Spikes injured?

[Kasmir]

With this theory, no stat in NFL could be used for comparison. For example, a sack on 3rd and long wouldn't mean the same thing as a sack on 1st and 10 ? A 18 yards draw on 3rd and 20 should be modified so that a 2 yards run on 3rd and 1 would be worth more ?

That is precisely the kind of adjustments Football Outsiders makes in their alternative statistical system, which is (ahem) a little more comprehensive than what you've revealed of yours:

five yards on third-and-4 are worth more than five yards on first-and-10 and much more than five yards on third-and-12. Red zone plays are worth more than other plays. Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Methods To Our Madness

If you're at all interested in the application of statistics to football, check them out. They have anticipated all of your questions.

 

[Joker]

I READ IT ON TWITTER...IT MUST BE TRUE!!!

 

[supafly]

I READ IT ON TWITTER...IT MUST BE TRUE!!!

You have a good point Joker, but any smoke about a potential 'MRI' still doesn't make me too happy.

I agree that Twitter is not a viable news source, but with that said, what else would the motivation have been for her to say that??

I'm guessing there is some truth to him being injured, but it not being anything in a major way.

In other words, we have a tweet from someone close to him, who was there--and then we have the word of Drew Rosenhaus....

 

[Joker]

an important thing to remember is the lens through which all of this is viewed...for us, as football fans, we see or hear this in media and we immediately fear the worst, forgetting that the person doing the actual posting on Twitter could be reacting/overeacting in any number of ways..imagine..he has a girlfriend..SHE has hit the motherlode...she's WITH a Pro Football player under contract to the NFL...it's the motherlode, golden goose, Gigantic Tooth Fairy and Larry Leprechaun all rolled into one...he's playing ball with the boys while she's looking through the Robb Report for used Mercedes...he tweaks his ankle cutting to the hoop and limps off court...I've done it a thousand times...no big deal...BUT she goes bat**** insane with fear..MY GOLDEN GOOSE BABY PIE SNOOKUMS HURT HIMSELF WEAL WEAL BAAAAD!!! she tweets....five seconds later, one of the thousand NFL fanatics who spend every waking minute trying to cover the lives of their favorite team's players sees this "tweet" and all hell breaks loose...meanwhile, Spikes is like "man, what IS this bullsh!t...I got REAL world problems goin' on here with family...ain't got time for this crap"...and there you have it...the obvious reason why we're waiting for information that never occured. IMHO of course....

 

[supafly]

an important thing to remember is the lens through which all of this is viewed...for us, as football fans, we see or hear this in media and we immediately fear the worst, forgetting that the person doing the actual posting on Twitter could be reacting/overeacting in any number of ways..imagine..he has a girlfriend..SHE has hit the motherlode...she's WITH a Pro Football player under contract to the NFL...it's the motherlode, golden goose, Gigantic Tooth Fairy and Larry Leprechaun all rolled into one...he's playing ball with the boys while she's looking through the Robb Report for used Mercedes...he tweaks his ankle cutting to the hoop and limps off court...I've done it a thousand times...no big deal...BUT she goes bat**** insane with fear..MY GOLDEN GOOSE BABY PIE SNOOKUMS HURT HIMSELF WEAL WEAL BAAAAD!!! she tweets....five seconds later, one of the thousand NFL fanatics who spend every waking minute trying to cover the lives of their favorite team's players sees this "tweet" and all hell breaks loose...meanwhile, Spikes is like "man, what IS this bullsh!t...I got REAL world problems goin' on here with family...ain't got time for this crap"...and there you have it...the obvious reason why we're waiting for information that never occured. IMHO of course....

That's a fair enough viewpoint, and one that I had not considered, but you have a decent point, as far as the 'overreaction' factor--especially from the woman's point of view.

 

[BlueThunder]

The word "MRI" always scares the bejezus out of fans......why add that little item to a tweet.....unless you add "precautionary" also..

 

[RayClay]

Apparently Spikes has responded that he's going to "keep on doing it", whatever that means.

?Barry White - Never Gonna Give You Up?‏ - YouTube

 

[supafly]

Apparently Spikes has responded that he's going to "keep on doing it", whatever that means.

?Barry White - Never Gonna Give You Up?‏ - YouTube

Making movies??

 

[RDS11]

40% should really be considered about 53% since he played only 12 games.
If you follow the Pats you would know that Spikes in an impact player vs the run. The Pats use sub packages about halof the time. Your logic if flawed. He would have to be an impact player in pass defense to play more, but that doesnt change his impact as a run defender.



An ILB in a 34 2 gap defense that is off the field in sub packages is not properly measured by those stats. His job is to stop the run, and by all accounts he did it well. How do you expect him to get sacks if he isn't asked to blitz? You seem to be looking at statistics alone, which a terrible, terrible means of assessing LB play, and also seem to not really understand the Pats defensive concept.


There are many, many factors you overlook. Quality of opponent, weather, game situation, the impact our offense had, etc.


A player who improves the run D as an ILB and subs out in passing situations is an impact player.



So. Corey Dillon didnt play on 3rd down in 04, was he not an impact player?


Again, you seem to not understand the concept of the defense.
When we take Spikes out and put in a 5th DB what does that have to do with Spikes impact in the base 34? Nothing/

First, read all my comments before replying.
I said Spikes played 31% all all snaps, so 40% would be prorated over 16 games.

I understand the concept of team defense, that each individual has a job to do. But production is important. In Patriots Reign, Mangini and Belichick argued about the value of Milloy over that simple fact : in 2002, Milloy had a bunch of zeroes on his stat line. Bottom line, he was traded.

It's now always as simple as that, but again, I trust Belichick more than anybody on this board regarding player evaluation. Twist it any ways you want it, Spikes was just good enough to play 40% of all defensive snaps in 2010. That means that for 60% of all snaps, he was irrelevant as a better player was on the field in his place. By better I mean for that perticular situation. But then again, Mayo plays 100% of the time. His absence would have triggered a drop in the defense. Wilfork plays more than any other lineman, McCourty more than any other CB. Their absences would have had an impact. Spikes played 40%, and got minor contribution in that time. What his absence meant, is that in those 40% a less capable player than him was on the field. Did it have an impact on the overall results ? No.

Weather, quality of opponents and other intangibles should even out at the end of one season. That's why I tried to stay clear of a game by game analysis.

Now getting back to the original statement, which says that the defense was never the same once Spikes was suspended is absurd. This is all I was trying to point out.

Again, I pointed out stats, and somebody tries to make a stupid comparison : first it was Brady, now Dillon. I will point out that Dillon in 2004 established the most yards in franchise history. Spikes got 1 INT in 2010. Talk about a valid comparison...

 

[RayClay]

That means that for 60% of all snaps, he was irrelevant as a better player was on the field in his place.

You're saying Guyton is better against the run than Spikes? You're kidding.

If you're saying Mayo is better, he should be, he was a top 10 pick.

So what are you saying? The Patriots have a 3 LB rotation at LB, just like they did with Bruschi playing both spots like Mayo, Phifer playing more on passing downs, Ted Johnson against the run.

I'm really struggling to see what your problem is with that.

With Spikes out and a QB that hardly ever played for Green Bay, a couple mediocre runners ran through the middle of our defense like it was marsmallow.

That's what you saw if you watched the game but, apparently, all you do is look at the stat sheet afterwards.

 

[Ring 6]

First, read all my comments before replying.
I said Spikes played 31% all all snaps, so 40% would be prorated over 16 games.

I understand the concept of team defense, that each individual has a job to do.

You kind of answered my question that you don't because there is a lot more to it than that.

But production is important.

More important than what?
What do you consider production? Taking on the G and stuffing an A gap run for a 1 yard gain on 1st and 10 is production.

In Patriots Reign, Mangini and Belichick argued about the value of Milloy over that simple fact

I don't recall that in Patriots Reign. Can you copy in that part, because I think you are 'misremembering'

: in 2002, Milloy had a bunch of zeroes on his stat line. Bottom line, he was traded.

He wasnt traded. He was cut because of the cap.

It's now always as simple as that, but again, I trust Belichick more than anybody on this board regarding player evaluation. Twist it any ways you want it, Spikes was just good enough to play 40% of all defensive snaps in 2010.

Again, you don't understand the defensive concept. On 40% or so, of the plays we use a base 34. Spikes does not play in sub packages.

That means that for 60% of all snaps, he was irrelevant as a better player was on the field in his place

Not better, different, because his position doesnt exist when there are 5 dbs on the field.

By better I mean for that perticular situation. But then again, Mayo plays 100% of the time.

They are different players. Being Mayo isnt the only way to have an impact.

His absence would have triggered a drop in the defense. Wilfork plays more than any other lineman, McCourty more than any other CB. Their absences would have had an impact. Spikes played 40%, and got minor contribution in that time.

This is where you need to watch football. Spikes impact is not shown in the categories that you want to limit defense to. His job is to stop the run. How many sacks or Ints he has isn't relevant to his primary job. His contribution was significant even if you missed it with your nose in a stat book.

What his absence meant, is that in those 40% a less capable player than him was on the field. Did it have an impact on the overall results ? No.

Of course it did. Again, you need to understand the concept. Our defense sacrifices other things to prioritize stopping the run from the base defense. The better we do on those downs, the better situations we are in on later downs. If its 2nd and 2, vs 2nd and 10 its an entirely difference success rate. It is very reasonable to say that Spikes strong play on run defense has an impact on the plays he isnt even on the field by impacting down and distance. You wont find that in a stat sheet.

Weather, quality of opponents and other intangibles should even out at the end of one season. That's why I tried to stay clear of a game by game analysis.

Huh? You compared the 4 cold weather games he didn't play against mostly lesser competition to the 12 better weather games he played against generally better competition. How does that even out over a season?

Now getting back to the original statement, which says that the defense was never the same once Spikes was suspended is absurd. This is all I was trying to point out.

I'm discussing your comment that the defense is no different without him, that he had no impact.

Again, I pointed out stats, and somebody tries to make a stupid comparison : first it was Brady, now Dillon.

It is valid in that you dismiss Spikes because his role is not to be on the field in all situations just as Dillons was.

I will point out that Dillon in 2004 established the most yards in franchise history. Spikes got 1 INT in 2010. Talk about a valid comparison...

Spikes job is not measured in Interceptions. The comparison is valid because you dismissed Spikes for not being on the field in all cases. Neither was Dillion. Of course I also specifically stated that the comparison was limited that aspect, but you chose to ignore that.

Football is not about a stat sheet. The impact of a run stopping ILB is not going to show up in the few stats that you are misled into thinking a defender should be judged on.
You are pretty far off track on this one.

 

[RDS11]

You kind of answered my question that you don't because there is a lot more to it than that.


More important than what?
What do you consider production? Taking on the G and stuffing an A gap run for a 1 yard gain on 1st and 10 is production.


I don't recall that in Patriots Reign. Can you copy in that part, because I think you are 'misremembering'


He wasnt traded. He was cut because of the cap.


Again, you don't understand the defensive concept. On 40% or so, of the plays we use a base 34. Spikes does not play in sub packages.

Not better, different, because his position doesnt exist when there are 5 dbs on the field.


They are different players. Being Mayo isnt the only way to have an impact.


This is where you need to watch football. Spikes impact is not shown in the categories that you want to limit defense to. His job is to stop the run. How many sacks or Ints he has isn't relevant to his primary job. His contribution was significant even if you missed it with your nose in a stat book.



Of course it did. Again, you need to understand the concept. Our defense sacrifices other things to prioritize stopping the run from the base defense. The better we do on those downs, the better situations we are in on later downs. If its 2nd and 2, vs 2nd and 10 its an entirely difference success rate. It is very reasonable to say that Spikes strong play on run defense has an impact on the plays he isnt even on the field by impacting down and distance. You wont find that in a stat sheet.

Huh? You compared the 4 cold weather games he didn't play against mostly lesser competition to the 12 better weather games he played against generally better competition. How does that even out over a season?


I'm discussing your comment that the defense is no different without him, that he had no impact.


It is valid in that you dismiss Spikes because his role is not to be on the field in all situations just as Dillons was.


Spikes job is not measured in Interceptions. The comparison is valid because you dismissed Spikes for not being on the field in all cases. Neither was Dillion. Of course I also specifically stated that the comparison was limited that aspect, but you chose to ignore that.

Football is not about a stat sheet. The impact of a run stopping ILB is not going to show up in the few stats that you are misled into thinking a defender should be judged on.
You are pretty far off track on this one.

For Milloy, it's on page 136. But I did confuse the Mangini-Belichick argument: it was over Victor Green.

I did say that the 40% times Spikes was on the field, it was because he was better than the next guy. I'm not dismissing that. I never did, as I said I trust Belichick to put the best players on the field at all time. What I said, again, it's that I do not agree with the statement that the defense was never the same following Spikes suspension. My argument, is that Spikes does not play in sub packages as he's on the field 40% of the time and for these 40% the dropoff between Spikes and the next guy is not that much. It's not like Spikes' replacement would never ever make a tackle against the run. He might do it 0.5 yards later, but it wasn't like they were playing 10 against 11 without Spikes on a running play. And no, the ILB job isn't limited to play against the run : it has to include an occasional forced fumble, recovery, INT. If Spikes can't do any of those, than at some point he will be replaced by somebody who can.

I think that following the Browns games in which Spikes played a season high 79% of snaps (and the Pats were run over for 230 yards), the coaching staff decided to play Spikes less and Guyton more because of Spikes' limitation. Some have argues that it was because of ''situational football'' but when your ILD run-stopper plays only 16 snaps against the Steelers (21%) or 17 snaps against the Lions (22%), or that over the next 4 games following the Browns games, 3 of them were the games Spikes saw the field the less this season, while Guyton was playing more and more, is quite telling of what the coaching staff was trying to do. Spikes averaged 23% of all snaps between the Browns game and the time he was suspended. That's another argument against the ''the defense was never the same after Spikes suspension''.

You mentioned that an ILD stops for a 1 yard gain is production and I agree. I don't have access to these stats, and maybe you do. The only thing I can tell is that Spikes was credited with only 1 tackle for a loss in 2010 (the team had 35).

Seriously, comparing Dillon 2004 situation to 2010 Spikes is just pure nonsense. What, because Dillon wasn't on the field at all time like Spikes ? A bunch of players weren't on the field at all time in 2010, including Brady. The silliness of going that route is laughable. You won't prove a point by putting words in mouth of others.

I sure hope Spikes becomes a superstar. He was a beast at Florida, an integral part of a National Championship team. But let's be realistic here : in his rookie year in 2010, he did OK for a rookie, but he wasn't a difference maker.

 

[RDS11]

Another note re: your analysis- wouldn't it force you to conclude that pass defense specialists are always more valuable than run defense specialists? If teams pass more than they run, and they do, then the raw numbers will indicate that pass specialists see more snaps than run specialists, every time. You've failed to account for the need for diverse skillsets on a defense, and that, perhaps more than anything else, has rendered pretty much everything that you've said on this topic irrelevant. Statistically irrelevant, even

Yes, I do think pass defense specialists are more valuable. First, because teams pass more than they run. Also, Coldhardfootballfacts did a nice analysis regarding stopping the pass and correlation to victory. Their result, is that stopping the pass (they used the defensive passer rating as their indicator) is one the most most telling stats regarding correlation to victory.

Obviously, I wouldn't play 11 DB all the time ! But if I have to choose between a LB that is a run-stopper and a LB who can cover the TE, I would pick the LB who can cover.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Production is important. That is why Law wasn't cut for cap reasons when/while Milloy was. Although once he was injured in the 2004 season it became a no brainer for Bill to cut Law for the same reason - production vs. cap and cash cost. Whether he would have absent the injury is probably debateable.

 

[RDS11]

Please find where I said that, because I believe it was you saying it. I don't believe that at all. I disagreed with your phrasing of it. In terms of total yardage:

4 of the 5 best teams against the run last year made it to the playoffs. The 5th, San Diego, was 9-7 and had special teams problems which cost them multiple games and, probably, the playoffs.

All 5 of the best teams against the run in 2009 made the playoffs.

4 of 5 in 2008 made the playoffs, with the 5th finishing 9-7.

2007 is the last time a team with a top 5 defense against the run finished with a losing record.

On the flip side, 3 of the 5 best from last year in pass defense failed to make the playoffs, 3 of 5 missed in 2009, 2 of 5 missed in 2008 and 2 of 5 missed in 2007.

At least in recent years, there's a greater correlation of top 5 in total rushing yards allowed making the playoffs than there is in top 5 in total passing yards allowed making the playoffs.

.

You don't get the whole picture here.
First, it's obvious that teams that make the playoff have a somewhat good defense, either pass or run, or else they wouldn't make the playoffs.

Total yardage is only part of the picture. You cannot use total yardage as the end-all statistical value. If you do, then there's funny things that will pop-out, like Drew Bledsoe being the 8th best QB of all-time.

But if you look at the most recent champion, the Packers, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempt and 24th in total yardage on offense.
On defense, they were 15th in total rushing yardage allowed and 5th worse in rush yards per attempt.
So looking at this, they were not good at running the ball, and below average at stopping it.

Yet they won it all. Because they were very efficient throwing the ball and stopping the pass. Their 5.4 net yards per pass attempt was 3rd best on defense, and their 7.1 was 3rd best on offense.

In 2009, the Saints had similar statistics, although they were less efficient against the pass. What they did great against the pass was creating turnovers (15TDs against 26 INTS). I don't have their defensive passer rating, but with 15 TDs against 26 INTs it was probably very good.
Against the run, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempts (4.5) and 21st for total rushing yardage.
On offense, they were good passing and running.

In 2006, the Colts on offense were 16th in avg rush yards per attempt, and 18th in total rushing yardage. On D, they were the worst rushing D with an incredibly bad 5.3 rushing avg per attempt, and also the worst in rushing total yardage. But they were 13th in net yards per pass attempt.

Stopping the pass and passing efficiently is the key. Running and stopping the run, not so. Doesn't mean teams should try to copy the 2006 Colts, but historically being average at stopping the run is good enough for a chance at winning it all. Being average at stopping the pass is usually less forgiving...except for those lucky 2007 Giants

 

[Ring 6]

For Milloy, it's on page 136. But I did confuse the Mangini-Belichick argument: it was over Victor Green.

What is on page 136? You said it was BB and Mangini arguing that Milloy should be traded. I'm confused now.

I did say that the 40% times Spikes was on the field, it was because he was better than the next guy. I'm not dismissing that. I never did, as I said I trust Belichick to put the best players on the field at all time. What I said, again, it's that I do not agree with the statement that the defense was never the same following Spikes suspension. My argument, is that Spikes does not play in sub packages as he's on the field 40% of the time and for these 40% the dropoff between Spikes and the next guy is not that much.

That is an unsubstantiated opinion, and you are continuing to ignore counterarguments.

It's not like Spikes' replacement would never ever make a tackle against the run. He might do it 0.5 yards later, but it wasn't like they were playing 10 against 11 without Spikes on a running play.

Again, this shows a total lack of understanding of how defense is played. Its like the argument that a run defense that allows 3.5 ypc is terrible becasue 3x3.5 would be a first down every time.


[/quote]And no, the ILB job isn't limited to play against the run : it has to include an occasional forced fumble, recovery, INT. If Spikes can't do any of those, than at some point he will be replaced by somebody who can. [/quote]
His primary job is to stop the run. Sure fumbles happen. How many do you expect?
The average NFL defense recovered 10.9 fumbles last season.(including special teams) With 11 players on the field that is about 1 a player. As you pointed out Spikes played 31% of the snaps, so his 'share' would be 0.3 fumbles. Can we agree that is not a very relevant point?

I think that following the Browns games in which Spikes played a season high 79% of snaps (and the Pats were run over for 230 yards), the coaching staff decided to play Spikes less and Guyton more because of Spikes' limitation. Some have argues that it was because of ''situational football'' but when your ILD run-stopper plays only 16 snaps against the Steelers (21%) or 17 snaps against the Lions (22%), or that over the next 4 games following the Browns games, 3 of them were the games Spikes saw the field the less this season,

Again, you have to get your eyes out of the stat book and watch the game.
We blew those teams out and were in prevent for most of those games.
Spikes played in the base almost every play, and didn't play in sub almost every play. His snap counts are not a reflection of being ahead or behind of Guyton, it is a reflection of what defense we played.

while Guyton was playing more and more, is quite telling of what the coaching staff was trying to do.

No it isn't. The snaps had nothing to do with Guyton playing in Spikes place, no matter how much you want to create a story that could make it seem so.

Spikes averaged 23% of all snaps between the Browns game and the time he was suspended. That's another argument against the ''the defense was never the same after Spikes suspension''.

And what was different about the games after the Cleveland game that would cause the base ILB to play less and the sub package LB to play more? Hint: we had huge leads and teams were playing catchup so we played prevent.

You mentioned that an ILD stops for a 1 yard gain is production and I agree. I don't have access to these stats, and maybe you do. The only thing I can tell is that Spikes was credited with only 1 tackle for a loss in 2010 (the team had 35).

Another reason why you need to watch football instead of relying on stats.
Your argument is that because you can't put a stat on it then it isn't relevant, which is ridiculous.
Again, you show your ignorance of the defense using tackles for loss by a 34 2 gap ILB on a defense that rarely blitzes ILBs in the base as the only statistic you can come up with to judge run defense.

[quoe]Seriously, comparing Dillon 2004 situation to 2010 Spikes is just pure nonsense. What, because Dillon wasn't on the field at all time like Spikes ? A bunch of players weren't on the field at all time in 2010, including Brady. The silliness of going that route is laughable. You won't prove a point by putting words in mouth of others. [/quote]
You argued that Spikes had less value because he did not play in sub packages. Dillon did not either. If you can't understand the difference of using a comparison to isolate a point and comparing 2 players, I can't help you much.
Tom Brady is a very smart QB and that made his career much more prolific than it would have been if he had average intelligence. Tim Tebow is a very smart QB, and that will help him go farther in the league than if he had average inteligence.
See I didn't 'compare Tebow to Brady' I isolated an aspect of Brady to illustrate a factor that is in Tebows favor.

I sure hope Spikes becomes a superstar. He was a beast at Florida, an integral part of a National Championship team. But let's be realistic here : in his rookie year in 2010, he did OK for a rookie, but he wasn't a difference maker.

I do't know what you mean by 'difference maker'. Was Vince Wilfork a difference maker? We could make a similar argument to the one you are making about Spikes to say he wasn't, but an understanding of defense, or the Patriots defense, and our eyes tell us differently.
Spikes had a role. He did it very well. That role is a pretty important one.

 

[Ring 6]

You don't get the whole picture here.
First, it's obvious that teams that make the playoff have a somewhat good defense, either pass or run, or else they wouldn't make the playoffs.

Total yardage is only part of the picture. You cannot use total yardage as the end-all statistical value. If you do, then there's funny things that will pop-out, like Drew Bledsoe being the 8th best QB of all-time.

But if you look at the most recent champion, the Packers, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempt and 24th in total yardage on offense.
On defense, they were 15th in total rushing yardage allowed and 5th worse in rush yards per attempt.
So looking at this, they were not good at running the ball, and below average at stopping it.

Yet they won it all. Because they were very efficient throwing the ball and stopping the pass. Their 5.4 net yards per pass attempt was 3rd best on defense, and their 7.1 was 3rd best on offense.

In 2009, the Saints had similar statistics, although they were less efficient against the pass. What they did great against the pass was creating turnovers (15TDs against 26 INTS). I don't have their defensive passer rating, but with 15 TDs against 26 INTs it was probably very good.
Against the run, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempts (4.5) and 21st for total rushing yardage.
On offense, they were good passing and running.

In 2006, the Colts on offense were 16th in avg rush yards per attempt, and 18th in total rushing yardage. On D, they were the worst rushing D with an incredibly bad 5.3 rushing avg per attempt, and also the worst in rushing total yardage. But they were 13th in net yards per pass attempt.

Stopping the pass and passing efficiently is the key. Running and stopping the run, not so. Doesn't mean teams should try to copy the 2006 Colts, but historically being average at stopping the run is good enough for a chance at winning it all. Being average at stopping the pass is usually less forgiving...except for those lucky 2007 Giants

2010 Packers allowed 83 rush yards per game in the playoffs.
2008 Steelers allowed 40.3
2007 Giants allowed 74
2006 Colts allowed 82.8 and cut that 5.3 to 4.1

You cannot use SB winners as your sample while using regular season statistics.
Those Colts are the perfect example.
Manning was terrible in the playoffs, they actually won the SB BECAUSE OF their defense, and it wasn't even a close argument. To use that team as an example of how you win a SB without good run defense is terribly disingenuous.
Furthermore, you are totally ignoring the correlation between run defense and pass defense related to down and distance, and how a defense must play when it cant stop the run.
You are using defensive QB rating compared to defensive rushing yards per carry (where you also need to factor in the increase that a good team will have by playing ahead and in prevent) as if they were comparable.

 

[Joker]

I don't know what you mean by 'difference maker'. Was Vince Wilfork a difference maker? We could make a similar argument to the one you are making about Spikes to say he wasn't, but an understanding of defense, or the Patriots defense, and our eyes tell us differently.
Spikes had a role. He did it very well. That role is a pretty important one.

I don't get it either... I watched every game multiple times ,some over 10 times, and actually keyed on the play of the OLB's and inside guys,Spikes and Mayo.I thought Spikes came as advertised....quick in short bursts, deficient in pass coverage, a hard hitter and sure tackler.For a first year, he acquitted himself pretty well and settled in rather well after he got his initial feet wet. I ended last season feeling pretty damned good about our inside backers and a helluva lot more concerned with the OLB play.

It's a peculiar trait displayed on sports message boards everywhere....a certain somebody gets a hair across his azz about a certain guy and then defends that opinion with a death grip ...twisting, spinning, contorting and disfiguring statistics to fit their particular jihad...I do this myself on occasion...guess it goes to the rabidity index of a team's fans.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't know what you mean by 'difference maker'. Was Vince Wilfork a difference maker? We could make a similar argument to the one you are making about Spikes to say he wasn't, but an understanding of defense, or the Patriots defense, and our eyes tell us differently.
Spikes had a role. He did it very well. That role is a pretty important one.

I don't get it either... I watched every game multiple times ,some over 10 times, and actually keyed on the play of the OLB's and inside guys,Spikes and Mayo.I thought Spikes came as advertised....quick in short bursts, deficient in pass coverage, a hard hitter and sure tackler.For a first year, he acquitted himself pretty well and settled in rather well after he got his initial feet wet. I ended last season feeling pretty damned good about our inside backers and a helluva lot more concerned with the OLB play.

It's a peculiar trait displayed on sports message boards everywhere....a certain somebody gets a hair across his azz about a certain guy and then defends that opinion with a death grip ...twisting, spinning, contorting and disfiguring statistics to fit their particular jihad...I do this myself on occasion...guess it goes to the rabidity index of a team's fans.

Its especially obvious when you remember back to 2009 when Guyton was getting destroyed in run defense. Thats the irony. We drafted Spikes to solve a big problem, run D at ILB, he played as expected, and it is now being argued he had no impact because we have the guy who was so bad we had to draft Spikes. Oh well, such is the message board dynamic.

 

[Deus Irae]

You don't get the whole picture here.
First, it's obvious that teams that make the playoff have a somewhat good defense, either pass or run, or else they wouldn't make the playoffs.

Total yardage is only part of the picture. You cannot use total yardage as the end-all statistical value. If you do, then there's funny things that will pop-out, like Drew Bledsoe being the 8th best QB of all-time.

But if you look at the most recent champion, the Packers, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempt and 24th in total yardage on offense.
On defense, they were 15th in total rushing yardage allowed and 5th worse in rush yards per attempt.
So looking at this, they were not good at running the ball, and below average at stopping it.

Yet they won it all. Because they were very efficient throwing the ball and stopping the pass. Their 5.4 net yards per pass attempt was 3rd best on defense, and their 7.1 was 3rd best on offense.

In 2009, the Saints had similar statistics, although they were less efficient against the pass. What they did great against the pass was creating turnovers (15TDs against 26 INTS). I don't have their defensive passer rating, but with 15 TDs against 26 INTs it was probably very good.
Against the run, they were 26th in rushing yards per attempts (4.5) and 21st for total rushing yardage.
On offense, they were good passing and running.

In 2006, the Colts on offense were 16th in avg rush yards per attempt, and 18th in total rushing yardage. On D, they were the worst rushing D with an incredibly bad 5.3 rushing avg per attempt, and also the worst in rushing total yardage. But they were 13th in net yards per pass attempt.

Stopping the pass and passing efficiently is the key. Running and stopping the run, not so. Doesn't mean teams should try to copy the 2006 Colts, but historically being average at stopping the run is good enough for a chance at winning it all. Being average at stopping the pass is usually less forgiving...except for those lucky 2007 Giants

The thing is, I do get it. Look, I don't really care that you dismiss the running game. If you want to be fool enough to do that, it's your choice. I do care that you keep repeating the same weak argument over and over again, despite the fact that it's been demonstrated to be wrong.

There is a clear correlation (though not a 1:1 causation situation) between the ability to stop the run and a team's ability to win games and get to the playoffs. Furthermore, there was a clear impact in Spikes' absence on the field last year, as Wilfork himself noted when talking about what the Patriots problems were all season. Here's Yardbarker pointing it out even back on week 2:

Also used a heavy nickel with Wilfork to discourage running on subpackages (a recurring problem).

Pats Propaganda, Defensive Game Plan Reviews

Here's Wilfork pointing it out:

Wilfork's answer was that he would get the Patriots out of their base 3-4 defense, and try running the ball.

It turns out that's what the Jets did in the third quarter, when the momentum of the game started to swing.

"We’ve been having problems with sub runs all year, going back to last year," Wilfork said. "The one thing that can hurt us, the run they chose, the weak zone, we talked about and didn’t execute.

Wilfork and struggles with 'sub' runs - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Now, you're welcome to keep arguing a lost point for as long as you want, if that's what works for you. However, I've shown you to be incorrect. Others here have shown you to be incorrect. Wilfork is indirectly pointing out that you're incorrect. If you can't accept that, you're welcome to keep tilting at windmills. I'm done with the subject though, since the point is proven at this point. I'll leave the endless circle for others to run in from here on out.