots supports this idea.

I am not taking away from the fact that it was a good year rushing. But I also put it in perspective.

I'll have to admit, I replied to your response on page 3 before reading Andy's response and I wish I could've put it as well as he did. But, that said--overall I agree with a lot of your stuff and think you're a good dude. So I'll quit busting chops

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The other thing to recognize is that Maroney will need to do what is best for the Patriots, not the Patriots doing what is best for Maroney.

Unless of course the Patriots decide doing what's best for Maroney is what's best for the Patriots. You cannot fit a square peg in a round hole (without seriously damaging it, at least...). Bill knew who and what Maroney was when he drafted him. I'd seldom seen him quite that excited over a draft pick. He was looking for a home run hitter to open up this offense. He's acknowledged the plan was to change the blocking scheme. Just never really panned out. But that's not really on Laurence...who got banged up pretty good out of the gate being a team player and running behind Pokey's blocking scheme in 2006...while Brady sought out the immortal tandem of Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel...

They say battles are won and lost in the trenches. On this team where pass blocking for a HOF QB is job 1 there is little margin in those trenches, and that's before Neal goes down annually. He's going to be 33 this fall and he misses 4 games a year on average (not counting missing his first two years entirely). Kaczur has had his moments and his struggles, the latter particularly when Neal is out. In just his 5th season since being drafted at the end of the 3rd round he will turn 30 as camp opens...

Sometimes I wish we could get by with skill players who didn't have to be taught to substitute as blocking dummies. But to do that we need to draft (because it's cost effective) OL talent with a higher ceiling. And we might want to do that before we get anyone else killed in what is often a snowball effect that emanates from the right side of that OL...

 

[tanked_as_usual]

4.) Joseph Addai, the runner Maroney was most often compared to when he came into the league, has seen his game decline in each of his 3 seasons in the NFL. He's 2 years older than Maroney, has taken a lot more pounding in the NFL, and may already be past his prime.

5.) Maurice Jones-Drew, the other runner generally compared to Maroney, has also seen his YPC decline every year he's been in the NFL. He was a human bowling ball during his rookie year. Last year, he was a relatively pedestrian player with a 4.2 YPC. He's about the same age as Maroney, and I don't think he's in decline, but it's important to note that his offensive line was devestated last year and his numbers went down. You know, like the Maroney situation in New England before he went on IR.

consicuously absent from this discussion is deangelo williams who was the next rb taken after maroney....the funny thing is that williams is the guy who was advertised as the one with the most wear and tear on him coming out of college......he's missed 3 games in 3 years

one could also argue that maroney's play has declined since day 1.......

but what is likely more acurate is that he has thus far failed to become more than a ball carrier.........with his size and speed, I would be pretty sure that the pats have tried to scheme him into some RB screens and quick outs, but he has failed to pick up that part of the game.......at the rookie pay level, it is worth holding onto him until for as long as it takes, but the success rate of RB being something more after being something less the first 3 years is very low........guess there is always a first, and I hope so, but I don't feel that optimistic about maroney's future

 

[DW Toys]

Maroney is 1st on the depth chart. To say otherwise is pure foolery.

And no, I wouldn't trade Maroney for a 3rd round pick. Not at all.

On a side note, Jasper Brinkley isn't worth a 3rd rounder. Maybe a 5th, but not a 3rd.

Oh, btw, the Pats hold Maroney's rights as a restricted free agent since he'll only have 5 years of service in an uncapped year. So, for a minimal amount of money, the Pats can hold onto him for a 1st round pick.

How will that be affected if there is no CAP? Explain the first rounder. I do not understand that.

I was making a point on Brinkley, but IMO there are Picks out there in the second or third round that have a better R.O.I. at this present point in his career.

We can agree to disagree on where on the depth chart Maroney winds up. I like the kid but he has not fulfilled his first round value, is that a fair statement?
DW Toys

 

[Ring 6]

1.) Michael Felger saying that the Pats were going to draft Ty Warren. Said that they love that guy and were going to draft him with one of their two first rounders.
2.) Doug Gabriel was benched because he did not take criticism of how he fumbled the ball well.
3.) Michael Felger stating in the Chad Jackson's rookie season that the coaching staff felt he had maturity issues
4.) Michael Holley stating the Pats would draft Mayo. Granted he portrayed it as opinion, but it was clear that it was inside information
5.) Michael Smith stating that the coaching staff felt Brady was ahead of schedule (also reported by Charlie Casserly, Shira Springer, and others).

Do I need to go on? Those are the ones I came up with off the top of my head. I'm sure I can go back and find more. You were right. It was pretty easy.

I guess you should go on because you havent shown what I asked.
You are now telling me that people predicting who the Patriots will draft is proof that the coaching staff shares inside priveldged information with the media? How about all of the predictions that were wrong?
I will take them one by one.
1) Felger made a correct guess. How many of BBs draft picks has he correctly predicted? A blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.
2) First that is an unsubstantiated claim. Secondly, it may have come from the player as well.
3) Again unsubstantiated. Even if true, there are many other ways to draw that conclusion that getting a report from the coaching staff (the most obvious of which would be to actually watch practice and listen to the coaching he is given)
4) Again, the 3% of media predictions about who the Pats will draft wouldn't qualify as proof that the organization told the media what their plan was. By the way, why would they?
5) So reporters asked about Brady and BB said 'he is ahead of schedule'? What is your point? You sound like you are trying to disprove that BB is a mute.

I think we need to recognize what the topic we are discussing is.
The topic is whether the coaching staff has told the media what their opinion and assessment of Laurence Maroney is and that it is negative despite the fact that in every press conference BB has never said anything negative, and even further that Maroney has failed to following the direction given him by the coaching staff.

I don't think that showing members of the media guessed right on a few draft picks gets you in the same area code.