Interesting Read on if this year's group is better than last year's

[patsfanincleveland]

The patriots specialize in players nursing injuries and who have had more than one injury. WR's can indeed be compensated for by a healthy set of TE's. We are again reduced to having our playoff hopes rely on the lack of injuries among them.

The argument that so many make is that WR's don't matter. We have Brady. He can pass to Welker or an JAG. There is no real difference in production. Personally, I think that this is a lot of nonsense.

Your argument is backwards.

The basis of the Patriots offense is two TE's. Since it's based on two TE's, Gronk and AHern are the most important players.

Saying the offense is "dependent" upon healthy TE's is saying having your two best players affects efficiency.

It's universal that in that having your best people makes you better.

WR's in this offense are supportive.

This can be done in three ways.

Added dimension for opportunity.
Negating emphasis on the two primary assets.
Limit excessive offensive snaps inherent in this offense.

As far as the whole WR value is concerned is the basic fact that QB's make WR's not the other way around. That doesn't mean you don't want quality WR's but it does define the most important ingredient.

 

[patfanken]

a fine analysis as always

1) I apologize for the snide comment / personal shot. It was not necessary.

Forget about it.

2) With regard to the running game, you are correct that the improvement in the OL could mean a much better running game. As you say, the health of Mankins and Gronkowski would help alot. Even if there is loss from not having Woodhead, this improved blocking should make up for this is overall running production. And as I agreed, Washington and/or Blount should help the total quality of the running game. For me, Vereen is a question mark. He seems to be a fine receiver; we'll what other roles he can excel at.

Of course Vareen is a question mark, but no less or more of one than Ridley was coming into last season. Think about it. Ridley had shown this same kind of "flashes" in limited snaps that Vareen showed this past year. Given what Ridley did when he got consistent snaps in his role, isn't it fair to think that Vareen could make a similar jump as his snaps increase in his role? After that its nice to see that BB has created some intense competition for the 2-3 back up roles, among some proven talent

3) Raw talent and JAGs with potential are both great. However, given where we were last year and our cap situation, I would have hoped to be in a better position by now at WR. I agree that if the TE's stay healthy, we have little to worry about.

So if the Sanders thing had gone through, you'd have been happy? Let me offer this perspective. Where did the passing offense fail last season, REALLY? Clearly, without Gronk, we had trouble getting into the endzone. Despite the myth that's evolved, the Pats had little trouble moving the ball against the Ravens, but LOTS of trouble getting into the endzone. Adding Dobson and Jenkins alone, gives Brady 2 more big targets as options, but Jones and Boyce are both stronger than Branch and LLoyd as red zone targets.

It could be that BB went into this off season with the specific objective of improving the Pats ability to put the ball into the endzone from the redzone. If that is the case, then I think he's made a good start

4) The mess was not the overall passing game, which was the best among playoff teams, as you said. The mess was in anything but the short game. And yes, we can do without stretching the field except when we play top defenses.

Well, I don't think we will ever agree on this. I think this whole "stretch the field" imperative is simply crap....and the Pats have proved it to be the last 3 years, by having an elite passing game WITHOUT any so called "deep threat". As it turned out, what it lacked last season (as I said above" wasn't a "deep threat", but red zone threats, if Gronk is out.

Understand, its not that I wouldn't like to have a true "field stretcher". But to me it would be more of a luxury, than a necessity

In any case, Belichick has addressed this issue and hopefully one of the 10 WR not named Amendola on the roster will be productive. As with you, I expect Amendola to be top addition, certainly in the slot.

I think we all have a tendency to forget that after DA, the next WR on the field is going to be the 4th option on most pass plays. Hard to be an impact receiver when that's your role. LLoyd picked up over 900 yds being the 3rd option most of last season, so if our 4th option, whomever it turns out to be, manages to produce in the 600yd range, I'd deem it a success.

And most likely I'd bet that 4th option receiver this season will be filled by committee. For example if YAC is the need you go with Edelman, if we are in the redzone, it would be Dobson, etc.

5) I say the sky may be falling at wide receiver. You say that this may or may not be true, but it really doesn't matter much. You are correct if the TE's and Amendola remain healthy and productive.

Now you get it. But I also think BB is not ignoring DA's health history. Edelman, Jones, and Boyce all have the skills to step in and play the slot if he reverts to his last 2 year's injury situation. I also think that Fells and Ballard are both better options as back up TE's to what we had last year.

6) As is usually the case, we agree on almost all points. Certainly we agree the patriots are very likely to be a playoff team. We also agree that the new offense will be very interesting to watch as it develops. If not for injuries, we would have seen more of the new system last year.[/QUOTE]Agreed.

But at some point this off season I'm going to start a thread to discuss the cyclical nature of the NFL. Particularly the transition of Defenses which were primarily man back in my day, to being primarily zone the last 20 years, to moving back to being primarily man again. That evolution makes me want to ask (especially since we have a new WR corps), would the offense be better off not being so reliant on WR's needing to read defenses and run option routes, and be better off running predetermined routes, but running them ultra precisely. Thus eliminating any "miscommunication" issues between the QB and the receiver.

 

[belichick010405]

Think about it. Ridley had shown this same kind of "flashes" in limited snaps that Vareen showed this past year. Given what Ridley did when he got consistent snaps in his role, isn't it fair to think that Vareen could make a similar jump as his snaps increase in his role? After that its nice to see that BB has created some intense competition for the 2-3 back up roles, among some proven talent.

Hey Pat - you are asking a very good question here. I am more than intrigued on how Vereen is going to be utilized this year for a number of reasons. When Vereen was drafted, I felt that he was going to be an every down back in the same mold as DeMarco Murray and I felt that Vereen was the better prospect of the two.

Now - I am not saying that Vereen is going to be as productive as Murray has been over their first two years but what I will say is that if Lamar Miller, who is not a good receiver out of the backfield, is going to be the #1 for Miami, then it can be reasonably expected that Vereen could very well see more than 150 touches this year, including over 40 touches from Brady for a total 900 or more total yards. The Houston playoff game should have opened some eyes.

He is a versatile running back who can move to the slot with Amendola moving to the outside since there is a common habit that Amendola is a slot receiver alone.

 

[JMarr]

This guy realizes Brady was about to be in the superbowl with Rache Caldwell as his #1 receiver?

I would think so. Do YOU realize the Pats had Corey Dillon and a much better defense and offensive line that year?

 

[supafly]

^ ^ ^

It's amazing to look back on the defensive statistics from 2006 and see that we had the #2 scoring defense in the entire NFL at about 15 pts per game.

Definitely a big difference, although one can hope that our defense continues to head in the right direction.

 

[mgteich]

I agree that Ridley was a question mark going into last year. That doesn't make Vereen any less of a question mark this year. Vereen just hasn't played much. The good news is that Belichick has quite a variety to chose from in Vereen, Washington, Blount and Bolden. There are many roles that may or may not be filled. The critical ones are backup to Ridley, 3rd down back and kick returner.

As you say, all the running backs will look better than last year if Mankins and Gronk are healthy.

I'm not sure the #2 WR will always be the fourth option. This depends a lot on game situation. With 2 TE's and 2 WR's on the field, the #2 WR may be the receiver most likely to be open.

I agree that Belichick is indeed address our #1 2012 weakness on offense: poor red zone performance. I could see Belichick keeping someone especially for that role.

Forget about it.

Of course Vareen is a question mark, but no less or more of one than Ridley was coming into last season. Think about it. Ridley had shown this same kind of "flashes" in limited snaps that Vareen showed this past year. Given what Ridley did when he got consistent snaps in his role, isn't it fair to think that Vareen could make a similar jump as his snaps increase in his role? After that its nice to see that BB has created some intense competition for the 2-3 back up roles, among some proven talent

So if the Sanders thing had gone through, you'd have been happy? Let me offer this perspective. Where did the passing offense fail last season, REALLY? Clearly, without Gronk, we had trouble getting into the endzone. Despite the myth that's evolved, the Pats had little trouble moving the ball against the Ravens, but LOTS of trouble getting into the endzone. Adding Dobson and Jenkins alone, gives Brady 2 more big targets as options, but Jones and Boyce are both stronger than Branch and LLoyd as red zone targets.

It could be that BB went into this off season with the specific objective of improving the Pats ability to put the ball into the endzone from the redzone. If that is the case, then I think he's made a good start

Well, I don't think we will ever agree on this. I think this whole "stretch the field" imperative is simply crap....and the Pats have proved it to be the last 3 years, by having an elite passing game WITHOUT any so called "deep threat". As it turned out, what it lacked last season (as I said above" wasn't a "deep threat", but red zone threats, if Gronk is out.

Understand, its not that I wouldn't like to have a true "field stretcher". But to me it would be more of a luxury, than a necessity

I think we all have a tendency to forget that after DA, the next WR on the field is going to be the 4th option on most pass plays. Hard to be an impact receiver when that's your role. LLoyd picked up over 900 yds being the 3rd option most of last season, so if our 4th option, whomever it turns out to be, manages to produce in the 600yd range, I'd deem it a success.

And most likely I'd bet that 4th option receiver this season will be filled by committee. For example if YAC is the need you go with Edelman, if we are in the redzone, it would be Dobson, etc.

Now you get it. But I also think BB is not ignoring DA's health history. Edelman, Jones, and Boyce all have the skills to step in and play the slot if he reverts to his last 2 year's injury situation. I also think that Fells and Ballard are both better options as back up TE's to what we had last year.

6) As is usually the case, we agree on almost all points. Certainly we agree the patriots are very likely to be a playoff team. We also agree that the new offense will be very interesting to watch as it develops. If not for injuries, we would have seen more of the new system last year.

Agreed.

But at some point this off season I'm going to start a thread to discuss the cyclical nature of the NFL. Particularly the transition of Defenses which were primarily man back in my day, to being primarily zone the last 20 years, to moving back to being primarily man again. That evolution makes me want to ask (especially since we have a new WR corps), would the offense be better off not being so reliant on WR's needing to read defenses and run option routes, and be better off running predetermined routes, but running them ultra precisely. Thus eliminating any "miscommunication" issues between the QB and the receiver.[/QUOTE]

 

[patsfanincleveland]

I agree that Ridley was a question mark going into last year. That doesn't make Vereen any less of a question mark this year. Vereen just hasn't played much. The good news is that Belichick has quite a variety to chose from in Vereen, Washington, Blount and Bolden. There are many roles that may or may not be filled. The critical ones are backup to Ridley, 3rd down back and kick returner.

As you say, all the running backs will look better than last year if Mankins and Gronk are healthy.

I'm not sure the #2 WR will always be the fourth option. This depends a lot on game situation. With 2 TE's and 2 WR's on the field, the #2 WR may be the receiver most likely to be open.

I agree that Belichick is indeed address our #1 2012 weakness on offense: poor red zone performance. I could see Belichick keeping someone especially for that role.


Agreed.

But at some point this off season I'm going to start a thread to discuss the cyclical nature of the NFL. Particularly the transition of Defenses which were primarily man back in my day, to being primarily zone the last 20 years, to moving back to being primarily man again. That evolution makes me want to ask (especially since we have a new WR corps), would the offense be better off not being so reliant on WR's needing to read defenses and run option routes, and be better off running predetermined routes, but running them ultra precisely. Thus eliminating any "miscommunication" issues between the QB and the receiver.

[/QUOTE]

That would be an outstanding and worthwhile endeavor.

The reality is that too much of 2013 football analysis is stuck in "3 yards and a pile of dust".

 

[ivanvamp]

Barring the amount of time it will take for the young WRs to get accustomed to the playbook, the team is pound for pound stronger than last year.

The team fixed:

1) Kickoff return by adding Leon Washington

2) Interior pass rush by adding Armond Armstead and Tommy Kelly

3) Pass defense by adding Adrian Wilson to man the strong safety position, along with maintaining stability in the cornerback spots by resigning Aqib Talib (allows everyone else on the defense to be put in the right position and allows them to play more aggressive) and slot corner Kyle Arrington, also added Logan Ryan

4) Lack of speed/size/depth at WR by adding talented rookies Josh Boyce and Aaron Dobson, along with adding Donald Jones, Danny Amendola (slightly bigger than Welker, can also play on the outside at times and has as good hands, if not better) and resigning Julian Edelman

5) Lack of speed at LB by adding Jamie Collins (a converted safety)

(Sorry if I may have left other players out)

One overlooked fact is that the Patriots are returning 22 of 24 starters. I feel like certain analysts are overreacting too much about this team just because they lost Wes Welker. Yes, he was the most productive player on the offense for some time, but there are lots of other options on offense that will keep defenses busy.

The Patriots have a running game to lean on that ranked 7th in the NFL, led by young Stevan Ridley, Shane Vereen and Brandon Bolden which I also must mention that they are only going to get better.

I'm sure the young talent on defense will only get better (Chandler Jones, Donta Hightower, Tavon Wilson, Alphonso Dennard). If guys like Jake Bequette and Ras-I Dowling can at least show something, that would be a bonus.

Good post. I agree that, on paper, I think the Pats are better than they were last year, even with the loss of Welker (which is big, IMO). The offense will continue to be elite, and I think the defense and special teams both improved considerably based on the new additions.

Of course, time will tell.

 

[Oswlek]

I would think so. Do YOU realize the Pats had a washed up Corey Dillon, a much better defense and a worse offensive line that year?

Fixed that for you.

I'm not sure how anyone can get themselves alarmed about the 2013 Patriots. Welker is gone, but a defense that was solid down the stretch will have a full offseason as well as some promising reinforcements. It is hardly unreasonable to think that one of NE's two first round rookies will improve in their second year.

As for the WR corps in particular, Lloyd was a dog who I am thrilled to see go and Edelman missed most of 2012. Of course Wes looks critical when he was the only WR worth a damn last year! Even if we assume no one approaches his totals, competent performance out of three newcomers would be an improvement overall. Or at least, not much of a drop off.

IMO, for someone to say that NE is definitively worse than last year, they must be willing to say that Welker's loss will have a significant effect and then turn around and check "no" in the box next to numerous reasons for optimism.

 

[supafly]

As for the WR corps in particular, Lloyd was a dog who I am thrilled to see go and Edelman missed most of 2012. Of course Wes looks critical when he was the only WR worth a damn last year! Even if we assume no one approaches his totals, competent performance out of three newcomers would be an improvement overall. Or at least, not much of a drop off.

I couldn't possibly agree with you more on this issue. I think that the WR corps pretty much sucked last year outside of Welker, so the bar for the WR's was set pretty low to begin with.

Belichick addressed the weaknesses that helped to slow the offense down in the effeciency/red zone department, and rightfully so. We should now have more of an intermediate/deeper threat, or at least someone who can beat man coverage some of the time.

On top of that, Llyod was limited in many ways, and our WR3 and WR4 produced 21 catches (Edelman) and 16 catches (Branch), so I'm still unsure as to why everyone is so worried around here.

It's good to hear from you. You need to spend more time around here and less time with the "brahs" over on the BSPN boards....

 

[DocHoliday]

Honestly Tom has proven many many times its not the physical talents that matters in his WR, it's just being on the same page to take advantage of matchups.

That alone gets this team 80% of the required production. Add talent, which we should objectively have more of at this point and I think it's a given the WR corps are better.