Spikes injured?

[Deus Irae]

Obviously...NFL coaches are just dumbasses that don't put their best players on the field.

Belichick seems to think that playing Guyton more than Spikes gives him the best chance to succeed, but you disagree ?

Belichick considered Guyton the better option in passing situations. I considered Guyton the better option in passing situations.


As I said, you're argument just doesn't hold because it doesn't take situational football into account.

 

[Uncle Rico]

 

[TheSolderKing]

Guyton is the fastest or 2nd fastest/quickest LB on this team. I like what he brings to the table more so than spikes. Spikes is very good, but he has some baggage I don't like. He lacks commonsense--- why the hell do you comeback badly out of shape after a suspension. I understand he missed out on "Football field shape" , but he came back as a careless slug as he abused his body w/o thinking about the TEAM. I doubt he did much Cardio in his hiatus :bricks: i mean suspension. What Spikes did was SELFISH and borderline Randy Moss like b/c all he cared about was HIMSELF

 

[RDS11]

Belichick considered Guyton the better option in passing situations. I considered Guyton the better option in passing situations.


As I said, you're argument just doesn't hold because it doesn't take situational football into account.

My argument was that I disagree with the poster who said that the defense was never the same once Spikes was suspended.

I have shown multiple statistics showing that Spikes impact in 2010 was marginal. And what you are providing is just confirming this.

Situational football...if Spikes was another Mayo, he would have played 100% of the snaps. But he's not. He was on the field for 31% of all snaps in 2010 (playing in only 12 games, I'm guessing it could have been close to 40% should he have played 16 games). So to Belichick, Spikes was the best option only around 40% of the time.

So to go back to my original argument, I pointed out that Spikes wasn't an integral part of the defense at first, therefore his suspension had almost no impact.

And I will say it again, because I know it will comeback : of course it would have been better if he had played those 4 games. Another option is always better. He's just wasn't an impact player in 2010.

Not that I would want to stick it to you again, but you'll notice that the last 4 games before Spikes was suspended, he played a lot less (according to your spreadsheet).
Noticed how much his snaps were greatly reduced after the Browns fiasco ?
Combined with the 4 games he was suspended, and one could assume that one of the reason the Pats defense was much better in the 2nd half was because Spikes played less.

 

[Deus Irae]

My argument was that I disagree with the poster who said that the defense was never the same once Spikes was suspended.

I have shown multiple statistics showing that Spikes impact in 2010 was marginal. And what you are providing is just confirming this.

Situational football...if Spikes was another Mayo, he would have played 100% of the snaps. But he's not. He was on the field for 31% of all snaps in 2010 (playing in only 12 games, I'm guessing it could have been close to 40% should he have played 16 games). So to Belichick, Spikes was the best option only around 40% of the time.

So to go back to my original argument, I pointed out that Spikes wasn't an integral part of the defense at first, therefore his suspension had almost no impact.

And I will say it again, because I know it will comeback : of course it would have been better if he had played those 4 games. Another option is always better. He's just wasn't an impact player in 2010.

Not that I would want to stick it to you again, but you'll notice that the last 4 games before Spikes was suspended, he played a lot less (according to your spreadsheet).
Noticed how much his snaps were greatly reduced after the Browns fiasco ?
Combined with the 4 games he was suspended, and one could assume that the reason the Pats defense was much better in the 2nd half was because Spikes played less.

Post Browns games:

Steelers game: Patriots got out to a big lead and played pass after that. Per Reiss

With the Patriots getting ahead early, which created more pass-rush opportunities, this was a game played mostly in sub packages. That explains why five of the top six defenders, in terms of playing time, were defensive backs.

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4687706/defensive-snaps-day-for-d-backs

Colts game: Colts ground game was lousy. Manning is under center
Lions game: Per Reiss,

Instead, this would be a game played mostly in sub packages against a Lions offense that ranked 31st rushing and third in passing.

Defensive snaps: Love, Fletcher on radar - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston
Jets game: 45-3 blowout with Spikes getting his pick in the victory and the Patriots ending up playing against the pass early on.

You're confusing your arguments, among other problems.

 

[RDS11]

Post Browns games:

Steelers game: Patriots got out to a big lead and played pass after that. Per Reiss



Defensive snaps: Day for d-backs - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Colts game: Colts ground game was lousy. Manning is under center
Lions game: Per Reiss,


Defensive snaps: Love, Fletcher on radar - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston
Jets game: 45-3 blowout with Spikes getting his pick in the victory and the Patriots ending up playing against the pass early on.

You're confusing your arguments, among other problems.

So what's your point ?
It's exactly what I've been telling, Spikes was not a big factor in 2010.
If he had been, he would have played more, end of story.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Obviously...NFL coaches are just dumbasses that don't put their best players on the field.

Belichick seems to think that playing Guyton more than Spikes gives him the best chance to succeed, but you disagree ?

Guyton's snap count, though, was inflated by Spikes' absence the last four weeks. It certainly wasn't 2:1 after 12 games (I don't have the exact numbers of hand, and don't have time to look at them; I'd guesstimate it was about 4:3).

Belichick considered Guyton the better option in passing situations. I considered Guyton the better option in passing situations.

As I said, you're argument just doesn't hold because it doesn't take situational football into account.

Also, remember that Guyton's had three years in this system, whereas Spikes—as good as he is at reading plays—only had a few months.

 

[Deus Irae]

So what's your point ?
It's exactly what I've been telling, Spikes was not a big factor in 2010.
If he had been, he would have played more, end of story.

But your argument does not flow. I'm not sure how you're missing it.


Spikes in... team gets big lead... Spikes out.


How are you going from that to claiming he's not a factor when he's in the game when it's still close?


Spikes is the run stopper. Guyton is the pass ILB. You're essentially trying to ignore 1/2 of the game.

 

[RDS11]

I'll end up with this, because it's getting nowhere in a hurry :
Spikes just average around 40% of snaps all year. Therefore his impact was limited to 40% of all plays by the coaching staff who thought they had a better option 60% of the time (1st argument, if he had been an impact player, he would have played more). In that 40%, Spikes produced 1 INT and nothing else : no sack, no forced fumble, no TD, no fumble recovery (2nd argument, if he had been an impact player, his stat line wouldn't show a bunch on zeroes). Based on this, how can one figure out that losing Spikes for 4 games have a major impact on the defense, especially considering the results of those 4 games (3rd argument : the Spikes-less defense didn't show any statistical drop) ?

Everything you have been arguing comes back to one of those 3 points.
An impact player shouldn't be a liability against the pass. So if Spikes was pulled on 3rd and long, it's because there's someone better. And if that player doesn't play because there's someone better, then when that player is injured or suspended it won't make a huge impact, as he wouldn't have played most of the time anyways !

 

[RDS11]

But your argument does not flow. I'm not sure how you're missing it.


Spikes in... team gets big lead... Spikes out.


How are you going from that to claiming he's not a factor when he's in the game when it's still close?


Spikes is the run stopper. Guyton is the pass ILB. You're essentially trying to ignore 1/2 of the game.

OK one more thing for the sake of it : we have already determined that stopping the run has no correlation to winning. You even said as much.
So if you had to lose one of the 2 players, would you keep the one that can stop the run more effectively or stops the pass more effectively ?

Getting back to my initial comment : of course it would have been better to dress Spikes, but losing him over those 4 games was statistically irrelevant.

 

[Sciz]

Obviously...NFL coaches are just dumbasses that don't put their best players on the field.

Belichick seems to think that playing Guyton more than Spikes gives him the best chance to succeed, but you disagree ?

Or, you know, Guyton was deemed the better option against the pass, which is what the Pats were more worried about with all of their leads. I'd love to see a split of Spikes' snap percentages depending on score margin.

As for the stats argument, they don't make a stat for "number of offensive linemen taken on before they get to Mayo," which is Spikes' main role.

 

[BradyFTW!]

While I agree that other factors should be accounted for when evaluating the defense, again, the loss of Spikes was statistically irrelevant. That's all I said

Irrelevant to what? What are you measuring Spikes' absence against that leads you to conclude that it's not significant? It obviously can't be the end result (running a regression against a small sample size of binary outcomes would be just about the dumbest thing ever) and if you're measuring it against points or total yards, then I can guarantee that you haven't appropriately factored in the various external factors that need to be taken into account.

If you want to argue that his absence is irrelevant in your opinion, then go ahead, but don't pretend that you have statistics backing you up if "percentage of total snaps" is the best that you can muster.

Another note re: your analysis- wouldn't it force you to conclude that pass defense specialists are always more valuable than run defense specialists? If teams pass more than they run, and they do, then the raw numbers will indicate that pass specialists see more snaps than run specialists, every time. You've failed to account for the need for diverse skillsets on a defense, and that, perhaps more than anything else, has rendered pretty much everything that you've said on this topic irrelevant. Statistically irrelevant, even

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Considering players who amount to something usually do much better their second year, one could look at Spikes' 61 tackles in 12 games (and the 16 tackles in one game he made against the Ravens) and think Spikes might be headed to becoming an impact player. 8th on the Pats in combined tackles in 12 games is a pretty good starting point for a 2nd year player. Ted Johnson, for comparison, had 41 tackles and half a sack as a rookie. He jumped to 87 tackles the next year. More recently, Chung went from 37 to 96 tackles, 1st to 2nd year. The Spikes haters will be eating some serious crow if Spikes pulls the same trick and more than doubles his tackle total...

 

[Deus Irae]

OK one more thing for the sake of it : we have already determined that stopping the run has no correlation to winning. You even said as much.

Please find where I said that, because I believe it was you saying it. I don't believe that at all. I disagreed with your phrasing of it. In terms of total yardage:

4 of the 5 best teams against the run last year made it to the playoffs. The 5th, San Diego, was 9-7 and had special teams problems which cost them multiple games and, probably, the playoffs.

All 5 of the best teams against the run in 2009 made the playoffs.

4 of 5 in 2008 made the playoffs, with the 5th finishing 9-7.

2007 is the last time a team with a top 5 defense against the run finished with a losing record.

On the flip side, 3 of the 5 best from last year in pass defense failed to make the playoffs, 3 of 5 missed in 2009, 2 of 5 missed in 2008 and 2 of 5 missed in 2007.

At least in recent years, there's a greater correlation of top 5 in total rushing yards allowed making the playoffs than there is in top 5 in total passing yards allowed making the playoffs.

So if you had to lose one of the 2 players, would you keep the one that can stop the run more effectively or stops the pass more effectively ?

Team by team basis

Getting back to my initial comment : of course it would have been better to dress Spikes, but losing him over those 4 games was statistically irrelevant.

Incorrect. Any impact to losing him over those 4 games is statistically unknowable, not statistically irrelevant.

 

[Ring 6]

Tell me what I'm ignoring, because I've provided enough data to prove that Spikes wasn't a factor in 2010, in more ways than one.

Fact :the defense was more efficient during Spikes absence.
Fact : Spikes backup (not the right term, as Guyton would play on specific downs) had much better production.

I agree that we do not have a 100 games sample to make judgment. True. But we can only look at the data we have, and that's 16 games. And based on that data, not on opinion or what if, the loss of Spikes was mostly irrelevant.

One fact you are ignoring is that the Jets gained most of those rushing yds vs a prevent defense after the game was out of hand, and Spikes wasn't on the field for many of them.
Surely if you are going to use rushing yards allowed as a stats against Spkies you should consider whether he was on the field when the yards were gained, right?

 

[Ring 6]

I'll end up with this, because it's getting nowhere in a hurry :
Spikes just average around 40% of snaps all year. Therefore his impact was limited to 40% of all plays by the coaching staff who thought they had a better option 60% of the time (1st argument, if he had been an impact player, he would have played more).

40% should really be considered about 53% since he played only 12 games.
If you follow the Pats you would know that Spikes in an impact player vs the run. The Pats use sub packages about halof the time. Your logic if flawed. He would have to be an impact player in pass defense to play more, but that doesnt change his impact as a run defender.

In that 40%, Spikes produced 1 INT and nothing else : no sack, no forced fumble, no TD, no fumble recovery (2nd argument, if he had been an impact player, his stat line wouldn't show a bunch on zeroes).

An ILB in a 34 2 gap defense that is off the field in sub packages is not properly measured by those stats. His job is to stop the run, and by all accounts he did it well. How do you expect him to get sacks if he isn't asked to blitz? You seem to be looking at statistics alone, which a terrible, terrible means of assessing LB play, and also seem to not really understand the Pats defensive concept.

Based on this, how can one figure out that losing Spikes for 4 games have a major impact on the defense, especially considering the results of those 4 games (3rd argument : the Spikes-less defense didn't show any statistical drop) ?

There are many, many factors you overlook. Quality of opponent, weather, game situation, the impact our offense had, etc.

Everything you have been arguing comes back to one of those 3 points.
An impact player shouldn't be a liability against the pass.

A player who improves the run D as an ILB and subs out in passing situations is an impact player.

So if Spikes was pulled on 3rd and long, it's because there's someone better.

So. Corey Dillon didnt play on 3rd down in 04, was he not an impact player?

And if that player doesn't play because there's someone better, then when that player is injured or suspended it won't make a huge impact, as he wouldn't have played most of the time anyways !

Again, you seem to not understand the concept of the defense.
When we take Spikes out and put in a 5th DB what does that have to do with Spikes impact in the base 34? Nothing/

 

[RayClay]

I will repeat for the X-time, I wasn't saying Spikes doesn't have talent or anything else, the only thing I said is that his absence didn't have much impact on the Patriots D.

Missed the green bay game, eh?

Oh, and if you can't trust your own eyes, no piece of paper will make up for it.

 

[supafly]

Just FWIW--Brandon Spikes played 31.7 % of all of the 2010 defensive snaps.

I don't have any idea where anyone is getting 40 % OR 53 % from.

I understand that he only played in 12 games, and I suppose that is where the "40 %" projection is coming from. I see that you added another 8-9 % for the other 4 games that he was suspended. Based on an additional 1/4 of 31.7---(approximate, since snap counts vary) that would project to a little under an additional 8 %.

We can all assume that if Spikes had not been suspended, it would have been approx. 39 % of all snaps.

2010 Patriots defensive snap count - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[Joker]

hey..this sounds great...let me take 40 years off my bottom line....

DUMP Spikes!...he was horrible in his rookie year and didn't make 100 tackles..I hate him...I want a new player ...I have an unbeaten fantasy football team in a league with 100 other ADHD crippled,spoiled little mommy's boys who cry everytime we don't get what we want IMMEDIATELY!!! GET RID OF HIM!!!

hey, geez...this is GREAT....I'll NEVER have to wait for anything to ever develop again!!! I just dump any player who isn't immediately the best all pro at his position....man, I can't wait for all the other stupid football fans who disagree with me to see I'm right!!!! DUMP HIM AND DRAFT THE HIGHEST RATED NEW PLAYER AT EVERY POSITION!!!!

GO ME!!! GO ME!!!

 

[supafly]

I'm still waiting to see if anyone has heard anything on the potential injury of this guy, besides the news from his agent of course?

Every time I check, it's like I'm a little kid again, and my parents are arguing about getting a divorce all over again.

Obviously, Spikes was a high draft LB (something just about everyone here clamors for on a non-stop basis), can pair up well against the run on the inside with Mayo, and should/could be the immediate future of our run stopping game.

Yes, Guyton plays in passing/subpackage situations, and yes we jumped out to a lead alot and this raised Guyton's snap count, but for stopping the run---Spikes is a key player here.

Here's hoping he is NOT hurt, and will continue to learn the defense and contribute on a regular basis throughout the year.