Slater to Return in 2023

[crawhammer]

I am now convinced you do not understand the how and why of special teams play.

It's not complicated.

Why is that the reason for us not agreeing is my "last of understanding"?

ST are important. Approximately 17% importance after I crunched all of my numbers. Slater has no direct contributions to the other 83% of importance.

As for the 17%, the kicker, punter and returners assume the highest shares of that percentage. Everyone else on ST, including Slater, falls in somewhere after them.

the fair catch? why wasnt there a return? oh yeah, slater out ran the punt and was in Hills face... not chance of a return... and with a guy as dangerous as he was? it was a big deal... its baffling you can't seem to understand that...

Punter gets more credit on that play. And if I'm rankings all the plays of this game by importance, this one isn't in the top half.

amazing what you can learn when you actually watch the plays...

I've watched the game start to finish more than once.

every time we stopped the cheefs and forced them to punt helped win the game.

Ok, and? By "we" you mean the defense. And punters punt. Slater has very little to do with your statement here.

No...you don't.

If I'm rankings (which I may) the most important Patriots players over the last 15 years then it'll be a quite awhile before Slater comes up for consideration.

Give me a rough estimate of where you think you'd have him?

 

[crawhammer]

There were examples cited by @Pape and others (the one from @Hammer of Thor has videos that show what he did in that Super Bowl) that you ignored. In fact, you completely dismissed them and added the sarcastic "Super Bowl MVP" thing, which really killed it for me.

I'm not going to spend time going back through game film to find others and point them out to you, because you'll just dismiss them with whatever the next excuse is for why you don't wish to acknowledge his impact. I made the same mistake probably 10+ years ago because I was irritated with the fact he was taking up space on the WR depth chart when they were thin at the time. Then someone else pointed his impact out, and I went back and watched the film and realized I was wrong, and I'm definitely glad I was.

It's disappointing that you choose to be argumentative and set in our opinions, which keeps you from appreciating the little nuances that make this game great. You'd rather insist you're right even when this happens to be something that you've clearly missed. It's O.K. to be open-minded. That's how we all grow.

Instead, this tendency to not want to listen to others and acting like everyone else is stupid and you're the genius is certainly not helping your standing here. And as you know, I've gone to bat for you in the past when you were getting shut down - so I'm just giving it to you straight. At the rate you're going, in the future, instead of getting answers, you're probably going to start getting frustrated when your posts begin to garner no responses for reasons just like your responses in this thread.

I appreciate what you're saying here. I tried to back out of the thread before I really got into it, because honestly I knew how the conversations would go.

I do think there are people who agree with me but they don't want to take the unpopular view.

It's interesting you say I think everyone is stupid (which is entirely false) when people are literally calling me an idiot or "mentally challenged" (that's cute) because I hold an unpopular opinion which I've genuinely tried to back up.

Look, I don't take the comments literally, I get people prefer the path of least resistance to refuting an argument (which is to attack the source). That's generally not how I approach it.

I'm not trying to disrupt the harmony of forum either. It's not like I'm saying Brady sucks or the Patriots cheated their way to titles. I'm not even saying anyone sucks, that's hardy my point.

And of course I get things wrong, no one is undefeated, but I'm hardly setting a precedent here for strongly holding an opinion and being "argumentative."

Also, my sarcastic remark about the SB MVP had a point to it. A player with Slater's role has no chance of ever receiving MVP consideration. The opportunities aren't there. Which sort of reflects my overall position, that Slater hasn't had the opportunity to be a game-determining impact player throughout the entirety of his career. Not his fault necessarily, he just hasn't had the skill set to contribute more (or elsewhere). It is what it is. He's good at what he does but there's nothing more to it. I understand a lot of people may disagree with me on this. And that's ok.

 

[Pape]

It's not complicated.

Why is that the reason for us not agreeing is my "last of understanding"?

its apparently more complicated than you think...its all interconnected... possessions, field position etc... there is no one phase of the game that does not affect the other and its this "lack" of understanding on your part that is driving this disagreement... you think one dimensionaly, and its reflected in your comments...

ST are important. Approximately 17% importance after I crunched all of my numbers. Slater has no direct contributions to the other 83% of importance.

As for the 17%, the kicker, punter and returners assume the highest shares of that percentage. Everyone else on ST, including Slater, falls in somewhere after them.

You say special teams are important, then completely gainsay that statement by putting qualifiers on a standout special teamer that hardly any player can achieve.... Moving the goal line every time .... And 17% is your number... Thats the definition of a pfya number...

Punter gets more credit on that play. And if I'm rankings all the plays of this game by importance, this one isn't in the top half.

the punter gets credit for a good punt. the gunner gets the credit for stopping the return. they arent mutually exclusive and two things can be true at the same time... punters can boom a kick, but what does it matter if there is a 60 yard punt and a 25 yard return? it all goes back to there is no one phase of the game that is not connected to another in some shape or form...

so you place stuffing the cheefs on the 4 yard line in a 14-7 game, forcing them to punt not even in the top half of plays? when you know in retrospect that they scored on 5 of their 7 second half possessions? huh, interesting

I've watched the game start to finish more than once.

apparently not

Ok, and? By "we" you mean the defense. And punters punt. Slater has very little to do with your statement here.

"We" being the New England Patriots... And yes I said we... Ive given Bob Kraft more than enough money to feel entitled to say "we" ... and apparently the advantageous field position came from where? thats right, special teams play... and who was responsible for sticking his nose in hills face, forcing him into the wall of defenders? its okay you can say it...we all know the answer...and so should you, since i linked the play and you've "watched the game start to finish more than once"

If I'm rankings (which I may) the most important Patriots players over the last 15 years then it'll be a quite awhile before Slater comes up for consideration.

Give me a rough estimate of where you think you'd have him?

#1 ... after all hes the super bowl MVP

 

[rochrist]

There were examples cited by @Pape and others (the one from @Hammer of Thor has videos that show what he did in that Super Bowl) that you ignored. In fact, you completely dismissed them and added the sarcastic "Super Bowl MVP" thing, which really killed it for me.

I'm not going to spend time going back through game film to find others and point them out to you, because you'll just dismiss them with whatever the next excuse is for why you don't wish to acknowledge his impact. I made the same mistake probably 10+ years ago because I was irritated with the fact he was taking up space on the WR depth chart when they were thin at the time. Then someone else pointed his impact out, and I went back and watched the film and realized I was wrong, and I'm definitely glad I was.

It's disappointing that you choose to be argumentative and set in our opinions, which keeps you from appreciating the little nuances that make this game great. You'd rather insist you're right even when this happens to be something that you've clearly missed. It's O.K. to be open-minded. That's how we all grow.

Instead, this tendency to not want to listen to others and acting like everyone else is stupid and you're the genius is certainly not helping your standing here. And as you know, I've gone to bat for you in the past when you were getting shut down - so I'm just giving it to you straight. At the rate you're going, in the future, instead of getting answers, you're probably going to start getting frustrated when your posts begin to garner no responses for reasons just like your responses in this thread.

It's a branding issue.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If I'm rankings (which I may) the most important Patriots players over the last 15 years then it'll be a quite awhile before Slater comes up for consideration.

Give me a rough estimate of where you think you'd have him?

No point. Hes been important. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Sicilian]

I'm definitely late to this thread (and probably shouldn't other getting involved at all, but eh, I'm bored).

My two cents: In general, people underestimate the importance of ST's until something goes wrong. It's kind of like OL: It's best when you never hear about it.

As for the ST being bad last year: If you're blaming Slater for that, it's like trying to upgrade the OL by replacing Onwenu. You get better by improving your worst player, not your best. Slater back (assuming he's still able to play at his level at 37), is a good thing. Improve the other people on the squads (and the coaching).

 

[mike_usagisan]

I think Bill will let Slater's ending go the Bruschi route. He'll resign him and see how it goes in training camp. If Slater sees himself slowing down, he'll pull the plug.

 

[Ian]

Slater hasn't had the opportunity to be a game-determining impact player throughout the entirety of his career.

Again, you don't understand the impact of starting field position, forcing a fair catch and preventing a return, tackles inside the 10, etc. We've gone entire seasons where that's been a difference, including some of Slater's best years.

You talk about the punter being the more important factor while not realizing how difficult it is to run full speed down the field (after first fighting through typically two defenders as teams eventually figured out they needed to deal with him) and still have the ability and agility to adjust your body and make a tackle and prevent a return. Especially against guys - usually teams' fastest, shiftiest players - who are also significantly younger.

As @Pape said, a long punt is useless if the net yards aren't there. Slater's been directly responsible for most of that.

That Super Bowl link @Pape posted with multiple videos of what he did are a clear example of how New England won that game. If those don't happen and the Rams even manage a couple of field goals, it could have turned out differently. You clearly didn't watch them, because you'd at least potentially say, "I had forgotten about that ... " - which was my reaction.

The fact you're dying on this hill "just because others agree with you" doesn't make it any better. If you want to educate yourself and potentially act like you care enough to learn and grow, go look up the statistics when it comes to opposing teams scoring based on starting field position. That stat changes drastically from inside the 17 back, compared to beyond.

So that absolutely matters, and it's why Belichick screwed up Gostkowski's kicking (it messed with his FG mechanics for a bit - if you recall) when the league changed the rules and Belichick had him work on getting underneath it to get the ball higher and short of the end zone on kickoffs so that Slater could get down the field and stop the guy at or before the 15. That's because Belichick understands the key element that you're missing about this entire argument.

 

[crawhammer]

its apparently more complicated than you think...its all interconnected... possessions, field position etc... there is no one phase of the game that does not affect the other and its this "lack" of understanding on your part that is driving this disagreement... you think one dimensionaly, and its reflected in your comments...

No, I get how it's all interconnected. And I agree with you, "there is no one phase of the game that does not affect the other." I guess you're perhaps coming from a position of they're each 33.3% relevant to the team's success.

I see it this way:

49% Offense
34% Defense
17% Special Teams

I'm not trying to devalue anything or anyone, this is just how I see it breaking down based on my understanding and consumption of the game. Slater's only a part of the 17% and there are other players from within that phase alone who are more impactful than him. It's my honest view, not a biased one.

and apparently the advantageous field position came from where? thats right, special teams play... and who was responsible for sticking his nose in hills face, forcing him into the wall of defenders? its okay you can say it...we all know the answer...and so should you, since i linked the play and you've "watched the game start to finish more than once"

Your link just stated at the beginning when I opened it but I've seen the play many times. It was a great punt by Allen, it pinned Hill on the sideline, the entire punt coverage was excellent, and Hill nearly hopped out of bounds before reversing direction with really nowhere to go. He should just fair caught it but instead he made a poor decision. Slater did his job on this play but I think it's pretty telling that we're looking at a "Slater play" where the punter deserves the most props and everyone did their job well on the play (except for Hill). And Slater gets a blank on the stat sheet to boot.

#1 ... after all hes the super bowl MVP

This is sarcasm but I'm not sure how it fits here.

I appreciate your point of view on this stuff. It's an interesting discussion I think.

 

[Pape]

No, I get how it's all interconnected. And I agree with you, "there is no one phase of the game that does not affect the other." I guess you're perhaps coming from a position of they're each 33.3% relevant to the team's success.

I see it this way:

49% Offense
34% Defense
17% Special Teams

I'm not trying to devalue anything or anyone, this is just how I see it breaking down based on my understanding and consumption of the game. Slater's only a part of the 17% and there are other players from within that phase alone who are more impactful than him. It's my honest view, not a biased one.


Your link just stated at the beginning when I opened it but I've seen the play many times. It was a great punt by Allen, it pinned Hill on the sideline, the entire punt coverage was excellent, and Hill nearly hopped out of bounds before reversing direction with really nowhere to go. He should just fair caught it but instead he made a poor decision. Slater did his job on this play but I think it's pretty telling that we're looking at a "Slater play" where the punter deserves the most props and everyone did their job well on the play (except for Hill). And Slater gets a blank on the stat sheet to boot.


This is sarcasm but I'm not sure how it fits here.

I appreciate your point of view on this stuff. It's an interesting discussion I think.

My position on percentages is very simple, and is based on situational football ... What ever squad, be it offense, defense or special teams, is on the field at that time is the most important aspect of the game... It is quite literally an in the moment philosophy. Doesn't have to equal or be anything else

And yes that last bit was indeed sarcasm.

 

[crawhammer]

It's a branding issue.

What??

No point. Hes been important. I'll leave it at that.

Fair enough. I respect your opinion.

Again, you don't understand the impact of starting field position, forcing a fair catch and preventing a return, tackles inside the 10, etc. We've gone entire seasons where that's been a difference, including some of Slater's best years.

I understand it. It's all important to some degree and it's all interconnected. It's the 'degree' that I'm disputing. You'll think this is predictable, but I'll say it anyway, Slater's best years don't amount to anything without all of Brady's brilliance and heroics throughout the entire course of Slater's career. I don't know what you call the last two seasons for Slater but the ST have been putrid and there's no longer a magic eraser at quarterback.

Look, Slater's been good, or great, at his job. I'll take your word for it, he's one of the best ever at what he does. That doesn't mean his relative impact on the team has been game-determining or season-determining.

If Brady's the most important Patriots player over the last 15 years, and I can cite a 1000 examples for how and why, and Gronkowski is #2, Edelman #3... then White, Hightower, Amendola, Vereen, Hogan, Mayo, Van Noy, Chung, etc... I mean where does Slater fall on this list?

That Super Bowl link @Pape posted with multiple videos of what he did are a clear example of how New England won that game. If those don't happen and the Rams even manage a couple of field goals, it could have turned out differently. You clearly didn't watch them, because you'd at least potentially say, "I had forgotten about that ... " - which was my reaction.

Super Bowl 53 was so tight that every single play became more important. Goff and his receivers were not good in this game. Gurley was useless (due to injury). Patriots had a superior defensive plan too. Hightower and Van Noy had outstanding games (combined for 6 QB hits and 3 sacks). Gilmore and J Jones as well (combined for 13 tackles, 3 PD, 1 INT, 1 FF and 1 sack) . Edelman was uncoverable (10 receptions on 12 targets). Brady and Gronk combined for the most decisive offensive play of the game. The o-line was great and Sony capped off a very nice postseason (with 94 yards and 1 TD). Slater registered 1 tackle. There were 172 snaps in this game and Slater appeared in 15% of them (all on ST). I'm sure he did his job to his maximum capability but he alone hardly "won the game." I would call that a clear case of an overstatement.

The fact you're dying on this hill "just because others agree with you" doesn't make it any better. If you want to educate yourself and potentially act like you care enough to learn and grow, go look up the statistics when it comes to opposing teams scoring based on starting field position. That stat changes drastically from inside the 17 back, compared to beyond.

I'm just engaging in conversation. And I'm not disputing what you're saying here. I just consider several other factors of the game to be more impactful.

Here are some things to consider (2022 season)...

Patriots averaged 5.0 kickoffs and 4.7 punts per game.
Patriots had a kickoff touchback percentage of 36.5%
Patriots averaged 35.9 yards per punt attempt (last in NFL).
Patriots averaged 36.3 net yards per successful punt (last in NFL).

2022: Slater registered 6 solo ST tackles (tied for 54th in the NFL).
2021: Slater registered 5 solo ST tackles (tied for 68th in the NFL).
2020: Slater registered 3 solo ST tackles (tied for 88th in the NFL).

So that absolutely matters, and it's why Belichick screwed up Gostkowski's kicking (it messed with his FG mechanics for a bit - if you recall) when the league changed the rules and Belichick had him work on getting underneath it to get the ball higher and short of the end zone on kickoffs so that Slater could get down the field and stop the guy at or before the 15. That's because Belichick understands the key element that you're missing about this entire argument.

BB should have reconsidered for the 2022 season... ST allowed 3 KO return TDs which accounted for half of all TDs allowed. BB likes to hype his ST, and he aims to gain an advantage with that phase (because of course it improves your chances for success), but he's missing the mark recently and his ST are hurting the team. So it works both ways.

 

[Hyped]

Best news so far this off-season!!!

Now I won't have to buy a Cardona jersey or an Andrews jersey....

The blue #18 lives on Sundays in my house, baby!!!!

 

[Ian]

Super Bowl 53 was so tight that every single play became more important. Goff and his receivers were not good in this game. Gurley was useless (due to injury). Patriots had a superior defensive plan too. Hightower and Van Noy had outstanding games (combined for 6 QB hits and 3 sacks). Gilmore and J Jones as well (combined for 13 tackles, 3 PD, 1 INT, 1 FF and 1 sack) . Edelman was uncoverable (10 receptions on 12 targets). Brady and Gronk combined for the most decisive offensive play of the game. The o-line was great and Sony capped off a very nice postseason (with 94 yards and 1 TD). Slater registered 1 tackle. There were 172 snaps in this game and Slater appeared in 15% of them (all on ST). I'm sure he did his job to his maximum capability but he alone hardly "won the game." I would call that a clear case of an overstatement.

You didn't look at that article and/or watch what he did that they highlighted. Go look at it and watch the videos - I mean really look at it, don't pretend you did and then not do it - and rethink the bolded portion above.

Especially when you look at the Rams' starting field position in the second half:



He was the guy responsible for a lot of that.

 

[Ian]

I understand it. It's all important to some degree and it's all interconnected. It's the 'degree' that I'm disputing. You'll think this is predictable, but I'll say it anyway, Slater's best years don't amount to anything without all of Brady's brilliance and heroics throughout the entire course of Slater's career.

100% predictable - so all the little things his teammates did when Brady won those tight games didn't play a factor? Cool.

 

[RobertWeathers]

100% predictable - so all the little things his teammates did when Brady won those tight games didn't play a factor? Cool.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

You didn't look at that article and/or watch what he did that they highlighted. Go look at it and watch the videos - I mean really look at it, don't pretend you did and then not do it - and rethink the bolded portion above.

Especially when you look at the Rams' starting field position in the second half:



He was the guy responsible for a lot of that.

Look at the last one you circled. 9 play drive in the 4th quarter taking up 5 minutes of the clock in a tie game. Yet the Rams still punted from their own 30 yard line! That led to the Patriots starting their next drive at their own 31 (best field position we had in the 2nd half until the shanked Rams FG attempt with 5 seconds left). Which just so happened to be the drive the Patriots scored their only TD. All set up by Slater disrupting enough to lead to a punt downed at the 7. Thanks Matthew Slater!

 

[Steve102]

Me.

 

[crawhammer]

100% predictable - so all the little things his teammates did when Brady won those tight games didn't play a factor? Cool.

Where did I say "didn't play a factor"? This is how my arguments become idiotic... when my words are twisted.

I'll repeat... Every single teammate who played >0 snaps in a game made some sort of impact (positive or negative). If what they did was positive, even if it's a little thing (your words), then it contributed to the overall success achieved in that game, i.e. played a factor. I'm quantifying the factors, even all of the little things (your words), and placing a value on them. Brady's value is #1. Teammate X is valued at the very bottom. Slater and every other teammate fall in between.

Even tallying up all of the little contributions from Slater, he doesn't play enough in the game, and he's certainly not ever touching the football in the pivotal moments. Generally, punts have importance, but they don't often result in pivotal moments (on the level of TDs, explosive plays, turnovers, sacks, etc.). Slater by virtue of his relatively limited skillset, and lack of opportunities (due to limited overall playing percentage), keep him down on the factor scale. Makes total sense.

You didn't look at that article and/or watch what he did that they highlighted. Go look at it and watch the videos - I mean really look at it, don't pretend you did and then not do it - and rethink the bolded portion above.

Especially when you look at the Rams' starting field position in the second half:



He was the guy responsible for a lot of that.

Still, you're circling 3 plays out of 172. But I'll briefly break them down.

Play #1: Great punt by Allen. The football would have landing out of bounds. The football glancing off Slater's hands was of no consequence. This play is 100% Allen (and the long snapper and the protection).

Play #2: Slater whiffed on the tackle and the returner got decent yardage. Completely blew a golden opportunity to light someone up. This honestly is a sorry excuse for a plus play.

Play #3: Absolutely beautiful punt by Allen. Slater got himself in perfect position to down the ball. Nice play.

I'll concede #3. That one play was a factor but it did not win the game. I already named several Patriots who had a greater impact on the win. I'll stick by that list.

 

[Pape]

Where did I say "didn't play a factor"? This is how my arguments become idiotic... when my words are twisted.

Your words aren't being twisted. And if you think they are, quite frankly that's on you and how you present your argument. Use better words.

 

[Ian]

Still, you're circling 3 plays out of 172. But I'll briefly break them down.

Play #1: Great punt by Allen. The football would have landing out of bounds. The football glancing off Slater's hands was of no consequence. This play is 100% Allen (and the long snapper and the protection).

Play #2: Slater whiffed on the tackle and the returner got decent yardage. Completely blew a golden opportunity to light someone up. This honestly is a sorry excuse for a plus play.

Play #3: Absolutely beautiful punt by Allen. Slater got himself in perfect position to down the ball. Nice play.

I'll concede #3. That one play was a factor but it did not win the game. I already named several Patriots who had a greater impact on the win. I'll stick by that list.