Pats sign DE Mark Anderson

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Texans' Board opinions on Mark Anderson

Connor Barwin is terrible.

There was no greater love shown for a player than many on the draft forum for Connor.

Box and patchick will be very angry with you.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'm talking about the role he will play.
He certainly wont be playing Vrabels.

And you know this how? The guy hasn't even hit training camp yet. We have no idea what he can or cannot do in this system yet. I'm looking forward to seeing how BB utilizes Anderson in our defense. If BB can make TBC into a double digit sack machne in our system, I have faith in what he can do when given the right raw materials. Anderson is super atheltic and actually fits the stringent physical requirements that BB demands from an OLB in the Pats 3-4. I will take a wait and see approach before making snap judgments on how limited or expansive a role Anderson can handle.

If you compare Anderson's production to Matt Roth, who some here have coveted, there isn't a whole lot of difference between the two. Roth has produced 1, 3.5, 3, 5, 4, and 3.5 sacks respectively and is actually a year older than Anderson. Physically he's a little heavier at 6'4 272 but we're talking about similar players overall except that Roth never had the 'breakout' season that we saw from Anderson. Are stats everything? Of course not. But production on the field matters a lot and I haven't heard anything to make me think that Roth was anymore athletic than Anderson and it's a fair bet that Roth would cost more to sign.

 

[TheComeback]

I don't know why he wore out his welcome with the Bears and Texans. Wade Phillips is installing a one gap 3-4 and didn't keep him,while the Bears are a 4-3 team. I know the Texans were over CAP, but cutting him didn't save much.

I like the 17 hurries and especially the high number of Pass Defended. I wonder if it was pass coverage, or tipped passes, but it doesn't really matter does it?

I wish Marlon the best, but he was a street FA, the Pats were forced to picked up as they were going into the Playoffs, when Wilfork was the only remaining healthy Defensive Lineman.

Welcome aboard Pass Rush Specialist.

I don't think Anderson wore out his welcome. It was more than they have younger guys on the roster who they want to give a chance (Connor Barwin), and letting Anderson hit FA was a way to both do that and save a little cap space. They've also got Antonio Smith, who is more of a 3 down player.

 

[TheComeback]

And you know this how? The guy hasn't even hit training camp yet. We have no idea what he can or cannot do in this system yet. I'm looking forward to seeing how BB utilizes Anderson in our defense. If BB can make TBC into a double digit sack machne in our system, I have faith in what he can do when given the right raw materials. Anderson is super atheltic and actually fits the stringent physical requirements that BB demands from an OLB in the Pats 3-4. I will take a wait and see approach before making snap judgments on how limited or expansive a role Anderson can handle.

If you compare Anderson's production to Matt Roth, who some here have coveted, there isn't a whole lot of difference between the two. Roth has produced 1, 3.5, 3, 5, 4, and 3.5 sacks respectively and is actually a year older than Anderson. Physically he's a little heavier at 6'4 272 but we're talking about similar players overall except that Roth never had the 'breakout' season that we saw from Anderson. Are stats everything? Of course not. But production on the field matters a lot and I haven't heard anything to make me think that Roth was anymore athletic than Anderson and it's a fair bet that Roth would cost more to sign.

The other difference is that Roth has been a career starter. Anderson started one season for the Bears his second year. After that, he's been limited to specialist duty.

 

[Ring 6]

Except for the fact that Anderson is much younger, you're not giving up any picks to get him and it won't cost nearly as much in terms of salary.

So, aside from being completely different situations, it's the same move all over again, I guess.

Right, because I havent said 3 times that I am talking about the role.

 

[patchick]

And you know this how? The guy hasn't even hit training camp yet. We have no idea what he can or cannot do in this system yet. I'm looking forward to seeing how BB utilizes Anderson in our defense. If BB can make TBC into a double digit sack machne in our system, I have faith in what he can do when given the right raw materials.

Even without camp, think it's fair to say that Anderson's strengths are different from Vrabel's. He's speedier, has had good success as a pure pass rusher, but his career has been limited by his weakness against the run. So I'd be more surprised to seem him turn into a Vrabel than to see him match TBC's sack totals.

 

[Ring 6]

And you know this how? The guy hasn't even hit training camp yet. We have no idea what he can or cannot do in this system yet. I'm looking forward to seeing how BB utilizes Anderson in our defense. If BB can make TBC into a double digit sack machne in our system, I have faith in what he can do when given the right raw materials. Anderson is super atheltic and actually fits the stringent physical requirements that BB demands from an OLB in the Pats 3-4. I will take a wait and see approach before making snap judgments on how limited or expansive a role Anderson can handle.

Feel free to take as long as you wish. I am giving my opinion, which is that we did not sign a guy who would be playing OLB in the 43 like Vrabel did his first year, move to ILB when needed, serve time as the best pass defending LB in sub packages as well as time as the best rusher. But, hey since he hasn't practiced yet, maybe he could be Bruschi too.

If you compare Anderson's production to Matt Roth, who some here have coveted, there isn't a whole lot of difference between the two. Roth has produced 1, 3.5, 3, 5, 4, and 3.5 sacks respectively and is actually a year older than Anderson.

Please tell me we aren't judging players solely by the number of sacks they had.

Physically he's a little heavier at 6'4 272 but we're talking about similar players overall except that Roth never had the 'breakout' season that we saw from Anderson.

They are very different players. I'd consider Roth being the best all around defender on his team and doing a good job at all duties of his role more of a 'breakout' than a season with a good sack total, but thats just me.

Are stats everything? Of course not. But production on the field matters a lot and I haven't heard anything to make me think that Roth was anymore athletic than Anderson and it's a fair bet that Roth would cost more to sign.

Where would you be hearing this? Do you think Roth starting as an OLB and playing very well vs the run and pass and Anderson being a 3rd down rusher tells us something?

 

[Sciz]

Re: Texans' Board opinions on Mark Anderson

Connor Barwin is terrible.

I'd love to know how you know that, considering he has played less than one quarter of regular-season football in the last 19 months. He had 4.5 sacks as a rookie.

 

[Urgent]

If you compare Anderson's production to Matt Roth, who some here have coveted, there isn't a whole lot of difference between the two. Roth has produced 1, 3.5, 3, 5, 4, and 3.5 sacks respectively and is actually a year older than Anderson. Physically he's a little heavier at 6'4 272 but we're talking about similar players overall except that Roth never had the 'breakout' season that we saw from Anderson. Are stats everything? Of course not. But production on the field matters a lot and I haven't heard anything to make me think that Roth was anymore athletic than Anderson and it's a fair bet that Roth would cost more to sign.

Coveted is a strong word.
Warming to?
Accepting if a trade for Umenyiora didn't happen?
Seeing as a fall-back after Lawson signed elsewhere?

Several of us have compared Anderson to TBC.
Roth gains more comparisons to Ninkovich.

You could paint one as flashy, the other as steady.

Significantly different players and roles. You could see Roth setting the edge on first and second down, and Anderson coming in for passing situations.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Feel free to take as long as you wish. I am giving my opinion, which is that we did not sign a guy who would be playing OLB in the 43 like Vrabel did his first year, move to ILB when needed, serve time as the best pass defending LB in sub packages as well as time as the best rusher. But, hey since he hasn't practiced yet, maybe he could be Bruschi too.

Vrabel played ILB because the Pats were severely lacking in ILB depth until they drafted Mayo, not necessarily because Vrabel was an outstanding ILB by any means. And a lot of people fail to realize that even Vrabel wasn't Vrabel until he had about 2-3 years of the Pats system under his belt. He didn't look much more than an average linebacker until he fully adjusted to the Pats system. So your judging Anderson after exactly 0 years in the Pats system doesn't have much of a an underlying basis to support it.

Please tell me we aren't judging players solely by the number of sacks they had.

Please see below where I explained that stats don't mean everything but production is certainly important and not to be overlooked.

Where would you be hearing this? Do you think Roth starting as an OLB and playing very well vs the run and pass and Anderson being a 3rd down rusher tells us something?

It tells us how they were being utilized by their previous teams but it tells us very little about how they will actually be used by the Pats who have a totally different defensive system. If you were telling me you KNEW how good Vrabel was gonna be for us based on his very lightly used years in Pittsburgh I'd tell you, you were full of crap.

 

[DaBruinz]

Why on earth would you read scouting reports on a guy that hasnt played college ball since 2005?

I think you mean 2006. And the scouting reports were posted by someone else.. Helps to pay attention to that. Thanks.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm talking about the role he will play.
He certainly wont be playing Vrabels.

How do you know he won't be playing the same role as Vrabel? Because we, the FANS, have speculated that Anderson is going to be a 3rd down pass specialist??

Seriously, Andy. A little research on your part would go a long way.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Re: Texans' Board opinions on Mark Anderson

They're getting Connor Barwin back. They've got no reason to miss Anderson.

That behind said, he had more total pressures (26) than any edge-rusher currently on the Pats roster, and that was purely as a backup.

Just curious - what is the source of that stat?

 

[Sciz]

Re: Texans' Board opinions on Mark Anderson

Just curious - what is the source of that stat?

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Mark Anderson

Sacks are listed at the top under "Standard Stats," hits and hurries are at the bottom, under "Charting Stats."

Anderson had 4 sacks, 5 hits, and 17 hurries for a total of 26, outdoing Cunningham's 22, Ninkovich's 20, and Moore's 5. For reference, TBC had 37 last season.

 

[Ring 6]

How do you know he won't be playing the same role as Vrabel? Because we, the FANS, have speculated that Anderson is going to be a 3rd down pass specialist??

Seriously, Andy. A little research on your part would go a long way.

I don't need to research the difference between Mike Vrabel and Mark Anderson. I'm basing ZERO on what FANS have speculated.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Texans' Board opinions on Mark Anderson

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Mark Anderson

Sacks are listed at the top under "Standard Stats," hits and hurries are at the bottom, under "Charting Stats."

Anderson had 4 sacks, 5 hits, and 17 hurries for a total of 26, outdoing Cunningham's 22, Ninkovich's 20, and Moore's 5. For reference, TBC had 37 last season.

That should make me miss TBC, but all it does is make me suspicious of the "charting" stat.

 

[DaBruinz]

Even without camp, think it's fair to say that Anderson's strengths are different from Vrabel's. He's speedier, has had good success as a pure pass rusher, but his career has been limited by his weakness against the run. So I'd be more surprised to seem him turn into a Vrabel than to see him match TBC's sack totals.

What weakness against the run? This is the only place I've heard this mentioned.

If Anderson was so "bad" against the run, why did the Bears make him their starting DE in 2007 opposite Ogunleye? Where Anderson started the first 14 games until he went down with an injury. He also had another injury during TC in 2008 that required surgery on his thumb.

Being able to be solid against the point of attack on the run isn't just about size. It's also about technique. And I find it hard to believe that a guy who was good in college against the run all of a sudden becomes "bad".

 

[OhExaulted1]

90 man Camp Fodder/Shadow Roster.

 

[Ring 6]

Vrabel played ILB because the Pats were severely lacking in ILB depth until they drafted Mayo, not necessarily because Vrabel was an outstanding ILB by any means. And a lot of people fail to realize that even Vrabel wasn't Vrabel until he had about 2-3 years of the Pats system under his belt. He didn't look much more than an average linebacker until he fully adjusted to the Pats system. So your judging Anderson after exactly 0 years in the Pats system doesn't have much of a an underlying basis to support it.

His skillset and level of ability didnt change when he sign a Patriot contract.
Vrabel was always Vrabel. He had a very good year in 2001, one of the keys to the SB run.

Please see below where I explained that stats don't mean everything but production is certainly important and not to be overlooked.

Basing your opinion solely on stats, and then saying stats don't mean everything is still basing your opinion solely on stats.

It tells us how they were being utilized by their previous teams but it tells us very little about how they will actually be used by the Pats who have a totally different defensive system. If you were telling me you KNEW how good Vrabel was gonna be for us based on his very lightly used years in Pittsburgh I'd tell you, you were full of crap.

Actually, I was very, very optimistic about Vrabel because I saw every game he played at OSU and followed him closely in Pittsburgh.
You seem to think that a 6 year veteran who has only really been a sub package pass rusher is going to all of sudden become a starting 34 OLB, especially when he has a reputation as a weak run defender.
But it isn't about what they did elsewhere, its about skillset. Mark Anderson and Mike Vrabel are completely different players. If I have to explain that to you, there is no point in having a discussion.

Should we move on to discuss why Ochocinco is going to take the Moss role even though he has never done it and has a different skillset because we haven't seen him on the Patriots so we don't know he won't run a go every play?

 

[Ring 6]

What weakness against the run? This is the only place I've heard this mentioned.

If Anderson was so "bad" against the run, why did the Bears make him their starting DE in 2007 opposite Ogunleye? Where Anderson started the first 14 games until he went down with an injury. He also had another injury during TC in 2008 that required surgery on his thumb.

Being able to be solid against the point of attack on the run isn't just about size. It's also about technique. And I find it hard to believe that a guy who was good in college against the run all of a sudden becomes "bad".

He is bad against the run. Starting 14 times isnt proof of good run D skills.