Malcolm Brown

[RobertWeathers]

So your argument that he was just a hair below Pro Bowl-caliber is that a Pats fan site decided to make a list of guys who were snubbed, and he barely broke the top 5 of that? That's a pretty weak claim. Frankly, the fact that Pats Pulpit listed "Alan Branch or Malcom Brown" is pretty damning, since it suggests they're unaware that Branch was the *much* better player last year. Branch actually was a borderline Pro Bowler.



What the hell are you talking about? I was pumped when we drafted him, go back to the draft thread if you need to. I was optimistic his rookie year, didn't develop any pessimism until last season when he didn't make much of a sophomore leap.

I'm looking at the metrics. I could care less what they say.

Metrics say he was 15th in DT pressures in the NFL. He was outstanding vs the run. That is a fact.

Look- you think he is a bust but the numbers do not support your assertion.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm looking at the metrics. I could care less what they say.

Metrics say he was 15th in DT pressures in the NFL. He was outstanding vs the run. That is a fact.

Look- you think he is a bust but the numbers do not support your assertion.

How is that a fact? It's a significant weakness in his game, he does not consistently anchor against the run.

The longer this conversation goes on, the clearer it becomes that you don't recognize what you're watching. I don't want to be a **** about this, I generally think you're a good poster, but there's really no point in continuing a conversation re: defensive line play with someone who thinks Brown has been outstanding against the run.

 

[RobertWeathers]

How is that a fact? It's a significant weakness in his game, he does not consistently anchor against the run.

The longer this conversation goes on, the clearer it becomes that you don't recognize what you're watching. I don't want to be a **** about this, but there's really no point in continuing a conversation re: defensive line play with someone who thinks Brown has been outstanding against the run.

I don't think you know what you are watching either so lets end it here.

 

[JMC00]

Bad game by the defense but ya let's single out one guy. Wonder if people did the same thing with Wilfork in '05 when the Pats got trounced by San Diego in Foxboro 41-17 and gave up about 200 yards rushing

 

[mosi]

I think the LB's are a bigger problem on defense than DL. There is nobody to fill the gap, take on and shred blocks, cover and tackle RB.

David Harris lacks speed so they tried J.Richard at LB. He is slower than most of LB on other teams and he can't cover, tackle or blitz.

This. Even Hightower did not play well when he was in there. The team overall played like a team that felt like it deserved to win, not a team that fought to win. Very odd game, which reminded me a lot of the 2014 start in Miami.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This. Even Hightower did not play well when he was in there. The team overall played like a team that felt like it deserved to win, not a team that fought to win. Very odd game, which reminded me a lot of the 2014 start in Miami.

They looked totally out of sync vs MIA and last night

 

[EddardSnow67]

Maybe none of us are really all that good at evaluating players relatively speaking, considering the fact that we're fans.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I'd look at it the other way: there are some guys that clearly weren't part of the problem. Branch was fine. Adam Butler looked decent in the limited snaps he got. Guy made some good plays. Flowers played a legitimated good game. Hightower looked basically fine until he was injured. Marsh gets a pass because he's been on the team less than a week and was thrust into a position he clearly wasn't ready for. I'm not sure if Richards at LB will work, but he wasn't terrible.

When we're looking at the terrible-ness on the front 7, I think it comes down to a few guys. I think our DEs after Flowers were in over their heads, while Brown and Van Noy were awful. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to pin the majority of the front 7's struggles on a few guys.

That's very fair. I still believe that, being that it's about team defense still, the whole didn't equal to the sum of its parts for many reasons, so it's still tough to single out what could be described as bad performers. This is especially considering it was the defense that gave up three 90-yard drives for all the reasons you very adequately described.

With all that said, the coaching staff has probably done more with less before, and although every year is different, they know how to win regardless. This squad has some really good pieces that, if they can stay on the field, will more than likely ascend as the season progresses. BB always has the team playing better in November and December than any other team in the league consistently. And even he says the first month is still preseason in a way. He and Matty will figure it out. Get healthy and they can still be tops in scoring D. I really do believe that whole-heartedly. Time will tell if Brown will show more or continue to underwhelm.

 

[mgteich]

Richards seems better at LB than SS from what I can tell

I'm not sure that qualifies him to stay on the roster.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Maybe none of us are really all that good at evaluating players relatively speaking, considering the fact that we're fans.

Wrong. I'm a great talent evaluator.

Just tell me his 3 cone and I'll tell you if he's good or not

 

[long distance]

Richards seems better at LB than SS from what I can tell

I'm not sure that qualifies him to stay on the roster.

So you're thinking of removing him..? Thought the season of fans 53 was over and we're on to real games..

He has qualified. He started (in specific week 1 g-p). Made plays on bad D day.
As long as he is on the roster, he is active and is part of the game plan the discussion about his use and position actually makes most sense.

 

[mgteich]

Let me try this again.

I believe that Richards play at safety is not good enough to have him on the 53. We've all said this for months. Obviously, Patricia and Bill seem more in Richards than we do.

Someone said that he seemed a better LB than a safety. I said that this fact wasn't enough to qualify him for the 53. I made no comment with how poorly or well he played at LB.

If Richards is one of our best LB's, so be it. If Patricia has a role for him that works, I'm more than fine with seeing Richards in such a role. Richards is clearly a hard worker, does all that is asked of him, and is a Belichick favorite.

I guess that I have not seen anything that would make me believe that if there were two injuries at safety, I would want Richards out there as one of our two safeties. But, perhaps he is developing those skills; it is difficult to see.

So you're thinking of removing him..? Thought the season of fans 53 was over and we're on to real games..

He has qualified. He started (in specific week 1 g-p). Made plays on bad D day.
As long as he is on the roster, he is active and is part of the game plan the discussion about his use and position actually makes most sense.

 

[long distance]

Let me try this again.

I believe that Richards play at safety is not good enough to have him on the 53. We've all said this for months. Obviously, Patricia and Bill seem more in Richards than we do.

Someone said that he seemed a better LB than a safety. I said that this fact wasn't enough to qualify him for the 53. I made no comment with how poorly or well he played at LB.

If Richards is one of our best LB's, so be it. If Patricia has a role for him that works, I'm more than fine with seeing Richards in such a role. Richards is clearly a hard worker, does all that is asked of him, and is a Belichick favorite.

I guess that I have not seen anything that would make me believe that if there were two injuries at safety, I would want Richards out there as one of our two safeties. But, perhaps he is developing those skills; it is difficult to see.

Thanks for elaborating/discussing. I don't care much for Richards dismissive talk. Brings nothing. It doesn't matter if I like him or not as a player. I shared my unimportant “evaluations“ preseason.

Now he is part of the team. Much bigger than most projected or wanted albeit only in week 1. I started a thread trying to discuss him and the hybrid position because I felt they are doing something there. It was not very successful of course. Its much easier to post i hate Richards or half sentence dismissive “evaluation“..

its OT here (though only slightly)..

 

[Tony2046]

I'd look at it the other way: there are some guys that clearly weren't part of the problem. Branch was fine. Adam Butler looked decent in the limited snaps he got. Guy made some good plays. Flowers played a legitimated good game. Hightower looked basically fine until he was injured. Marsh gets a pass because he's been on the team less than a week and was thrust into a position he clearly wasn't ready for. I'm not sure if Richards at LB will work, but he wasn't terrible.

When we're looking at the terrible-ness on the front 7, I think it comes down to a few guys. I think our DEs after Flowers were in over their heads, while Brown and Van Noy were awful. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to pin the majority of the front 7's struggles on a few guys.

Just for discussion purposes. Rewatching the game I paid some attention to Brown after reading some of your comments. I don't know enough about DL assignments to judge but did notice Brown and or Branch getting doubled. Occasionally it was 3 on 2. When they weren't doubled either one manhandled their blocks. So I'm not seeing Brown's inadequacy.

I'm still working through this but I think KC's running effectiveness had to do with their size and speed at the line of scrimmage. They ran 2 TE and 3 TE sets against a smaller 5 man Patriots front consisting of 3 DL's and two LB's, one of which being a 220 lb Richards. That seems like a KC advantage.

In short I think the Pats needed to be bigger up front. Whether that's with Marsh in the Star position instead of Richards or moving Flowers out to the edge and putting A. Butler on the line with Brown, Branch. I think the latter puts more pocket pressure on Smith and the former gives you more size on the edges. But it doesn't address the speedy back issue.

 

[Tony2046]

They looked totally out of sync vs MIA and last night

They were out of sync especially during the multiple crossing plays KC ran. You can literally see the confusion during those routes.

 

[DarrylS]

In days of yore remember this board would regularly criticize the ineptitude of Richard Seymour as he did not show up in the box score, only to have BB come to the podium midweek and heap praise on him for what a great game he played to the chagrin of all the fans who believed he did nothing during the previous weeks game..

We do not know the defensive game plan.. so there is a disadvantage for all of us.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Anddd he’s panning out:

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Anddd he’s panning out:

It's good to have him back. We really needed help in the middle.

 

[patsfaninpa]

Let's get VV back and a little more motivated Branch and our DL would look much better. Healthy T. Flowers too, of course.

 

[Ring 6]

Let's get VV back and a little more motivated Branch and our DL would look much better. Healthy T. Flowers too, of course.

Branch was the cause of Lee’s pick yesterday