ELITE PASS-RUSHERS, Over-analyzed

[MaineMan]

We've all heard the claims.

"We need an elite pass-rusher or we'll never make it back to the Superbowl!"

"If only we had an elite pass-rusher like McGinest again!"

"We NEED to stop screwing around and trade UP this time to get an elite pass-rusher!"

Such claims annoy me partly because, hell, I have no idea if they're accurate or not without doing my thing and digging into them. And that's the other part that annoys me - it takes TIME to dig into this stuff, whether to verify or disprove (and I honestly try to be neutral), but I have other crap to take care of.

It's like with "news" reporters and politicians. They're always making these claims in grave and authoritative or fear-mongering tones and I'm sitting there thinking, "JAY-zuz! REALLY?" so I go look stuff up and run some numbers so I can get a sense of proportion and perspective. And, of course, 99% of the time*, those news people and poiticos are just unloading another pile of stinky crap (*NOT a verifiable percentage). You'd think that the newspeople, with all their resources would have the professional courtesy to actually do this kind of thing FOR us, BEFORE they open their mouths and pass along pure cant. But, y'know, it's a caveat emptor world. Always has been.

Generally speaking, folks on this board are much, MUCH better about this (yet another unverifiable pseudo-quantification). But still, it's often worth looking a little deeper. So, I did.

I started by listing the sack leaders for the past decade, noting their draft position and, because it was there, recording total team sacks and how their team finished in those years. Yeah, I'm not close to done yet. But I have some preliminary results that seemed worth reporting.

-------------------

Eliminating one-year-wonders that might skew things, this is the list of guys (regardless of position) who've appeared among the sack leaders multiple years.

PLAYER / DRAFT POS# / Appearances among leaders

Mario Williams - #1 - 2
Julius Peppers - #2 - 5
Simeon Rice - #3 - 4
Andre Carter - #7 - 2
Terrell Suggs - #10 - 2
Dwight Freeney - #11 - 4
DeMarcus Ware - #11 - 5
Shaun Ellis - #12 - 2
Shawn Merriman - #12 - 2
John Abraham - #13 - 3

At this point, things start to get "disjointed", not to say, weird. So, I decided to throw back in a couple recent draftees who haven't really had a shot at multiple appearances yet (still leaving out those guys whose careers were pretty much over by 2001). It didn't really help, as you'll see shortly.

Orakpo - #13 - 1
Matthews - #26 - 1

Patrick Kerney - #30 - 3
Michael Strahan - #40 - 4
Aaron Schobel - #46 - 3
Lamarr Woodley - #46 - 3
Osi Umenyiora - #56 - 3
Leonard Little - #65 - 4
Jason Taylor - #73 - 4
Justin Tuck - #74 - 2
Bertrand Berry - #86 - 2
Shaun Phillips - #98 - 2
Jared Allen - #126 - 5
Elvis Dumervil - #126 - 2
**** Mathis - #138 - 3
Trent Cole - #146 - 2
KGB - #149 - 3 (If you don't know who "KGB" is, I'm not going to spell it out for you. Because I can't.)
Rod Coleman - #153 - 2
Aaron Kampmann - #156 - 3
James Harrison - UDFA - 2
Cameron Wake - UDFA - 1

So, WTF happens between #13 and #30? Going back to the "one-year-wonder" list, there are six guys total, including Matthews, selected between #13 and #30. Three more between #30 and #40. Still very thin at those spots.

Beyond that, it breaks down like this
- Top FIVE: 3 guys, 11 appearances
- Top TEN (tot): 5 guys, 15 appearances
- Top 15 (tot): 12 guys, 32 appearances
- (ahem)
- four 2nd-rounders, 13 appearances
- yadda, yadda (technical term used by data analysts to mean, "Meh.")

So, recognizing that this is possibly distorted by "player era", I need to go back and include "year drafted." S'okay. I was going back to the store anyway.... BECAUSE, for instance, there needs to be some weighting done to distinguish between, say, Carter - who's had 3 seasons of 9+ sacks in an 10-yr career - and, Mathis - who's had 6 seasons of 9+ sacks in an 8-yr career. There's also year-by-year pass defense to tie in somewhere.

Anywho, here's another (possible) trend I noticed and need to follow up on. It seems as if, no matter how many sacks one of these guys gets in a given season or how many times he's on the list, the lower his percentage of TOTAL TEAM SACKS, the better the team fares in terms of W/L record and post-season wins for that year. There seems to be a turning point somewhere between 30% and 40%. E.g., Allen gets 42% of teams sacks (15.5), the team goes 4-12; he gets 32% (14.5), the team goes 12-4 and wins a playoff game. Or, Peppers gets 34% (10.5), the team goes 8-8; he gets 24% (8), the team goes 11-5 and wins a playoff game.

This seems a GENERAL trend and there are exceptions, but I'll follow up.

Might be important to note a couple of things at this juncture.
- The Pats have had a guy among the sack leaders only once in the past decade - Vrabel, 2007 (12.5).
- Pats "sack leaders" over the years have represented a very low % of total sacks:

(SB) 2001 - Hamilton - 7 = 18%
---- 2002 - Seymour (or McGinest) - 5.5 = 17%
(SB) 2003 - Vrabel - 9.5 = 23%
(SB) 2004 - McGinest - 9.5 = 21%
---- 2005 - Colvin - 7 = 21%
(AFCCG) 2006 - Colvin - 8.5 = 19%
(SBL) 2007 - Vrabel - 12.5 = 27%
---- 2008 - Seymour - 8 = 27%
---- 2009 - TBC - 10 = 32%
---- 2010 - Wright - 5.5 = 15%

That's why I'm compelled to play the "what-if" game WRT the 2010 season. We had 20% more sacks than in 2008-09 and yet a much broader distribution that was also more like the earlier Superbowl years. If Ty Warren had been able to play.....if Mike Wright had been able to stick around.....

 

[tricktak]

We've all heard the claims.

"We need an elite pass-rusher or we'll never make it back to the Superbowl!"

"If only we had an elite pass-rusher like McGinest again!"

"We NEED to stop screwing around and trade UP this time to get an elite pass-rusher!"

Such claims annoy me partly because, hell, I have no idea if they're accurate or not without doing my thing and digging into them. And that's the other part that annoys me - it takes TIME to dig into this stuff, whether to verify or disprove (and I honestly try to be neutral), but I have other crap to take care of.

It's like with "news" reporters and politicians. They're always making these claims in grave and authoritative or fear-mongering tones and I'm sitting there thinking, "JAY-zuz! REALLY?" so I go look stuff up and run some numbers so I can get a sense of proportion and perspective. And, of course, 99% of the time*, those news people and poiticos are just unloading another pile of stinky crap (*NOT a verifiable percentage). You'd think that the newspeople, with all their resources would have the professional courtesy to actually do this kind of thing FOR us, BEFORE they open their mouths and pass along pure cant. But, y'know, it's a caveat emptor world. Always has been.

Generally speaking, folks on this board are much, MUCH better about this (yet another unverifiable pseudo-quantification). But still, it's often worth looking a little deeper. So, I did.

I started by listing the sack leaders for the past decade, noting their draft position and, because it was there, recording total team sacks and how their team finished in those years. Yeah, I'm not close to done yet. But I have some preliminary results that seemed worth reporting.

-------------------

Eliminating one-year-wonders that might skew things, this is the list of guys (regardless of position) who've appeared among the sack leaders multiple years.

PLAYER / DRAFT POS# / Appearances among leaders

Mario Williams - #1 - 2
Julius Peppers - #2 - 5
Simeon Rice - #3 - 4
Andre Carter - #7 - 2
Terrell Suggs - #10 - 2
Dwight Freeney - #11 - 4
DeMarcus Ware - #11 - 5
Shaun Ellis - #12 - 2
Shawn Merriman - #12 - 2
John Abraham - #13 - 3

At this point, things start to get "disjointed", not to say, weird. So, I decided to throw back in a couple recent draftees who haven't really had a shot at multiple appearances yet (still leaving out those guys whose careers were pretty much over by 2001). It didn't really help, as you'll see shortly.

Orakpo - #13 - 1
Matthews - #26 - 1

Patrick Kerney - #30 - 3
Michael Strahan - #40 - 4
Aaron Schobel - #46 - 3
Lamarr Woodley - #46 - 3
Osi Umenyiora - #56 - 3
Leonard Little - #65 - 4
Jason Taylor - #73 - 4
Justin Tuck - #74 - 2
Bertrand Berry - #86 - 2
Shaun Phillips - #98 - 2
Jared Allen - #126 - 5
Elvis Dumervil - #126 - 2
**** Mathis - #138 - 3
Trent Cole - #146 - 2
KGB - #149 - 3 (If you don't know who "KGB" is, I'm not going to spell it out for you. Because I can't.)
Rod Coleman - #153 - 2
Aaron Kampmann - #156 - 3
James Harrison - UDFA - 2
Cameron Wake - UDFA - 1

So, WTF happens between #13 and #30? Going back to the "one-year-wonder" list, there are six guys total, including Matthews, selected between #13 and #30. Three more between #30 and #40. Still very thin at those spots.

Beyond that, it breaks down like this
- Top FIVE: 3 guys, 11 appearances
- Top TEN (tot): 5 guys, 15 appearances
- Top 15 (tot): 12 guys, 32 appearances
- (ahem)
- four 2nd-rounders, 13 appearances
- yadda, yadda (technical term used by data analysts to mean, "Meh.")

So, recognizing that this is possibly distorted by "player era", I need to go back and include "year drafted." S'okay. I was going back to the store anyway.... BECAUSE, for instance, there needs to be some weighting done to distinguish between, say, Carter - who's had 3 seasons of 9+ sacks in an 10-yr career - and, Mathis - who's had 6 seasons of 9+ sacks in an 8-yr career. There's also year-by-year pass defense to tie in somewhere.

Anywho, here's another (possible) trend I noticed and need to follow up on. It seems as if, no matter how many sacks one of these guys gets in a given season or how many times he's on the list, the lower his percentage of TOTAL TEAM SACKS, the better the team fares in terms of W/L record and post-season wins for that year. There seems to be a turning point somewhere between 30% and 40%. E.g., Allen gets 42% of teams sacks (15.5), the team goes 4-12; he gets 32% (14.5), the team goes 12-4 and wins a playoff game. Or, Peppers gets 34% (10.5), the team goes 8-8; he gets 24% (8), the team goes 11-5 and wins a playoff game.

This seems a GENERAL trend and there are exceptions, but I'll follow up.

Might be important to note a couple of things at this juncture.
- The Pats have had a guy among the sack leaders only once in the past decade - Vrabel, 2007 (12.5).
- Pats "sack leaders" over the years have represented a very low % of total sacks:

(SB) 2001 - Hamilton - 7 = 18%
---- 2002 - Seymour (or McGinest) - 5.5 = 17%
(SB) 2003 - Vrabel - 9.5 = 23%
(SB) 2004 - McGinest - 9.5 = 21%
---- 2005 - Colvin - 7 = 21%
(AFCCG) 2006 - Colvin - 8.5 = 19%
(SBL) 2007 - Vrabel - 12.5 = 27%
---- 2008 - Seymour - 8 = 27%
---- 2009 - TBC - 10 = 32%
---- 2010 - Wright - 5.5 = 15%

That's why I'm compelled to play the "what-if" game WRT the 2010 season. We had 20% more sacks than in 2008-09 and yet a much broader distribution that was also more like the earlier Superbowl years. If Ty Warren had been able to play.....if Mike Wright had been able to stick around.....

Ty Warren and Mike Wright are not great pass rushers, sorry. Warren is known as a run stopper and Wright is just an ok pas rusher. they need at least a great pass rusher, maybe not an elite one but a great one. Did you not watch the playoff game vs. the jets? Sanchez had all the time in the world to throw the ball becuase he wasn't getting pressured at all. Any time Brady would get pressured by GREAT pass rushers like Ellis and Pace, he would make errant throws. A great or elite pass rusher is ONE THE MOST IMORTANT THINGS TO HAVE IN THIS LEAGUE. Look the past few years with teams in the superbowl, Pittsburgh (Harrison, Woodley), Green Bay (Matthews), the Colts (Freeney, Mathis) and New Orleans (Will Smith) all have had great pass rushers and the Patriots simply don't have any and they can't ask guys like Wilfork and Warren to rush the passer when that is simply not their forte. They need to grab a big time pass rusher this year, whether by trade, free agency or in the draft to finally get over the hump.

 

[MaineMan]

Ty Warren and Mike Wright are not great pass rushers, sorry. Warren is known as a run stopper and Wright is just an ok pas rusher. they need at least a great pass rusher, maybe not an elite one but a great one. Did you not watch the playoff game vs. the jets? Sanchez had all the time in the world to throw the ball becuase he wasn't getting pressured at all. Any time Brady would get pressured by GREAT pass rushers like Ellis and Pace, he would make errant throws. A great or elite pass rusher is ONE THE MOST IMORTANT THINGS TO HAVE IN THIS LEAGUE. Look the past few years with teams in the superbowl, Pittsburgh (Harrison, Woodley), Green Bay (Matthews), the Colts (Freeney, Mathis) and New Orleans (Will Smith) all have had great pass rushers and the Patriots simply don't have any and they can't ask guys like Wilfork and Warren to rush the passer when that is simply not their forte. They need to grab a big time pass rusher this year, whether by trade, free agency or in the draft to finally get over the hump.

I'm looking to see where I claimed that either Ty Warren or Mike Wright is an "elite pass rusher" or even a great one. Nope. Not there.

If anything, what the stats indicate to me is that the Pats have NEVER had an "elite pass rusher" compared to the sack leaders I'd already noted (and you then re-listed). But, they did have a "pass-rush". And the Pats got to four Superbowls (almost five), winning three of them, without a sack leader, "big-time pass rusher."

The only point I'm making about Mike Wright is that he's an effective, if limited, interior sub-rusher. If he stays healthy, maybe he contributes another sack or two to bring his total to seven and the team total to 38+.

The only point I'm making bringing up Ty Warren is that he ties up another blocker, which could have freed up someone else to get more pressure and maybe Cunningham, Ninkovich, Moore, TBC, etc. together get another sack or two. But the most important thing about Ty Warren is, as you note, his run defense, especially compared to Brace or G. Warren. And that's critical to the overall defensive effort facing a team with a tandem running threat like LT/Greene. With Ty on the line, you don't have to devote that extra LB or safety to cover the all-too legit threat of a running play on 3rd down. Without him, guy who could be covering or pinning their ears back and rushing are too easily caught by play-action.

BTW - if you're going to single out Sanchez as a QB the defense didn't do well against, you should probably acknowledge that he had one of the league's better ground games to back him up, AND, that he's become very elusive against pressure and, at this point, throws as well on the run as most of the best QBs in the league. IOW, I think you're giving him much less credit than he's due.

 

[mcsully]

MaineMan, very good post.. Thought out with a lot of facts to back up your opinion..

I'm not going to pull apart your post, but I think stats (esp Sacks) in our system hold very little weight.

You are correct, Vrabel and McGinnest weren't 15 sack a piece guys but they constantly put pressure on the QB and force turn overs. Between Harrison, Bruschi and a few others, they were able to change the game and make a pivotal play. Yes McCourtey had a great season last year and I'm hoping Mayo steps up his play from Tackling machine to game changing machine.. And I believe with Experience and another year being healthy, we'll see that..

But what a lot of us are saying is we are weak at RDE adn OLB. We need to bring in talent for that position.. I for one don't want to sit at 17 or 28 and reach for a player because we have a need. I want us to be active and move up and grab this player.

Of course moving up doesn't guarantee a great player and a lot of times, teams fail by picking the wrong player for their system or for some other reasons. But I believe in our staff and I believe the %'s are in our favor by moving up. I've read tons of articles that say the lower you pick, the less chance you are to bring in a talented player. So why not increase our chances, target a player and let him learn with our coaching staff.. our odds of addressing a glaring weakness is increased..

 

[Off The Grid]

You'd think that the newspeople, with all their resources would have the professional courtesy to actually do this kind of thing FOR us, BEFORE they open their mouths and pass along pure cant.

But, y'know, it's a caveat emptor world.

Always has been.

Pure POETRY, Brother Maine!!

 

[tricktak]

I'm not going to pull apart your post, but I think stats (esp Sacks) in our system hold very little weight.

You are correct, Vrabel and McGinnest weren't 15 sack a piece guys but they constantly put pressure on the QB and force turn overs.

Totally agree, vrabel consistently brought pressure to the quarterback as did McGinest. Cunningham was not highly thought of as a great pass rusher coming out of college anyways so we cannot depend on him to take a big leap forward and become our best pass rusher, he just doesn't have a great set of pass rushing skills. Ninkovich while probably make a few lucky plays bfor himself every now and then, but let's face it, he's a mediocre starter, should be a backup and has probably less pass rushing talent than Cunningham. Banta-Cain took a big step down as well and was not nearly a disruptive pass rusher as he was last year. There's only really a couple of guys on this roster who have great pass rushing talent, one being eric moore. It's not just about the pass rushing either, Vrabel and McGinest were both team leaders ad nobody on this defense has stepped up yet to become the leader and they need another scrappy pass rushing, high energy guy to lead this defense and give it some life. Mayo has been around for a few years and has just not stepped up as the leader of this defense.

 

[sbpatfan]

It's easy to say, "the Patriots need to trade up and grab an elite pass rusher." The question is, who? How many rookies are capable of being out veteran NFL players and providing an elite pass rush? Not many, and is it worth the risk? We've seen plenty of elite looking rookies prospects absolutely bust at the next level. Guys like Aaron Maybin and Vernon Gholston come to mind.

Is a guy like Robert Quinn really the answer? Or does picking up one of the first round ends along with a OLB in the second (where with all the Pats' picks it would be much easier to maneuver and get the guy you want) make the team better overall and therefore increase the pass rush?

 

[Off The Grid]

Ty Warren and Mike Wright are not great pass rushers, sorry.

It's always amusing when a poster of your caliber takes a flip and insulting attitude towards a poster of Maine's caliber.

...Particularly when you're ~ evidently ~ so confused by his level of discourse that, in your fevered imagination, you fabricate his position.

I'm looking to see where I claimed that either Ty Warren or Mike Wright is an "elite pass rusher" or even a great one.

Nope.

Not there.

Whoops!! Try again, Tak?? :bricks:

 

[jukes]

Doesnt matter if we have clay matthews, if we dont have people clearing the way for him in the trenches

 

[Off The Grid]

Doesnt matter if we have clay matthews, if we dont have people clearing the way for him in the trenches

There it is.

 

[Seneschal2]

Or does picking up one of the first round ends along with a OLB in the second (where with all the Pats' picks it would be much easier to maneuver and get the guy you want) make the team better overall and therefore increase the pass rush?

I do believe you'll be proven to be a prophetic soul -- post draft.

Also, MM - BB has stated that from a gameplan perspective, having two OLBs (left and right) with similar skillsets is his preferred roster of choice. Each one able to set the edge, with a dose of pass rush ability. If one side of his D was weaker than the other, the opposition would gameplan vs the weaker side. This is why we probably won't see one-dimensional pass rushers donning a Pats uni, as he wants them (the OLBs) to be balanced players. His thoughts are similar with the two TE offense, preferring two TEs who can block and catch.

 

[jukes]

I think the word "elite pass rusher" is overly used, there hasnt been an elite rusher in the past few drafts pesides clay matthews and orakpo, and woodley who turned out to be great since 07

 

[bucky]

We've all heard the claims.

"We need an elite pass-rusher or we'll never make it back to the Superbowl!"

"If only we had an elite pass-rusher like McGinest again!"

"We NEED to stop screwing around and trade UP this time to get an elite pass-rusher!"

I'm not sure whether these are the exact claims that have been made, but you're probably right. I'll certainly take your word for it. But maybe it's fair to say that this team just needs to improve the pass rush, which does not necessarily mean getting an elite pass rusher.

And when it comes to improving the pass rush, there are 2 areas of need IMO:

First, the 3rd down "specialists" are far from special. Pryor doesn't get to the QB much. The jury's out on Moore, but before him there certainly wasn't anyone to speak of. Wright is a good sub rusher, but his future is in doubt now. TBC is someone I'm OK with in that role. So the upgrade shouldn't be so hard - replace Wright, upgrade Pryor and Moore. The better players we get, the better the 3rd down D will be, but "elite" is not even in the vocabulary here.

Second, we need a better pass rush on 1st and 2nd downs. Our base D has a lot of good run stoppers who are not good at getting to the QB - Brace, Wilfork, Cunningham, Warren, Love, Nink. The solution here is much more difficult - we need to get some players who are good against both the pass and the run. This is the area where guys like Vrabel, Seymour, McGinnest were eilte. Of course the added benefit to this is these guys area all 3 down players and will improve your 3rd down defense as well. That's the kind of players I think we need to be getting even if it means moving up.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Second, we need a better pass rush on 1st and 2nd downs. Our base D has a lot of good run stoppers who are not good at getting to the QB - Brace, Wilfork, Cunningham, Warren, Love, Nink. The solution here is much more difficult - we need to get some players who are good against both the pass and the run. This is the area where guys like Vrabel, Seymour, McGinnest were eilte. Of course the added benefit to this is these guys area all 3 down players and will improve your 3rd down defense as well. That's the kind of players I think we need to be getting even if it means moving up.

I agree, there's plenty of run-stuffing types on the roster now with the impending return of Ty Warren, Brace, and the addition of Stroud.

But how about 4 down players? I think that's the term BB used when he was speaking about why he wanted McCourty in last year's draft. I think Watt can fill that criteria. Does he need a little filling out and coaching so he gets stronger against the run? Sure. But as a final product I think he has the ability to be that 3 down or even 4 down lineman (he can block kicks with his length and vertical). And getting after the QB, that he can do with a variety of moves on passing downs.

But I don't know if he lasts till 17. There are some that say Dallas will take Watt at 9, but I think that's a smokescreen. Dallas needs DB help badly so I don't see them passing on Amakamura unless he gets taken top 8 somehow.

The scenario I see is the Pats trading up to 13 for a 3rd round pick with Detroit to secure Watt. Then moving down from 28 and picking a quality player in the 2nd round, perhaps an OL or OLB, as well as stockpiling a future pick for 2012.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Every time I read the arguments that the Pats prefer a balanced offense and that they're not concerned to get an elite pass-rusher if that means a player who can't set the edge I think of them trading for Derrick Burgess. That didn't work out so well, of course, but I can't imagine they thought of him as an all-round linebacker.

 

[MaineMan]

MaineMan, very good post.. Thought out with a lot of facts to back up your opinion..

I'm not going to pull apart your post, but I think stats (esp Sacks) in our system hold very little weight.

You are correct, Vrabel and McGinnest weren't 15 sack a piece guys but they constantly put pressure on the QB and force turn overs. Between Harrison, Bruschi and a few others, they were able to change the game and make a pivotal play. Yes McCourtey had a great season last year and I'm hoping Mayo steps up his play from Tackling machine to game changing machine.. And I believe with Experience and another year being healthy, we'll see that..

But what a lot of us are saying is we are weak at RDE adn OLB. We need to bring in talent for that position.. I for one don't want to sit at 17 or 28 and reach for a player because we have a need. I want us to be active and move up and grab this player.

Of course moving up doesn't guarantee a great player and (1) a lot of times, teams fail by picking the wrong player for their system or for some other reasons. But I believe in our staff and (2)I believe the %'s are in our favor by moving up. I've read tons of articles that say the lower you pick, the less chance you are to bring in a talented player. So why not increase our chances, target a player and let him learn with our coaching staff.. our odds of addressing a glaring weakness is increased..

Taken together, these make an interesting contradiction for me.

Seems to me that most defensive systems, even most 3-4s, are far more aggressive and attacking than BB's 3-4, which is more "stop big plays" oriented than "make big plays" (e.g., individual sacks). As a result, the vast majority of the market more highly values college prospects that have demonstrated attacking capabilities over "defending" capabilities to the extent that underdeveloped defending skills are often "forgiven". Prospects may (or may not) be expected to develop these defending skills over time and they are at least acceptable if it's thought that they can bring their attacking skills to bear immediately. BB, I think, more highly values prospects who can step onto the field and begin, say, setting the edge immediately or covering immediately, even if they haven't demonstrated highly developed attack (pass-rush skills. Those are what can be developed later - in BB's system. So, a player with highly developed attacking skills and underdeveloped defending skills would "wrong for BB's system".

I don't see this as a black vs. white situation. It's more of a continuum with some prospects in the middle who could go either way.

However, because most of the rest of the market values attacking skills, prospects who have demonstrated (and/or projected) those skills, the law of supply-and-demand kicks in and pushes those prospects steadily toward the top of the auction, displacing the type of prospect that BB favors, moving them down. IOW, moving UP from the middle of the 1st round may actually INCREASE the odds of getting a player who's "wrong for BB's system" even though they may well turn out to be great players in a different system. And there's the contradiction.

So, to me, BB's penchant for trading down isn't gratuitous cleverness or for the sake of avoiding higher salaries, he's merely following his favored guys down as the market naturally pushes them that way (while acquiring extra opportunities to fortify role-positions, to upgrade the bottom of the roster and to take flyers on "redshirts" or potential "hidden gems" along the way).

Again, this isn't black-or-white to me. There may well be prospects possessing great attacking skills AND possessing defending skills that are developed more than enough to satisfy BB's requirements. Because the market is far more focused on the attacking aspect, that player may still be pushed up into the top of the first round, though such guys are probably very rare (Watt may well be an example). And it's entirely possible that BB could trade UP to go after one of these guys. IF he does so, we can probably be assured the guy is going to be a stupendous player (at least in BB's system).

However, BB will likely also be balancing the cost (in picks) of moving up against being able to upgrade the other moving parts he thinks the teams needs to continue to be successful (now and into the next couple years). And, of course, he's very unlikely to do so if he sees a prospect with equally great defending skills, but lesser attacking skills dropping to him.

 

[MaineMan]

Every time I read the arguments that the Pats prefer a balanced offense and that they're not concerned to get an elite pass-rusher if that means a player who can't set the edge I think of them trading for Derrick Burgess. That didn't work out so well, of course, but I can't imagine they thought of him as an all-round linebacker.

I agree. Seems to me that BB brought in Burgess to start as an edge-rushing DE in a year that he knew in advance was going to have to feature more 40-fronts due to losing Seymour. It seems like he also thought Burgess might be able to develop into a more all-around OLB. Burgess accomplished neither and it turned out to be a costly mis-judgement.

 

[Off The Grid]

Taken together, these make an interesting contradiction for me.

Seems to me that most defensive systems, even most 3-4s, are far more aggressive and attacking than BB's 3-4, which is more "stop big plays" oriented than "make big plays" (e.g., individual sacks). As a result, the vast majority of the market more highly values college prospects that have demonstrated attacking capabilities over "defending" capabilities to the extent that underdeveloped defending skills are often "forgiven". Prospects may (or may not) be expected to develop these defending skills over time and they are at least acceptable if it's thought that they can bring their attacking skills to bear immediately. BB, I think, more highly values prospects who can step onto the field and begin, say, setting the edge immediately or covering immediately, even if they haven't demonstrated highly developed attack (pass-rush skills. Those are what can be developed later - in BB's system. So, a player with highly developed attacking skills and underdeveloped defending skills would "wrong for BB's system".

I don't see this as a black vs. white situation. It's more of a continuum with some prospects in the middle who could go either way.

However, because most of the rest of the market values attacking skills, prospects who have demonstrated (and/or projected) those skills, the law of supply-and-demand kicks in and pushes those prospects steadily toward the top of the auction, displacing the type of prospect that BB favors, moving them down. IOW, moving UP from the middle of the 1st round may actually INCREASE the odds of getting a player who's "wrong for BB's system" even though they may well turn out to be great players in a different system. And there's the contradiction.

So, to me, BB's penchant for trading down isn't gratuitous cleverness or for the sake of avoiding higher salaries, he's merely following his favored guys down as the market naturally pushes them that way (while acquiring extra opportunities to fortify role-positions, to upgrade the bottom of the roster and to take flyers on "redshirts" or potential "hidden gems" along the way).

Again, this isn't black-or-white to me. There may well be prospects possessing great attacking skills AND possessing defending skills that are developed more than enough to satisfy BB's requirements. Because the market is far more focused on the attacking aspect, that player may still be pushed up into the top of the first round, though such guys are probably very rare (Watt may well be an example). And it's entirely possible that BB could trade UP to go after one of these guys. IF he does so, we can probably be assured the guy is going to be a stupendous player (at least in BB's system).

However, BB will likely also be balancing the cost (in picks) of moving up against being able to upgrade the other moving parts he thinks the teams needs to continue to be successful (now and into the next couple years). And, of course, he's very unlikely to do so if he sees a prospect with equally great defending skills, but lesser attacking skills dropping to him.

My GOD.

Required Reading, ladies and gentlemen.

Required Reading.

 

[mcsully]

Taken together, these make an interesting contradiction for me.

Seems to me that most defensive systems, even most 3-4s, are far more aggressive and attacking than BB's 3-4, which is more "stop big plays" oriented than "make big plays" (e.g., individual sacks). As a result, the vast majority of the market more highly values .

Fair enough.. And while I understand your point and see where you are aiming. I just feel from my point of view we've turned over the roster in two short years. During this time, we've been able to add youth, talent and clean up our salary cap (not that it was in bad shape.. but tough decisions were made.. ie Seymour)..

My only point is, we've add 24 picks in the past two years and our defense looks fairly talented in a lot of different areas. But the two glaring areas we are lacking is RDE and OLB. Two key positions regarding pass rush. Instead of adding another 10 guys, of a vast majority won't start, why not add 7 and fill in the two glaring holes.

Its funny how I asked in two seperate occasssions, who would you want more "Ware or Orland Pace".. And I have yet to receive a response.. The truth is, people know how this team is currently constructed and a LT is not as benefical as a pass rushing LB.. BB has proven this time and again by throwing money and draft picks at the position (Colvin, A. Thomas and Burgess). I think people (not saying you Maine), are trying to justify BB reasoning.. And as I, he is not perfect and has made multiple mistakes in this area..

While I love BB coaching style and am glad to have him with our team (hopefully another 10 years), sometimes you need to change things up and take a different approach..

**edit* -- was going to finish but had to add this

In the past 4 years, the Jets and Packers have been able to identify positions of need and address them by moving up in the draft.. Its worked for them, why not for us? I am totally confident in our scouting department..

 

[tricktak]

Doesnt matter if we have clay matthews, if we dont have people clearing the way for him in the trenches

uhm... last time I checked the packers had ryan pickett and howard green as their defensive ends and clay matthews was still a beast. I don't know about you but I don't exactly consider ryan pickett or howard green as guys who clear the way for Matthews. Try again bro.