Hightower: Flores’ defense, simpler, faster & more aggressive

[aluminum seats]

I would imagine that BB is keeping a close eye on Flores and the whole defense though. That reassures me.

After the Super Bowl, I wouldn’t mind if BB kept his eyes somewhere else.

 

[Ring 6]

Superbowl was a rough go for the patriots top 5 in points allowed defense.

Every team has rough games. That doesn’t change how they played over the course of a seeason. In other words apples do not equal oranges.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Superbowl was a rough go for the patriots top 5 in points allowed defense.

Yeah they picked the worst time for that. Vikings were the top D in "yards allowed" and "points per game" and got shredded. How did those rankings work out for them? The whole "points per game" argument is a really bad one.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah they picked the worst time for that. Vikings were the top D in "yards allowed" and "points per game" and got shredded. How did those rankings work out for them? The whole "points per game" argument is a really bad one.

That depends upon what you think “the whole points per game argument” is.

 

[TheRainMaker]

That depends upon what you think “the whole points per game argument” is.

I think where you "rank" statistically doesn't really matter. I've said this on other threads that it all comes down to match ups or scheme vs scheme. Just a few examples include:

The 2001 Pats had a statistically mediocre defense but held the Rams to 17 points.

The 2007 and 2011 Giants had mediocre defenses but handled the Pats offense twice.

The 2001 Steelers Defense was ranked #1 and sacking QB's left and right but couldn't handle the Pats mediocre offense.

The 2012 Ravens D was mediocre and had liabilities in pass coverage with Ray Lewis, Danell Elerbee and anyone not named Ed Reed but held the Pats offense to 13 points.

Those are just a few examples. I really don't care where a team is ranked and doesn't always tell the story.

 

[The Brandon Five]

“A defense so simple even Jordan Richards could understand it”

 

[TheRainMaker]

“A defense so simple even Jordan Richards could understand it”

Oh I'm sure he doesn't have trouble understanding anything. He just flat out can't play defense.

 

[luuked]

I disagree in that I don't think that's a valid excuse when the Pats drafted Chandler Jones, Vince Wilfork, Hightower and others later in the first round and beyond. Jaguars only drafted Ramsey and Fowler high in the 1st. Eagles only have Fletcher Cox and Brandon Graham. Vikings have Barr and Tre Waynes. Most of their talent comes after the 1st round so the Pats have had just as much of an opportunity as they have.

So just to get this straight. You disagree that drafting early gives other teams a better chance at landing talented scheme fits.

I guess there is no more discussion needed with the likes of you. Especially because you seem to think that the draft order only exists in the first round. You realize that drafting early has a cumulative to effect where as a top ten team you get to pick twice at a point where the successful teams only had a single pick, right?

If you pick 4, 36, 68, 104 or 31, 62, 93, 124 makes a hell of a difference. If you want to downplay it look at all those alleged genius front offices that after having great selections (eg. Seahawks or Ravens) could not put together any success evaluating players when faced with picking at the end.

 

[luuked]

Superbowl was a rough go for the patriots top 5 in points allowed defense.

That is just one data point of 16 + 3 games. By that logic maybe we should also call out our offense who could not get **** done until the very end against the Jags and needesd to be carried by the D in the AFCCG.

Sucks that it happened in the SB but it still is just one game in the collection of games from last season.

 

[supafly]

Yeah they picked the worst time for that. Vikings were the top D in "yards allowed" and "points per game" and got shredded. How did those rankings work out for them? The whole "points per game" argument is a really bad one.

I don’t think that judging a team’s defense by PPG allowed is faulty in itself, but it does need to be kept in proper context and used as a piece of the bigger picture, rather than the absolute that many here see it as.

One example is the 2016 SB winning defense which ranked #1 in points allowed, but didn’t face a top 10 QBR all season long, prior to seeing Matt Ryan. In my opinion, we’re good with a top 10 defense in terms of points allowed, and that’s normally where Belichick keeps the team. Of course, there are years where the eye test tells us that certain defenses just aren’t as good as the numbers may indicate, such as last year’s team (where injuries were a big factor).

 

[supafly]

The 2001 Steelers Defense was ranked #1 and sacking QB's left and right but couldn't handle the Pats mediocre offense.

The 2012 Ravens D was mediocre and had liabilities in pass coverage with Ray Lewis, Danell Elerbee and anyone not named Ed Reed but held the Pats offense to 13 points.

Not saying that I don’t understand where you’re coming from, because I do agree on some level, but the 2001 Pats beat Pittsburgh with good special teams play, and the 2012 Ravens allowed NE inside of their 35 yard line seven times, only to be bailed out by the wind and a poor NE secondary.

I’m sure there are plenty of other legitimate examples, but these two specific examples could be better, that’s all.

 

[Ring 6]

I think where you "rank" statistically doesn't really matter. I've said this on other threads that it all comes down to match ups or scheme vs scheme. Just a few examples include:

The 2001 Pats had a statistically mediocre defense but held the Rams to 17 points.

The 2007 and 2011 Giants had mediocre defenses but handled the Pats offense twice.

The 2001 Steelers Defense was ranked #1 and sacking QB's left and right but couldn't handle the Pats mediocre offense.

The 2012 Ravens D was mediocre and had liabilities in pass coverage with Ray Lewis, Danell Elerbee and anyone not named Ed Reed but held the Pats offense to 13 points.

Those are just a few examples. I really don't care where a team is ranked and doesn't always tell the story.

Again I don’t think the “story” you expect it to tell is the right one.
Ppg is the best gauge of how a defense has played. Why anyone would think there is any kind of statistic that would determine how they are going to play in any given game, much less every game, is amazing to me.

 

[mgteich]

If I might use a horse racing analogy, we shouldn't expect the odds on favorite to win, because sometimes he doesn't. A 50-1 shot should not be considered more likely to win that a 2-1 shot, because sometimes the 50-1 shot wins.

I think where you "rank" statistically doesn't really matter. I've said this on other threads that it all comes down to match ups or scheme vs scheme. Just a few examples include:

The 2001 Pats had a statistically mediocre defense but held the Rams to 17 points.

The 2007 and 2011 Giants had mediocre defenses but handled the Pats offense twice.

The 2001 Steelers Defense was ranked #1 and sacking QB's left and right but couldn't handle the Pats mediocre offense.

The 2012 Ravens D was mediocre and had liabilities in pass coverage with Ray Lewis, Danell Elerbee and anyone not named Ed Reed but held the Pats offense to 13 points.

Those are just a few examples. I really don't care where a team is ranked and doesn't always tell the story.

 

[Deus Irae]

If I might use a horse racing analogy, we shouldn't expect the odds on favorite to win, because sometimes he doesn't. A 50-1 shot should not be considered more likely to win that a 2-1 shot, because sometimes the 50-1 shot wins.

Your analogy is terrible.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Again I don’t think the “story” you expect it to tell is the right one.
Ppg is the best gauge of how a defense has played. Why anyone would think there is any kind of statistic that would determine how they are going to play in any given game, much less every game, is amazing to me.

I'm just not a huge fan of stats. While it's great they ranked high in points per game, most people can agree the Pats defense had flaws and improvement was needed. Your rank won't matter if you run into a team that can exploit your flaws which it finally happened against the Eagles and almost happened against Jacksonville.

If I might use a horse racing analogy, we shouldn't expect the odds on favorite to win, because sometimes he doesn't. A 50-1 shot should not be considered more likely to win that a 2-1 shot, because sometimes the 50-1 shot wins.

I agree with Deus, this is a really bad analogy.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Not saying that I don’t understand where you’re coming from, because I do agree on some level, but the 2001 Pats beat Pittsburgh with good special teams play, and the 2012 Ravens allowed NE inside of their 35 yard line seven times, only to be bailed out by the wind and a poor NE secondary.

I’m sure there are plenty of other legitimate examples, but these two specific examples could be better, that’s all.

Yes, the Pats had good special teams that day but Pittsburgh's offense ranked #3 overall but couldn't do much against NE's mediocre defense.

The Ravens game I discussed on another thread and agree the Pats were moving it with ease but then their drives just suddenly stalled. Brady also may have left 4 more points on the board had he not run around the field before the half and let time almost run out. The Ravens had to deal with the same wind so it's ridiculous to blame the wind on their loss. The Ravens D was nothing special and the Pats had the players to outscore them but couldn't.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm just not a huge fan of stats. While it's great they ranked high in points per game, most people can agree the Pats defense had flaws and improvement was needed. Your rank won't matter if you run into a team that can exploit your flaws which it finally happened against the Eagles and almost happened against Jacksonville.

I agree cumulative stats over a 16 game schedule in different situations are not highly instructive but the one that means the most is scoring because that’s what determines wins and losses. I’m but sure about your last comment because I’m not sure how being the 5th ranked defense by any yardstick would guarantee that you don’t run into a team who beats you on a given day.
I do know that a team that allowed fewer points played better than one that allowed more (turnovers aside) and I’ve never been one to use statistics predictively, only to assess play that is already in the books.
Sort of like a sticks performance is what it is but being a highly ranked stock up until today doesn’t affect you tomorrow.
Games are played on a field not a spreadsheet.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes, the Pats had good special teams that day but Pittsburgh's offense ranked #3 overall but couldn't do much against NE's mediocre defense.

The 2001 patriot defense was not mediocre by any stretch of the imagination
It allowed 17 or fewer points in something like 12 consecutive games to end the season. That’s an all time defensive performance not mediocrity.

 

[mcmurtry86]

Haven't we heard the "more aggressive" thing before? End of the day, I expect the Pats D to look like its usual self scheme wise and in terms of overall strategy

 

[Ring 6]

Haven't we heard the "more aggressive" thing before? End of the day, I expect the Pats D to look like its usual self scheme wise and in terms of overall strategy

As long as the GOAT is playing like the GOAT.