2018 Free Agency -- Part 2

[mgteich]

Yes, this could mean that Belichick has more faith in players who couldn't crack the 53 when Badmosi and Richards gots lots of reps, or not. The issue is to have a roster in January where players like Bademosi and Richards aren't having significant position reps.

There are at least three more likely alternatives.
1) The improvement could come from having a better set of corners, and a better set of front six players.
2) Along with that, schemes might/should NOT call upon us to use 4 safeties. Also, one would expect fewer 3 safety sets, although that isn't necessary if all three of our fine safeties are healthy.
3) Belichick considers the 4th safety position to be essentially a ST position, with only emergency position reps. In this scenario, we would hope that if TWO safeties were injured, a corner would move to safety. Also, Belichick may consider Richards a top special teamer.
========
A) IMHO, we now have FIVE corners that can be counted on to play corner. I'm OK with a 6th making the team instead of a 4th position safety.
B) The middle should be better with Shelton and Valentine replacing Branch and Francois.
Also, Hightower is back. Finally, Roberts has considerable competition for the run-stuffing LB position.
C) Clayborn should be a good addition to pair with Flowers. Rivers may or may not help.
D) Marquise Flowers is an OK last LB and Ster. I'm OK with four LB positions: Hightower, Van Noy, Flowers, Roberts (or his upgrade from what we now have). We NEED an additional LB to upgrade for Flowers and move him to being an emergency only LB (and fine STer).
=======
BOTTOM LINE
1) We need an upgrade at LB. I suppose, this could be Sam or Langi. I find that unlikely.
2) We should have a NINTH position defensive back. we now have 8 (5 corners and 3 safeties). We have several in competition: Practice Squad players from last year, C Jones, Richards and a new free agent.

AN ASIDE
We are the best team in the AFC, perhaps in the NFL. But, yes, we will continue to get better through acquisitions and worse through injuries. It is not a tall order to add a backup LB (backup to Hightower and Van Noy) and a 9th position defensive back. If necessary, Belichick will use 2019 draft picks to secure these additions, which could come soon or right before the trade deadline. Obviously, we will also need to replace players who end up on IR.

Not only did BB not select any safeties in the draft, he didn't sign any UDFA candidates (although they may have tried). This could mean that the coaches have more confidence in David Jones and/or Damarius Travis than we know. Alternatively, it could mean that the Pats already have Reid or Vacarro lined up to sign after May 8th.

 

[maineman209]

Yes, this could mean that Belichick has more faith in players who couldn't crack the 53 when Badmosi and Richards gots lots of reps, or not. The issue is to have a roster in January where players like Bademosi and Richards aren't having significant position reps.

There are at least three more likely alternatives.
1) The improvement could come from having a better set of corners, and a better set of front six players.
2) Along with that, schemes might/should NOT call upon us to use 4 safeties. Also, one would expect fewer 3 safety sets, although that isn't necessary if all three of our fine safeties are healthy.
3) Belichick considers the 4th safety position to be essentially a ST position, with only emergency position reps. In this scenario, we would hope that if TWO safeties were injured, a corner would move to safety. Also, Belichick may consider Richards a top special teamer.
========
A) IMHO, we now have FIVE corners that can be counted on to play corner. I'm OK with a 6th making the team instead of a 4th position safety.
B) The middle should be better with Shelton and Valentine replacing Branch and Francois.
Also, Hightower is back. Finally, Roberts has considerable competition for the run-stuffing LB position.
C) Clayborn should be a good addition to pair with Flowers. Rivers may or may not help.
D) Marquise Flowers is an OK last LB and Ster. I'm OK with four LB positions: Hightower, Van Noy, Flowers, Roberts (or his upgrade from what we now have). We NEED an additional LB to upgrade for Flowers and move him to being an emergency only LB (and fine STer).
=======
BOTTOM LINE
1) We need an upgrade at LB. I suppose, this could be Sam or Langi. I find that unlikely.
2) We should have a NINTH position defensive back. we now have 8 (5 corners and 3 safeties). We have several in competition: Practice Squad players from last year, C Jones, Richards and a new free agent.

AN ASIDE
We are the best team in the AFC, perhaps in the NFL. But, yes, we will continue to get better through acquisitions and worse through injuries. It is not a tall order to add a backup LB (backup to Hightower and Van Noy) and a 9th position defensive back. If necessary, Belichick will use 2019 draft picks to secure these additions, which could come soon or right before the trade deadline. Obviously, we will also need to replace players who end up on IR.

To me, "more confidence" simply means more confidence in the developmental potential of Jones and/or for THIS season - after working through a second summer and Camp as part of the actual defense, rather than merely as part of the scout team working against the offense last year. It also means more confidence in them than BB/Caserio had in any of this year's prospects who they might have drafted or signed as UDFA - at least from a value perspective. Apparently, they didn't "like" any of the Edge players who were available to draft this year, either - which may indicate "more confidence than we know" in one or more of Rivers, Lee or Davis.

In any case, I'm not really focused on an improvement in the play of "the 4th safety" specifically. I'm thinking more about the resilience of the group. "If all three of their safeties are healthy" seems an unnecessary risk to take if another, good, experienced safety is available in free agency at a reasonable price.

And, I'm not sure why the Pats SHOULD NOT use 4 safeties or use 3 less frequently if they have 4 good ones. Just to be clear, I'm not making a prescription here that they SHOULD. I'm simply posing the question, "what if being able to use 3 and 4 safeties is what BB wants to do?" I don't know the answer to that because I'm not inside BB's head, but I also don't think that there's anything about the context of the past 2-3 seasons taken together that definitively proves that he doesn't want to.

Similarly, I really don't know how Belichick feels about the 4th safety position. It's possible that he has simply thought of it as merely a ST position in the past (and perhaps that's changed). It's also possible that the 4th safety has ended up being a special-teamer by happenstance, in spite of his wishes to the contrary, because there weren't any viable ones available in free agency and his draft picks didn't perform up to expectations.

Also, "moving a corner to safety" - IOW moving a player into a position and set of assignments/reads that he hasn't been trained in or practiced all off-season - doesn't necessarily work very well, especially in the mid-to-late season. It seems to me that's simply throwing a body at a problem that might have been easily avoided in the first place. The "problem", of course, would be a significant reduction in coverage option flexibility while incurring a potential weakness against the run.

 

[chasa]

My only concern with reid(prior to the lawsuit) is that his price tag is probably outside of our budget.

Vaccaro will be cheaper, but there is a reason hes still available. I'd much rather see how things go early in camp, and then if the secondary is struggling bring someone in.

 

[mgteich]

Yes, belichick could develop schemes with 4 quality safeties on the team, or 5 or 6.

That isn't the issue.

We have 3 quality safeties, and 5 position corners. The issue is where to use of resources.
Personally, I would not spend the money for a a safety to compete with Chung for reps. I'm fine with a developmental safety.

If we are to use significant resources, I would use them on a LB or two, and even on an EDGE player or a TE. Safety is relatively low on my list of where to spend significant resources.

But, sure, if Vacarro were here we'd sit one or two of our corners and play him. And, yes, I;d try to figure out why difference choices weren't made.

We used 4 safeties because Bademosi was our starting CB, Jones was playing hurt and we had lost 4 of our LB's (Hightower, McClellan, Ninkovich and Rivers). Patricia got this talent poor defense to be one of the top 5 in points allowed in the last half. He just couldn't handle the additional injury: to Jones [against an offense that was playing very well].

..

And, I'm not sure why the Pats SHOULD NOT use 4 safeties or use 3 less frequently if they have 4 good ones. Just to be clear, I'm not making a prescription here that they SHOULD. I'm simply posing the question, "what if being able to use 3 and 4 safeties is what BB wants to do?" I don't know the answer to that because I'm not inside BB's head, but I also don't think that there's anything about the context of the past 2-3 seasons taken together that definitively proves that he doesn't want to.

 

[maineman209]

We used 4 safeties because Bademosi was our starting CB, Jones was playing hurt and we had lost 4 of our LB's

The Pats used the 3-safety nickel the majority of the time in 2016, when none of those conditions pertained.

MY point is not about BB potentially developing schemes for using 4 safeties on a regular basis. It's about him already using 3-safeties as a major part of his coverage schemes on a regular basis for the past 2-3 seasons.

To me, it's an open question as to whether or not he intends to continue to do so. It could be that he's merely been taking advantage of the personnel at his disposal. It seems equally possible that this is his deliberate design to counter something that the offenses he faces are doing on a regular basis.

Therefore, it's also an open question to me as to which is the best use of resources from BB's perspective - on another quality safety or another corner or on a position outside the secondary.

 

[Ring 6]

Let's consider how many defensive backs are on the field.

FIVE
This is our primary formation.
We drafted a rating nickel back. And yes, I understand that J Jones provide competition (and backup) for the spot. The LB's are Hightower and Van Noy.

Yes, we can have the big nickel instead, with a 3rd safety instead f the nickel back. As with 4 CB set, this should will depend on game plan and situation.

In either of these, one of the safeties can cheat up close to the LOS, leaving one deep safety (still with 2 or 3 on the field).

Many times last year, we didn't have 3 healthy CB's including a nickel that could be trusted in that role, so the 3d safety was used much more than is the case when the nice back is there.

FOUR
This is in very likely run situations. A 3rd run-stuffing LB replaces the nickel. That LB is Roberts or whoever moves ahead of him in that role. In one season this role was taken by a rotation of PS players. Roberts is NOT terrible as this LB, although I am 100% fine with Belichick drafting competition.


SIX
This happens in pure passing situations, and in garbage time. Traditionally, the 6th back (the dime) was a corner. Sometimes, in certain situations, a safety was the 6th.

2 LB's are still on the field. last year, the LB's were so depleted (how depleted were they?) that a safety essentially played linebacker.

I agree with AJ. Let's end this option forever. Let's have enough healthy and competent LB's. Let's have 5 healthy and competent corners. let's have a better pass rush. There is no reason to have 4 safeties on the field, or even 3 if one of the safeties is injured.

SEVEN OR EIGHT
On desperation plays, we use all the defensive backs that are healthy.
==========
1) We've improved the front 6.
2) We will secure an additional LB. However, given our current DL, our current CB's, our current 3 safeties Hightower, Van Noy and Flowers should be adequate.
3) To repeat, if one of the safeties is injured, I'm 100% fine with playing the other two., and not having 3 safeties on the field. I don't see that 3 safeties is ever necessary.
Of course, if our #3 safety is good enough, he occasionally will be on the field in place of the nickel CB, or in place of the dime CB.
===========
aj, feel free to correct errors in my understanding.

The only comment I would add is that vs Kc and philly we used the 4 safety defense on early downs, almost like a base.
I understand the thought process but it just doesn’t work. Sometimes outside the box thinking fails.

 

[Ring 6]

The Pats used the 3-safety nickel the majority of the time in 2016, when none of those conditions pertained.

MY point is not about BB potentially developing schemes for using 4 safeties on a regular basis. It's about him already using 3-safeties as a major part of his coverage schemes on a regular basis for the past 2-3 seasons.

To me, it's an open question as to whether or not he intends to continue to do so. It could be that he's merely been taking advantage of the personnel at his disposal. It seems equally possible that this is his deliberate design to counter something that the offenses he faces are doing on a regular basis.

Therefore, it's also an open question to me as to which is the best use of resources from BB's perspective - on another quality safety or another corner or on a position outside the secondary.

Oh there is no doubt B.B. concocted a 4 safety defense to combat some of the changes in offenses, particularly the Reid lineage.
Unfortunately Reid never really had that much success against us so we ended up worse off with this experiment.

We also struggled mightily when we tried to play 3 DL nickel and dime. But not having Hightower certainly was a part maybe a big part of that.

 

[Uptown]

Dez?



Latest On Dez Bryant

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Dez?



Latest On Dez Bryant

No thank you. We have more receivers than we know what to do with right now:

• Returning starters: Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell.
• Backups & new free agents: Phillip Dorsett, Kenny Britt, Jordan Matthews, Cordarrelle Patterson.
• Rookies and second year practice squad players: Braxton Berrios, Chris Lacy, Cody Hollister, Riley McCarron.

Camp competition is going to be pretty fierce.

 

[maineman209]

Dez?



Latest On Dez Bryant

Interesting. However, I'm on to ....

.......... Manziel?

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

I don't expect major changes when it comes to the defense. Bill decided to roll the dice with these guys again. Maybe he thinks rivers can do a decent job playing in coverage. Our LBs still can't cover but let's see what happens. I expect our defense to be middle of the pack. It was terrible last year and then it got better as the season went on but this defense made average QBs look great and we saw that in the super bowl minus butler. I think we will know about this defense through the first 8 games. He believes Jason McCourty can be an adequate replacement for butler as a second corner.

 

[Uptown]

Suh?

Interesting. However, I'm on to ....

.......... Manziel?

 

[long distance]

adding QB #4 . a sign of Wentz possibly missing TC . likely starting on PUP..

 

[oceansizer]

No thank you. We have more receivers than we know what to do with right now:

• Returning starters: Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell.
• Backups & new free agents: Phillip Dorsett, Kenny Britt, Jordan Matthews, Cordarrelle Patterson.
• Rookies and second year practice squad players: Braxton Berrios, Chris Lacy, Cody Hollister, Riley McCarron.

Camp competition is going to be pretty fierce.

That is right. Another injury prone WR is redundant to us. We are loaded with WRs before the training camp. Let them compete and show their value.

 

[Deus Irae]

No thank you. We have more receivers than we know what to do with right now:

• Returning starters: Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell.
• Backups & new free agents: Phillip Dorsett, Kenny Britt, Jordan Matthews, Cordarrelle Patterson.
• Rookies and second year practice squad players: Braxton Berrios, Chris Lacy, Cody Hollister, Riley McCarron.

Camp competition is going to be pretty fierce.

Calling Mitchell a returning starter seems off to me.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Calling Mitchell a returning starter seems off to me.

That's fair.

I meant that he's shown more than Britt, Dorsett, etc. If healthy, he seems to be the favorite for the third receiver, since we already know that Brady trusts him. We'll see how it shakes out.

Dez has never really been our style of receiver, though. He would have to prove that he can reliably read a defense and run routes in sync with Brady. We've never exclusively featured a big jump ball receiver. If we want to go that direction, we already have cheap alternatives who can at least provide a red zone presence. It's tough to see where Dez would offer enough value as a third receiver who doesn't play special teams.

Patterson is arguably the best kick returner in the NFL. With the changes to the kickoff formations / rules, he's probably even more valuable since coverage teams don't get a running start. Realistically, that means we still need a backup for Edelman (assuming he's starting the year; he might be on PUP), as well as some variety on the outside. Matthews and Berrios probably have the edge for the slot. Dorsett is the fastest player on the roster, and he was a solid blocker last year. I suspect he'll get a shot to compete. Etc.

 

[maineman209]

That's fair.

I meant that he's shown more than Britt, Dorsett, etc. If healthy, he seems to be the favorite for the third receiver, since we already know that Brady trusts him. We'll see how it shakes out.

Dez has never really been our style of receiver, though. He would have to prove that he can reliably read a defense and run routes in sync with Brady. We've never exclusively featured a big jump ball receiver. If we want to go that direction, we already have cheap alternatives who can at least provide a red zone presence. It's tough to see where Dez would offer enough value as a third receiver who doesn't play special teams.

Patterson is arguably the best kick returner in the NFL. With the changes to the kickoff formations / rules, he's probably even more valuable since coverage teams don't get a running start. Realistically, that means we still need a backup for Edelman (assuming he's starting the year; he might be on PUP), as well as some variety on the outside. Matthews and Berrios probably have the edge for the slot. Dorsett is the fastest player on the roster, and he was a solid blocker last year. I suspect he'll get a shot to compete. Etc.

Since the Pats' passing playbook seems to be heavily based on "levels" concepts, it might be useful to sorta "map out" the target areas of the field where each of these candidates have excelled in the past/may be acceptable going forward (because not every pass-catcher has run every route to every area equally well). Those levels/target areas would include:

behind the line
short range (up to ~8 yds)
intermediate range (~9 to 14 yds)
"deep" (~15 yds +)

And those levels could be further divided between inside and outside the numbers. Even "left-outside" and "right-outside" might make a difference.

It seems to me that the Pats might want to have all those target areas covered - redundantly, if possible, in order to preserve playbook options when players are injured. But then, we'd also need to include the TEs and RBs in those calculations.

For example, Gronk certainly runs deep routes frequently (hash, middle, boundary). In 2016, Bennett seemed to run quite a few intermediate-range routes (mostly hash to the boundary), and White has run numerous intermediate-range routes along the boundary (mostly right side, IIRC).

WRT WRs, We know that Dorsett can get deep and he's also run deep-crossers successfully, usually from right to left, as I recall. Hogan has been excellent deep/mostly left/mostly outside the numbers. He was used quite a bit more on intermediate-range routes in the middle last season (likely due to the absence of Edelman), but wasn't nearly as successful.

Anyway, such a "mapping out exercise might provide a feel for the versatility/limitations of each candidate, and for how the Pats might structure the entire pass-catching corps for resilience. If nothing else, it would provide a different perspective.

 

[maineman209]

Kinda like a new UDFA ...

 

[maineman209]

Duplicate post - computer glitch. Delete.

 

[long distance]