2017 Training Camp - Day 14 (8/16/17) [2nd Joint Practice with the Texans]

[Tony2046]

I think it's funny that @Deus Irae starts and argument about what a Deep Threat is and still hasn't actually defined it despite being asked by several people.. But that is Deus.. He can't be bothered once he thinks he's got a "win".

I thought that's what he was doing here.

I remember having arguments about this years ago, though I don't remember who with...

Any eligible player can threaten deep on any play. I generally break the field down into 9 zones

Inside 10 yards left/Inside 10 yards middle/Inside 10 yards right
11-20 as above
21+ as above

If you want to find the guys that are truly the best deep threats, find the guys who force teams to game plan them, specifically, even at 21+, and who still make the big plays downfield. When we do that, we're looking at guys like Dez Bryant, DeSean Jackson and Julio Jones, not guys like Hogan or Edelman.

 

[luuked]

Acknowledging that I'm splitting hairs, but I wouldn't say that YAC is "trivial", just that it's incomplete used out of context.

Anyway, the actually important thing to me about your post is that Hogan demonstrates that the tier-2/tier-3, situational/role players on the Pats are generally superior to the analogous players on other teams. Hogan is an example of the depth of quality on the Pats roster, and of the quality of BB's work in building it.

By trivial I mean that it is one of those stats that is simply compiled whereas there are ****ton metrics that are computed as a combination of factors and yet are equally pointless because they don't give the full picture.

 

[luuked]

I think it's funny that @Deus Irae starts and argument about what a Deep Threat is and still hasn't actually defined it despite being asked by several people.. But that is Deus.. He can't be bothered once he thinks he's got a "win".

I think he explained his view a couple posts earlier in this thread where he talks about the different zones of the field and whatnot.

 

[Tony2046]

By trivial I mean that it is one of those stats that is simply compiled whereas there are ****ton metrics that are computed as a combination of factors and yet are equally pointless because they don't give the full picture.

They don't but they can point you in the right direction in order to get the full picture.

 

[maineman209]

By trivial I mean that it is one of those stats that is simply compiled whereas there are ****ton metrics that are computed as a combination of factors and yet are equally pointless because they don't give the full picture.

Wish I could rate this "Agree" and "Funny" at the same time.

 

[Tony2046]

Wish I could rate this "Agree" and "Funny" at the same time.

I'll give the agree and you give the funny. haha

Edit: Oops. Vice versa then.

 

[luuked]

@Deus Irae @maineman209 @luuked

Using statistics only gets you in the ballpark but it's clear that Hogan isn't a top 5 deep threat but I don't think he's the 30th either. Other nonnumerical factors come into play such as offensive scheme, losing targets to other receiving threats etc...

With Deus's suggestion I sorted the receivers by most 20+ receptions.

I then created two charts. By 20+ yard plays and 20+ 40 yard plays. I think 20+40 gives a decent list to start a subjective debate with.

FTR, I like the 20+40 chart for one crucial and unarguable reason. Cooks and Hogan are ranked higher.

Thanks for the input.

Hogan is ranked 30th. Cooks ranked 17th
View attachment 17769

This is sorted by the combined 20+40 yard receptions.

Hogan ranked 23rd. Cooks ranked 12th.
View attachment 17770

There are so many ways to be successful as a WR/TE. One of the ways is that you are so respected that the opponents game plan for you and move the coverage towards you which frees up other players. This won't show up on any of the stat sheets.

Similarly, you can be a above-average WR but your team is stacked on other positions and the coaching staff knows how to leverage your strengths to put you into matchups that make you a statistical monster. If the opponents would stop putting their third or fourth best DB on that player he'd stop producing but this would mean that other players on the team have easier coverage to beat.

I agree totally with @maineman209 that what makes the Pats so deadly are not so much the top end players but that the depth players are usually better than those of the opponents which opens up a lot of ways to scheme/exploit matchups.

To bring this back to the stats you posted, as long as there is no way to normalize for the role and coverage and whatnot each receiver faced there will be no way to objectively compare them.

Yes, I suppose you can compare their production and say that in the end the only thing that matters are the points but like I mentioned above this ignores a lot of strategic decisions that led to those results.

 

[patsfan13]

I'll take a shot, a Deep threat is a player who dictates coverage due to his ability to score from anywhere on the field. Speed is certainly a major factor, height frequently is. The need to (usually) use your #1 DB + help in coverage is another (BB frequently uses #2-3 CB + help, see coverage scheme in J Jones in SB).

Randy Moss is a prime example, currently Julio Jones certainly is a deep threat.

Other players get deep due to the D having to focus on different players, these players find themselves matched up in #2-3 CB's. Using the Patriots as an example Gronk and Edleman were the #-12 options last year, that left Hiogan matched up with #3 CB's frequently which the Pats exploited using their scheme to get his deep in favorable situations.

So in situations this year Hogan could be matched up against a #3-4 CB in single coverage due to teams having to account for Gronk and Cooks, this will benefit Edleman also.

Cooks could be a deep threat in spite of his lack of height. Gronk is a deep threat down the seams cur to his size and the matchup problems he creates. This is pretty unique among TE's.

OK just off the top of my head here, feel free to correct any bone headed statements.

 

[Tony2046]

There are so many ways to be successful as a WR/TE. One of the ways is that you are so respected that the opponents game plan for you and move the coverage towards you which frees up other players. This won't show up on any of the stat sheets.

Similarly, you can be a above-average WR but your team is stacked on other positions and the coaching staff knows how to leverage your strengths to put you into matchups that make you a statistical monster. If the opponents would stop putting their third or fourth best DB on that player he'd stop producing but this would mean that other players on the team have easier coverage to beat.

I agree totally with @maineman209 that what makes the Pats so deadly are not so much the top end players but that the depth players are usually better than those of the opponents which opens up a lot of ways to scheme/exploit matchups.

To bring this back to the stats you posted, as long as there is no way to normalize for the role and coverage and whatnot each receiver faced there will be no way to objectively compare them.

Yes, I suppose you can compare their production and say that in the end the only thing that matters are the points but like I mentioned above this ignores a lot of strategic decisions that led to those results.

I agree. Stats are useful when trying to define a window of where to start a discussion but they can't end one.

 

[Tony2046]

I'll take a shot, a Deep threat is a player who dictates coverage due to his ability to score from anywhere on the field. Speed is certainly a major factor, height frequently is. The need to (usually) use your #1 DB + help in coverage is another (BB frequently uses #2-3 CB + help, see coverage scheme in J Jones in SB).

Randy Moss is a prime example, currently Julio Jones certainly is a deep threat.

Other players get deep due to the D having to focus on different players, these players find themselves matched up in #2-3 CB's. Using the Patriots as an example Gronk and Edleman were the #-12 options last year, that left Hiogan matched up with #3 CB's frequently which the Pats exploited using their scheme to get his deep in favorable situations.

So in situations this year Hogan could be matched up against a #3-4 CB in single coverage due to teams having to account for Gronk and Cooks, this will benefit Edleman also.

Cooks could be a deep threat in spite of his lack of height. Gronk is a deep threat down the seams cur to his size and the matchup problems he creates. This is pretty unique among TE's.

OK just off the top of my head here, feel free to correct any bone headed statements.

"Dictates coverage" is an excellent starting point.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

Maybe this will bring this thread back to normal. Here's a shot of Gronk and JJ Watt going at it on the field. 2 warriors battling it out.

I'll be curious to see whether the Tom Brady diet/training regimen that Gronk has picked up will cost him any of his raw power / strength that might show up in a 1v1 blocking situation against someone of equal size and athleticism.

 

[jimnance]

I'll be curious to see whether the Tom Brady diet/training regimen that Gronk has picked up will cost him any of his raw power / strength that might show up in a 1v1 blocking situation against someone of equal size and athleticism.

Probably the opposite. Brady has more power/strength now than he ever did before. No reason why Gronk wouldnt benefit as well. Gronk also trains a little different, as te obviously requires more power/strength than QB.
Increasing flexibility and balance, doing yoga just makes you a better athlete overall. Also allows you to improve in the weight room, since you'll recover quicker. Eliminating(or just cutting down on) red meat helps since it's now known that red meat actually lowers testosterone production.

 

[Tony2046]

@Tony2046 Didn't I tell you to have faith?

I just got this. haha.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

Probably the opposite. Brady has more power/strength now than he ever did before. No reason why Gronk wouldnt benefit as well. Gronk also trains a little different, as te obviously requires more power/strength than QB.
Increasing flexibility and balance, doing yoga just makes you a better athlete overall. Also allows you to improve in the weight room, since you'll recover quicker.

It'll be interesting to see if Gronk speaks of not being sore, the same as Tom does. I'm not contesting that flexibility, balance and yoga are excellent things, and I hope they help Gronk stay healthy.

As you hinted at, Tom has "power" in a different same than Gronk. Tom's power is more like that of a golfer or pitcher - rotational power and flexibility. His program is based around that idea. Gronk's power, on the other hand - blocking / shedding defenders - is different and likely requires the more traditional weight lifting elements remain in his training, along with whatever he's doing with Guerrero to get some of the benefits of what Tom has done.

My question is whether the time that Gronk spends focusing on his balance / flexibility / Guerrero stuff that he cannot dedicate to his previous workout regime will have any expense to what his previous workout routine allowed him to do. Or, maybe it's just plainly better to do it Tom and Guerrero's way, as you suggest. I guess we can go back and recall that Willie McGinest introduced Tom to Guerrero back in the day.

Eliminating(or just cutting down on) red meat helps since it's now known that red meat actually lowers testosterone production.

Do you have a source for this info? I'd be curious to read it, if you do.

 

[jimnance]

It'll be interesting to see if Gronk speaks of not being sore, the same as Tom does. I'm not contesting that flexibility, balance and yoga are excellent things, and I hope they help Gronk stay healthy.

As you hinted at, Tom has "power" in a different same than Gronk. Tom's power is more like that of a golfer or pitcher - rotational power and flexibility. His program is based around that idea. Gronk's power, on the other hand - blocking / shedding defenders - is different and likely requires the more traditional weight lifting elements remain in his training, along with whatever he's doing with Guerrero to get some of the benefits of what Tom has done.

My question is whether the time that Gronk spends focusing on his balance / flexibility / Guerrero stuff that he cannot dedicate to his previous workout regime will have any expense to what his previous workout routine allowed him to do. Or, maybe it's just plainly better to do it Tom and Guerrero's way, as you suggest. I guess we can go back and recall that Willie McGinest introduced Tom to Guerrero back in the day.


Do you have a source for this info? I'd be curious to read it, if you do.

I'll have to hunt for it. It was a shock to me too, but I've seen it in multiple places. Numerous medical studies. Red meat apparently inhibits testosterone production. Some of the foods that increase it are surprising: shrimp,strawberries and coconut. I already knew about pumpkin seeds.
Not many athletes eat much red meat any more during their seasons- since it also takes about 48 hours to digest- more blood goes to the gut to help digestion instead of to muscles. Most athletes eat a lot more chicken and fish instead since it digests quicker. Pretty common knowledge for anyone who works out much or plays a sport.
Back in the 60's, marathon runners used to eat steak before they ran. Nothing wrong with a little red meat,in moderation. But if you're seriously training, you gotta be careful when you eat it.

 

[long distance]

not that it means much . but to round up speculations..

 

[Bourne Again Christian]

When will we hear more?

 

[long distance]

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

not that it means much . but to round up speculations..

****in gutted.

 

[long distance]

****in gutted.

Remember Flowers..