TMQB: 2 Quick Notes

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 11:13 AM CST

My last post had the final adjusted Pass YPA differentials. We now have the #2 (GB) and #3 (Pit) ranked teams in adjusted Pass YPA differential in the Super Bowl. It’s such a relevant statistic and the last post was so lightly read that I’m highlighting it again.

Differential Rank	Team	O Adjusted Pass YPA	O Rank	D Adjusted Pass YPA	D Rank	Differential (O – D)
1	San Diego	7.8	1	5.3	1	2.4
2	Green Bay	7.1	3	5.4	3	1.7
3	Pittsburgh	6.9	5	5.3	2	1.6
4	NY Giants	7.0	4	5.7	6	1.3
5	New England	7.2	2	6.4	23	0.8
6	New Orleans	6.5	10	5.9	12	0.6
7	Indianapolis	6.6	8	6.1	16	0.6
8	Tampa Bay	6.4	11	5.9	11	0.5
9	Baltimore	6.3	13	5.8	7	0.5
10	Philadelphia	6.4	12	6.0	14	0.4
11	NY Jets	5.9	22	5.6	4	0.2
12	Kansas City	5.9	23	5.7	5	0.2
13	Tennessee	6.2	14	6.1	15	0.1
14	Oakland	5.9	20	5.9	10	0.1
15	Chicago	5.8	25	5.8	8	(0.0)
16	Dallas	6.7	7	6.8	28	(0.1)
17	San Francisco	6.2	15	6.3	22	(0.1)
18	Atlanta	5.9	19	6.1	18	(0.2)
19	Miami	5.9	21	6.2	20	(0.3)
20	Minnesota	5.7	28	6.0	13	(0.3)
21	Cincinnati	6.1	16	6.4	24	(0.3)
22	Buffalo	5.7	29	6.1	19	(0.4)
23	Detroit	5.8	26	6.2	21	(0.5)
24	Houston	6.8	6	7.4	31	(0.6)
25	St. Louis	5.2	30	5.8	9	(0.6)
26	Seattle	5.8	27	6.4	25	(0.7)
27	Denver	6.5	9	7.2	30	(0.7)
28	Cleveland	5.8	24	6.6	27	(0.8)
29	Washington	6.0	18	6.9	29	(0.9)
30	Jacksonville	6.0	17	7.5	32	(1.5)
31	Arizona	4.8	31	6.5	26	(1.7)
32	Carolina	4.3	32	6.1	17	(1.8)

Note that these were the regular season statistics. In other words, they turned out to be very predictive, better than points scored/points allowed, better than W/L record. Every year doesn’t turn out this clean, football is unpredictable, but pass efficiency should be one of the key stats everyone looks at (one day ESPN will catch up). Back to 2002 can be found here.

This table also explains why I have a difference of opinion with some people on this board about what the offseason priority should. I’m focused on the team level. I believe the people who advocate OL first are focused on the player level. If you look at the team level it suggests that upgrading the defense needs to be the priority. However, if you go player by player it appears that the weakest individual players are on the OL (e.g. Colombo).

So who’s right? Well naturally I think I am. And the beauty of approaching it from a team level is it proves itself. You claim the OL needs to be the priority? Yet Dallas was #7 in offense this year with a ‘weak’ OL. That means either:

-the OL is better than the general consensus, or

-A weak OL doesn’t drastically limit offensive performance, in which case it’s not a priority.

My take? Good passing teams can game plan around an offensive line deficiency (e.g. screen pass, bubbles screens, 3 step drops, etc). Here’s an NFL analyst on the subject …

The best way to hide a deficiency on an offensive line is to throw. In fact, a majority of the top passing offenses last season were able to overcome at least one significant weak spot along the offensive line. The Texans were without both starting guards for most of the year. The Colts benched disappointing left tackle Tony Ugoh and relied on fringe veteran Charlie Johnson. The Saints lost Pro Bowl left tackle Jammal Brown early on and dealt with the ineptitude of an overwhelmed Jermon Bushrod. Cowboys left tackle Flozell Adams wasn’t bad, but he wasn’t good enough to keep his roster spot after the season. The Packers’ offensive line was initially in flux and gave up a whopping 37 sacks the first eight games. For the Vikings and the Eagles, left tackles Bryant McKinnie and Jason Peters both made the Pro Bowl, but only on name recognition. Study them on tape and you come away thinking both players should have been benched (McKinnie, in fact, was benched in Week 15).

You also might have noticed the Steeler’s rolled into the Super Bowl with not 1, 2, but 3 backups on their OL (Scott for Max Starks, Flozell of Colon, and Legursky for Pouncey). Even more notable is one of those backups was Flozell Adams who wasn’t good enough to keep a spot on Dallas’s ‘weak’ OL! Yikes. This is just another reminder that virtually every team must game plan around OL weaknesses. How’d Pittsburg do it? They’ve got a defense. While their offense wasn’t much better than Dallas’s their defense is depressingly superior. When you look on a player by player basis it’s obvious just how big the gap is (Sean Lee really really needs to work out).


DE	Aaron Smith	Marcus Spears
NT	Casey Hampton	Jay Ratliff
DE	Brett Kiesel	Olshansky
OLB	James Harrison	Demarcus Ware
ILB	Lawrence Timmons	Keith Brooking / Sean Lee
ILB	James Farrior	Bradie James
OLB	Lamar Woodley	Anthony Spencer
CB	Ike Taylor	Mike Jenkins
S	Troy Polamalu	Alan Ball
S	Ryan Clark	Gerald Sensabaugh
CB	Bryant McFadden	Terrence Newman

I’d argue that every highlighted player is better than their counterpart.

Here’s the other thing. Absent a lot of luck, Dallas isn’t going to sniff the Super Bowl until the defense is better. Not a little better, not middle of the pack better, a lot better. I’m talking top 10 year in year out.

Victor Butler

There is a big difference of opinion on Victor Butler. One camp believes that Dallas needs to upgrade the OLB position. The other camp believes that we don’t need to allocate more resources to OLB because Dallas already has Victor Butler.

Now my personal opinion has been that the claim that Victor Butler is the answer at OLB is a lot of wishful thinking. That opinion is largely based on the fact that Butler simply doesn’t have the athletic attributes you see in consistently successful edge rushers.

However, I saw something this week that made me reconsider my opinion of Butler’s prospects. Bob Sturm profiled Butler and the profile had Butler’s sack rate. As it turns out Butler had the best sack rate on the team for the last 2 years.

In 2009, he had 3 sacks in just 67 chances to rush the passer (a sack rate of 4.4% - Ware's sack rate is 2.1%, Spencer's 1.4%)….

2 sacks and 9 QB pressures in 76 pass rush situations is easily the best rate again on the team.

Now that is a good sign obviously but it reminded me of something else … something that was written at the beginning of the season …

Cameron Wake is the exact reason why I hope, someday, it'll be possible to see in what percentage of a team's defensive snaps an individual player has participated. Consider: last year, Cameron Wake recorded 5.5 sacks despite starting only a single game and being deployed almost exclusively as a third-down pass-rusher. He also finished second on the team in QB Hits. Those seem like crazy excellent rates. Of course, until we know Team Snap%, we don't know the whole story.

Of course we know how that turned out. So I’m more optimistic about Butler’s potential to be a viable NFL starter. There's some real evidence to support the idea that Butler's more than a career backup.

Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.

Tweet Comment 73 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

great talking point that I agree with the sentiment

You claim the OL needs to be the priority? Yet Dallas was #7 in offense this year with a ‘weak’ OL. That means either:

-the OL is better than the general consensus, or

-A weak OL doesn’t drastically limit offensive performance, in which case it’s not a priority.

However, I’m confused a bit as to why you used Dallas’ overall offensive rank as 7th instead of their pass efficiency rank at 16 to make this point. I know what a stickler you are for that sort of thing.

To play devil’s advocate.. the people clamoring for an offensive lineman are saying that the line is old and can fall apart at any time. The right side of our line was complete garbage this season AND two other positions on the line could have that collapse at any moment because of age. The concept that our line is good enough for now means that we NEVER get an infusion of young cheap talent because every lineman we get needs years of grooming before being ready to contribute. Again, playing the advocate here as I generally agree with you fixing the defense is plan A and B.

Off to read the rest of your article-

Sometimes, the only thing missing from a problem's solution is the right perspective.

The Poster formerly known as KDP

by KD Drummond on Feb 3, 2011 11:52 AM CST reply actions

why you used Dallas’ overall offensive rank as 7th instead of their pass efficiency rank at 16 to make this point

I’m not sure where you’re gettting 16th in pass efficiency. Dallas was 7th in adjusted Pass YPA (which is simply Pass YPA adjusted for sacks). The logic for using the sack adjusted number is that sacks are somewhat consistent which suggests that they’re a reflection of true ability of the offense as opposed to random noise.

Dallas was 10th in raw Pass YPA.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 12:27 PM CST up reply actions

I’m not sure where you’re gettting 16th

whoops, sorry I’m slow today. The teams in the table are ranked by the differential. Dallas was 16th in terms of the difference between their offensive Pass YPA and defensive Pass YPA.

That’s a combination of the O being 7th an the D being 28th.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 12:41 PM CST up reply actions

that explains it

thx

Sometimes, the only thing missing from a problem's solution is the right perspective.

The Poster formerly known as KDP

by KD Drummond on Feb 3, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions

I have to mention something

Note that these were the regular season statistics. In other words, they turned out to be very predictive, better than points scored/points allowed, better than W/L record.

Not true, if you look at the team standings for points allowed, the top 8 teams/def all made the playoffs and the #1 and #2 teams are in the Super Bowl. Seems like a stronger predictor and most prominent common denominator.

"Football is an incredible game. Sometimes it's so incredible, it's unbelievable."
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry

by Kegbearer on Feb 3, 2011 1:51 PM CST reply actions

if you look at the team standings for points allowed, the top 8 teams/def all made the playoffs and the #1 and #2 teams are in the Super Bowl. Seems like a stronger predictor and most prominent common denominator

-for that to be true offense would have to be irrelevant
-unlike adjusted Pass YPA, that doesn’t hold true for other years. Association is not causation.

I sense you’ve got an axe to grind on this. Just know it’s not welcome.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 2:26 PM CST up reply actions

No axe to grind

Just saying that the best predictor this year was points allowed. I would have to check on other years before I can make any claims about it.

by Kegbearer on Feb 3, 2011 2:37 PM CST up reply actions

Quick Research - Points Allowed as predictor

In 2010 – 8 of the Top 10 teams in (fewest) points allowed made the playoffs
In 2009 – 8 of the Top 10 teams in points allowed made the playoffs
In 2008 – 7 of the Top 10 (one of the 3 that didn’t make the playoffs was NE with 11-5 record)
In 2007 – 9 of the Top 10 made the playoffs

Seems like a really strong predictor

by Kegbearer on Feb 3, 2011 3:06 PM CST up reply actions

I take it for granted that points scored / points allowed should be a strong predictor. And points scored / points allowed is obviously the cause of W/L.

Seems like a really strong predictor

You missed the point. Imagine the regular season just ended. You look at the statistics and you want to figure out ’who’s the strongest team’? My point is that if you look at the adjusted Pass YPA you’d have a good shot of saying who’s going to the Super Bowl.

Chronology: Regular Season → make prediction → playoffs → Super Bowl

Adjusted Pass YPA
2010: #2 v #3
2009: #2 v #3
2008: #1 v #12
2007: #1 v.#18

Points Allowed
2010: #1 v #2
2009: #18 v #25
2008: #1 v #19
2007: #4 v #7

Now think about the chronology of points allowed & making the playoffs.

regular season & points allowed happen simultaneously → playoffs

Understand the difference?

Points allowed isn’t predicting who’s making the playoffs. They’re happening at the same time. Of course most of the teams that are leaders in points allowed are going to make the playoffs. Points allowed determines half the score, which determines W/L record. Those teams are going to have good records and make the playoffs.

I also I think the idea lacks fundamental logic because it would mean the offense doesn’t matter.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 4:43 PM CST up reply actions

I also I think the idea lacks fundamental logic

You state this, yet you argue that points allowed determines half the score and that most teams that are leaders in points allowed are going to make the playoffs – yet you think it’s a crummy stat, not a good stat to rate defenses, and not a good indicator? Is that logical?

Also, to claim using a single def stat as a predictor means that offense doesn’t matter is kind of ridiculous. It’s a single indicator, doesn’t need to take into consideration everything. And then trying to claim points allowed doesn’t work as a predictor because of your chronology is illogical. We are both compiling stats from the regular season and predicting post season success. I don’t know why you suddenly changed it to SB only, is YPA not as accurate with playoff teams, only SB teams?

And lastly, your stats are off. At least in 2009. The Colts were in the SuperBowl and they had a Top 10 def in points allowed in 2009 yet you list #18 and #25. Makes me think i should check more of your stats.

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 8:17 AM CST up reply actions

YPA

Is a good stat, I just think it is hands and above better than every other stat. For example, the Cowboys in 2010 rank 16th in YPA differential. Do you think the team was really the 16th best performing team in the league in 2010?

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 8:25 AM CST up reply actions

*I just DON'T think it is hands above better than every other stat

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 8:26 AM CST up reply actions

And lastly, your stats are off. At least in 2009. The Colts were in the SuperBowl and they had a Top 10 def in points allowed in 2009 yet you list #18 and #25. Makes me think i should check more of your stats.

You are right about this. When the data downloaded to excel it didn’t stay sorted by points allowed. The corrected numbers are worse though

Points Allowed
2010: #1 v. #2
2009: #8 v. #20
2008: #1 v. #28
2007: #4 v. #17

And then trying to claim points allowed doesn’t work as a predictor because of your chronology is illogical. We are both compiling stats from the regular season and predicting post season success

Look at the above. Do you not see that points allowed isn’t predicting whether teams make it to the SB? You’ve got the 8th, 20th, 28th, & 17th in the SB.

The lowest ranked YPA diff to make the SB was 18th and I can tell you that was THE exception. That’s the lowest ranked team to make it since 2002. Arizona at 12 was the 2nd worst. After that it’s Carolina at 8th. Here’s the full list

2010: #2 v #3
2009: #2 v #3
2008: #1 v #12
2007: #1 v.#18
2006: #3 v #6
2005: #2 v. #4
2004: #3 v. #4
2003: #5 v. #8
2002: #2 v. #3

I don’t know why you suddenly changed it to SB only, is YPA not as accurate with playoff teams

it’s the timing. making playoffs isn’t a prediction. making the playoffs happens at the same time the regular season statistics are produced, it’s just descriptive.

Now take those regular season statistics and before the playoffs start predict who’s going to win the Super Bowl? Points allowed isn’t going to help you. Pass YPA differential can.

The best teams in points allowed aren’t going on to win the SB. The best teams in Pass YPA differntial are.

yet you think it’s a crummy stat, not a good stat to rate defenses, and not a good indicator? Is that logical?

Yes, it’s completely logical. Points allowed includes a bunch of factors that are unrelated to the defense. Did you know points allowed includes kick-off returns, punt returns, offensive giveaways? The defense has nothing to do with those but they’re included in points allowed.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 8:53 AM CST up reply actions

And defensive turnovers, special teams field position don’t play a role in YPA for the offense? In any case, what if we did the differential between points scored/points allowed…that may prove to be very similar with the YPA differential you use.

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 12:59 PM CST up reply actions

O-Line

I think the fact that the Steelers made it this far with a patchwork O-line is another example of desperately we need to improve our depth on the O-line.

by Kegbearer on Feb 3, 2011 1:52 PM CST reply actions

we need to improve our depth on the O-line.

Dallas jetisoned Adams and McQ. Adams played all year for Pit and McQ played 8 games for Miami. Something doesn’t hang together that guys Dallas is judging are at the bottom of their depth chart are viable NFL starters.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 5:00 PM CST up reply actions

Adams was jettisoned for money. Pat McQ was a back-up that played due to injury not a viable NFL starter.

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 8:27 AM CST up reply actions

Adams was as bad as Columbo and therefore not worth paying a starter's salary

McQ I don’t know much about honestly.

by foyesboys on Feb 4, 2011 2:02 PM CST up reply actions

but your point is still a good one

we don’t seem to evaluate oline talent well, either in house or through the draft

by foyesboys on Feb 4, 2011 2:04 PM CST up reply actions

I wouldn’t be devastated if we got something other than O-Line in the first (as it is seemingly becoming less and less a smart option at 9 so far) But we’d better address it in at least the second round, and at least one more mid rounder. Besides that we have young guys on the roster who need to give their all in training camp this summer, young and brewster especially are unknowns for the most part.

Poor guitarist seeking love.
Likes: Long walks on the beach, Candlelit dinners - Ear Melting Metal and Def Rhymes.... Preferably all at once.

What is best in life?
"To Crush your enemies, See them driven before you and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

My Cover of Mettalica's Classic "Master of Puppets"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8aDckMo6-Q

by Nick Castillo on Feb 3, 2011 2:51 PM CST reply actions

The O line does have to be a priority. I watched those games, and the QBs

on this team were under siege a lot of the time. Stats do not substitute for what I saw with my own eyes, and a whole lot of experts agree that that line is old and getting older and needs to be fixed. The fact that you keep arguing that a bad line is acceptable because other teams make due baffles me. That’s like saying the economy sucks, but it’s all right as long as someone out there has a job and is eating.

That said, you’ve repeated this over and over, and I’ll say it again, it does not have to be an either/or proposition. Both the O line and the D need to be addressed, and I doubt many here would squawk if a good pass rusher were the first pick.

by Fernie67 on Feb 3, 2011 3:14 PM CST reply actions

Let’s compare assumptions and see if we can find some common ground.

Dallas was 7th-ish in offense this year. With no changes, what would you project next year with Romo back healthy?

Dallas was 28th-ish in defense this year. With no changes, what would you project next year?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 5:41 PM CST up reply actions

while I am sure that this was meant for some one else...

with no changes I would predict 8-10th for Offense,

and 20-25th for Defense

formerly I draft the Cowboys!!!
Yes...I am Ironman....seriously my last name is ironman in German

Knowledge and Skill overcome superstition and Luck-Dawn Patrol

by I am Ironman!!! on Feb 3, 2011 5:56 PM CST up reply actions

How did the Cowboys rank in # of Qbs who missed games due to injury? Sort of a relevant stat in measuring O-Line play

I am not saying that OL needs to be picked first, not saying that OL needs to be carpet bombed either, but there are problems on the OL, and most of the starters are at the age where another year does not mean more experience, it just means another year older. You seem to assume that the level of O-Line play will remain static, whereas as others, myself included, fear a drop off.

There is a clear problem in how Dallas grades offensive linemen. As pointed out, FLozell is playing in the Super Bowl whereas there was no room for him in Dallas and McQuistan never saw much playing time in Dallas, yet played in Miami. There have been others as well

Lifelong Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
My Beer Blog: http://tiltingsuds.wordpress.com/

by Seanrude on Feb 3, 2011 7:24 PM CST up reply actions

c’mon Sean,

Romo got injured bc a rookie FB missed his assignment, not the OL. let’s not blame that on the OL just to defend a position.

I’m on board with this sentiment. Yes the OL needs to be improved. I just don’t think it’s the limiting factor that the defense is.

I am not saying that OL needs to be picked first, not saying that OL needs to be carpet bombed either, but there are problems on the OL, and most of the starters are at the age where another year does not mean more experience, it just means another year older. You seem to assume that the level of O-Line play will remain static, whereas as others, myself included, fear a drop off.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 7:36 PM CST up reply actions

What would I project with Romo back and behind this line? More injury time out for Romo,

just like two out of the last three years. Fair enough, let’s blame the rookie full back for the broken collarbone; of course, the rookie, the tight ends, the running backs all have to help that bad and aging O line. Whom do we blame for Kitna’s injury and the fact that we were down to our last QB by the end of the season? Lest we forget, they were losing with Romo, too, and, yes, the D was a big part of that, but let’s not forget that both Kosier and Colombo were out early in the season and Romo was getting pressured a LOT; do you think that situation is going to improve as time goes on? More injury time, slower healing for those guys, Romo at the mercy of backups that were terrible this year. That’s what I project with no changes to the O line.

by Fernie67 on Feb 4, 2011 9:42 AM CST up reply actions

if you believe Romo gets hurt unless the OL gets upgraded, I can understand why OL is your priority.

we’ll have to agree to disagree on that.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 9:51 AM CST up reply actions

I don't have ESP, so I don't know what will happen, and I certainly hope he stays

healthy, but since we all saw Romo harried and flattened over the last few years, Kitna go down this year, and McGee take his share of hits as well, I think I make a perfectly valid argument. And that’s just the passing game; I won’t even bother to talk about the run blocking. And since you’ve agreed that the line should be upgraded, I’m not sure what we’re disagreeing about.

by Fernie67 on Feb 4, 2011 11:25 AM CST up reply actions

I think we have a different perception on the probability that Romo will miss time with injury next year. I put it at a 1 in 5 chance, so relatively low probability.

Anyway, you never answered the question that would clear things up. Assume Dallas pulls off Raf’s mock draft.

-Camiri
-Rahim Moore
-Cannon.

Totally replaces the right side of the line and gets a free safety. Where would you expect the offense and defense to rank in that scenario (no FA moves)?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 1:23 PM CST up reply actions

Would love Raf's mock draft outcome

I know the question was for Fernie, but my opinion:
Dallas Off – Top 5
Dallas Def – Top 10

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 1:36 PM CST up reply actions

I guess Fernie isn’t replying, but this is where we differ.

I think it is very optimistic to expect a top 10 or even top 15 defense in that situation. I’d expect more like 23rd (mean reversion at work). So 5 & 23 = 0.500 +/- 2 wins

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 3:59 PM CST up reply actions

Def

I think our defense’s primary issues (I think we disagree here too) were Wade’s coaching/motivating/scheming/playcalling AND Alan Ball’s play at safety.
I think Rob Ryan can correct the former and Rahim Moore would fix the latter. I think the slightly worse pass rush – see my post about difference in sacks and FO adj sack rate – was a result of the two previous problems, which also caused bad coverage downfield and CB’s pressing themselves into mistakes, Brooking getting old and Spears getting injured. Thinking the D would be 23rd seems like a very pessimistic outlook to me.
I think Carimi and Cannon are the two players we are missing (or like players) before our Offense can be consistently elite – ie dominant performance in every game with a great passing and rushing attack.

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 4:07 PM CST up reply actions

take a long hard look at the steelers D vs. the Dallas D.

to me there’s a large difference between the 2.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 4:14 PM CST up reply actions

Yes it is called quality coaching.

Pittsburgh has the best defensive coaching staff in the NFL.

by BigDinLA on Feb 4, 2011 4:49 PM CST up reply actions

and outstanding safety play

Lifelong Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
My Beer Blog: http://tiltingsuds.wordpress.com/

by Seanrude on Feb 4, 2011 6:53 PM CST up reply actions

Yes it is called quality coaching.

4.42 / 38.5
4.43 / 32.5

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 7:26 PM CST up reply actions

Its more building for the future than for the present

Offense-around 10, with the potential to be top 5 in the near future. The oline played like a top 10 unit in 2007 and the result was our offense was historically good through 13 games (then the OL broke down, we had some injuries and didn’t try against washington)

defense-top 15. Last year was a down year but I don’t think we are too far off from being good. A decent safety would help this group out tremendously especially in ypa.

by foyesboys on Feb 4, 2011 2:11 PM CST up reply actions

Beats me. I thought the Cowboys would be better than they were this year,

despite my misgivings about the O line going in. If I knew won/loss before the season, I’d make a fortune in Vegas.

That said, you still aren’t reading what I’m saying. The Cowboys need a pass rush. If they took a pass rusher with the first pick, I wouldn’t complain. But they need to upgrade the O line. At this point, it would be easier to ask you what you want. An all-defense draft? You’re so bound and determined to prove that D should be the priority that you’re not even paying attention to what’s being said. Read my post that started this discussion again.

by Fernie67 on Feb 5, 2011 9:17 AM CST up reply actions

One caveat. I do not want the Cowboys to take an O lineman who

will just ride the bench before washing out. The Cowboys need someone to replace Colombo now.

by Fernie67 on Feb 5, 2011 9:43 AM CST up reply actions

You’re so bound and determined to prove that D should be the priority

actually, no. you wrote that you were baffled. I was explaining my assumptions and how I arrive at a different conclusion.

for example, I actually understand a little better why some people would be happy doing nothing more than draft Carimi, Moore, and Cannon. Bc they are far more optimistic than I am about the defense.

And presumably you’re no longer baffled … my assumption is that doing nothing about the OL doesn’t lead to a huge offensive drop-off.

regarding ‘proving the D should be the priority’ I wouldn’t say I’m determined to ‘prove’ that. It’s just my opinion that absent a big defensive improvement Dallas is no better than a 0.500 team. That’s why I wouldn’t be excited if all Dallas did was Raf’s draft.

OTOH, if someone said, look I don’t think you need to invest a #9 pick in Von Miller bc the NFL undervalues tweener rush OLB. Instead, you could trade down, take an OL, and use the extra pick to pry Eric Norwood aware from Carolina (bc Norwood is similar size/weight, similar college productivity) … I’d consider that a reasonable approach.

Anyway, would you be happy with Raf’s draft?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 5, 2011 9:48 AM CST up reply actions

p.s. the D is aging as well. Next season the 3 best players arguably will be Newman 33, Ratliff 30, Ware 29.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 5, 2011 9:56 AM CST up reply actions

So far, neither Ware nor Ratliff had shown any drop off in performance.

That can’t be said about the the O line. Newman is a concern. I don’t think Raf’s draft is what we’ll see. I suspect the CB will be our first pick.

by Fernie67 on Feb 5, 2011 10:20 AM CST up reply actions

Well, then, you're right that we have to agree to disagree on this:

my assumption is that doing nothing about the OL doesn’t lead to a huge offensive drop-off.

Would I be happy about Raf’s draft? Ask me after 2011 if it goes that way. I wouldn’t be crying in my soup over it; at least it would address long-standing needs. With new coaching can the D improve without upgrading the pass rush? I don’t know, but I freely admit that I would be second-guessing that draft if Ryan couldn’t improve the pass rush with the personnel he inherits.

by Fernie67 on Feb 5, 2011 10:19 AM CST up reply actions

there you go.

I’m more optimistic about the OL

You’re more optimistic about the D

There’s the difference. Bafflement resolved.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 5, 2011 10:41 AM CST up reply actions

Not really. I'm baffled about your O line complacence. I

didn’t say I was optimistic about the D. I have said over and over and over again that the pass rush must improve or the D will continue to suck. The question I asked was whether Ryan could work with the players already on the team. It will be bad if they don’t replace Ball. How much clearer can I be on how I feel about the defense? If you are saying that Ware and Ratliff will suck next year, then you’re right, I’m more optimistic than you are.

by Fernie67 on Feb 5, 2011 11:37 AM CST up reply actions

Would I be happy about Raf’s draft? Ask me after 2011 if it goes that way. I wouldn’t be crying in my soup over it

you have to be more optimistic about the D relative to me. I think “Raf’s draft” would be a horrible offseason. You wouldn’t be crying over it. That’s different.

With new coaching can the D improve without upgrading the pass rush?

again, this implies greater optimism. I don’t think new coaching is going to improve the pass rush.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 5, 2011 12:02 PM CST up reply actions

actually Steelers have 4 backups on their OL

Their only starter from preseason is Kemoauto ( I know its misspelled)

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 3, 2011 4:46 PM CST reply actions

Amen

Trying to get people on this website to understand that pass D is the #1 priority on this team, not O-line is impossible.

by Ben24626 on Feb 3, 2011 5:59 PM CST reply actions

Here is the problem though.

While I agree that pass defense is a gigantic issue, how exactly do you propose we just solve it with our first round pick?

Prince Amukamara? Is a rookie CB who may or may not be better than Scandrick really the answer?

How about Cameron Jordan? I mean after all he would play a position that historically huge impact on rushing the passer (sarcasm).

Or maybe we should take an OLB? Unfortunately, as much as I love Robert Quinn, would he, as a situational pass rusher just fix our pass defense problems?

The answers to these questions is likely ‘no’ for all these guys. As such, if you can accept that there is no cure-all in the first round of the draft, I don’t see why O-line problems all of a sudden shouldn’t be considered. Furthermore, as FITAT said himself, the biggest hole player-wise might be at Colombo’s current spot. So, if you accept that notion, the biggest marginal benefit the Cowboys can probably witness is at the RT spot where Colombo is starting to lose one-on-one battles with way too high a frequency.

So in short, I do agree that pass defense is a huge priority, but I don’t think that means we have to draft defense. I think if we have an o-lineman ranked high enough we should certainly take him in the first. It would at least inject youth into a position where we could easily see a rookie starter and it would really pretty much be the only pick towards O-line we would need to make. Then, in the second, third, and fourth rounds, where the value will be good for CBs, safeties, and LBs we can carpet bomb the defense to hopefully help Rob Ryan get this defense back on track.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 4, 2011 12:07 AM CST up reply actions

While I agree that pass defense is a gigantic issue, how exactly do you propose we just solve it with our first round pick?

When did I say we should solve it with our first round pick?

by Ben24626 on Feb 4, 2011 1:59 AM CST up reply actions

Well when you are on a post where the poster clearly

advocates for using the first pick on defense and you then agree with his championing of that philosophy, you can see how I might think you want to use the first pick for defense as well. Sorry if I was way off.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 5, 2011 12:54 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

I think your assumptions are bad.

Why would you assume that Amukamara isn’t going to be better than Scandrick? You’d certainly expect the best CB in college (whoever that may be, Brandon Harris, Amukamara) to be better than Scandrick. Why do you assume Quinn would be a situational pass rusher? When you draft well pass rushers usually start and have an impact immediately (e.g. Kearse, Clay Matthews).

You just assume away the possibility that the D can be improved through the draft. With the 9th overall pick that’s a pretty odd assumption to make. For the #9 pick why isn’t the base assumption that you would get a player who can make an impact immediately?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 8:08 AM CST up reply actions

Why would I assume those things?

Well, simply put, this team doesn’t have a history of starting rookies. Maybe that changes going forward, but look at Mike Jenkins and Anthony Spencer. Both first round picks, both took at least a year to start and play consistently.

And to be more specific to the players you mentioned, I was exaggerating when I said that Prince couldn’t beat out Scandrick. He would in reality have a good chance to. However, I still have my doubts on him being anything more than a nickel corner for a while. Unless we suddenly dump T-New, I just can’t see him beating out two corners who were Pro Bowlers two years ago. Then again, perhaps it is just that I am not as high on him as most.

Then, as for the OLBs, I think both guys you mentioned will have learning curves that will hurt their ability to displace Spencer. Quinn hasn’t played in a year and will be playing a new position. Miller would be playing a new position and will likely take time to develop into a three down LB. I know you hate the size issue, but even looking at the great smaller OLBs in the league they have taken years after college to develop into the players they are today (Harrison and Wake specifically). And for the record, Clay Matthews and Von Miller are not comparable. Matthews is over 250 lbs. and played a lot of DE in college.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 5, 2011 1:07 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

look at Mike Jenkins and Anthony Spencer

Jenkins and Spencer were picked 25th & 26th respectively.

If you look at defensive players taken in the top 10 I’d certainly expect and immediate impact unless Dallas blows the pick. But that’s just my assumption.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 5, 2011 2:31 PM CST up reply actions

Perhaps.

My problem is that this team, other than at FS and RT, doesn’t have a real spot where you clearly have to upgrade since at the other positions we have guys who had down years but have played well at times. That’s what makes me a little hesitant about taking a guy at #9 at a position where he may just not have a great chance to break through.

Of course, in the end this is all conjecture and hopefully if we do draft a great defensive player that our coaching staff will not fail to play the best guy.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 5, 2011 9:06 PM CST up reply actions

O line does need attention, but pass defense

and tackling across the board, are also critical. One of the points I think you are missing is that these teams don’t ‘make do’ with OL backups, what it means is that these teams have cultivated QUALITY DEPTH at OL positions. Dallas does need to address RT and both guard positions. I would really like for them to find a way to get Danny Watkins, who could do well at either guard spot and possibly with cultivation also at center. Even if it meant giving up a lower round pick to move up to get him, and he WILL be gone I think before Dallas’ 40th pick. Then starting at the 4th round look for tackle prospects, and hope for some type of FA market to bolster the line as well. That said, DEFENSE and TACKLING. With the 1st dallas pick, I am in a quandry. If we could get watkins, I would be willing to go with the BEST OT we can get and the line would be much better. I would also not be opposed to quinn or jordan for defensive help (DE/LB)on the side opposite Ware to balance the pressure applied. But I think Dallas also needs to use the third round, and any picks acquired if any trade down happens, to get SAFETIES. There are several safeties in the late 2nd to 3rd round range, something like Black and Sands would be fine. Beyond that, I would look for more depth in the OL, and if a great hands/timing route runner became available, a slot receiver (face it, Witten has been our slot for years, wouldn’t it be nice to have another slot option AND Witten?) These moves would improve both our OFFENSE and moreso, our DEFENSE in the statistical areas which are the crux of this whole discussion.

by reddmann10 on Feb 3, 2011 7:00 PM CST reply actions

same questions as above.

what are your assumptions on what the offense / defense does with no changes? What do they do with your ideal changes?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 7:16 PM CST up reply actions

with changes

their differential around 1.5 or better. Without, prob. still negative.

by reddmann10 on Feb 3, 2011 10:41 PM CST up reply actions

eh, here’s what I meant.

Without changes I expect the offense to be #4-8ish, call it 6 (return of Romo). I would expect the defense to be #20-25ish, call it 23 (mean reversion at work). 6 & 23 is a 0.500ish team +/- 2 wins with the unpredictability of football.

My ideal. Add a star defensive player, comes in and makes an immediate impact (a la Jevon Kearse’s rookie year) maybe the defense jumps to 15-20ish, call it 17. 6 & 17 bumps you up to more like a 0.600 team.

In the OL scenario where does the O go? To 4? So call it 4 & 23 … that’s still 0.500ish.

That’s how I look at it. Anyway, what are your assumptions?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 3, 2011 11:05 PM CST up reply actions

I can see what you are saying

but I am starting to doubt such a guy will be there at #9. Maybe Von Miller could be that guy or maybe Robert Quinn could fall, but I do think that a lot of the blue-chip defensive players will be gone by the time we pick at #9. Of course, the combine will answer some of these questions about where individual prospects will fit.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 4, 2011 12:11 AM CST up reply actions

walk me through your assumptions. what happens with the O & D if Dallas drafts OL?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 8:10 AM CST up reply actions

If Dallas drafts OL at #9 it could actually help the defense as well.

If we draft OL Sherrod or Carimi at 9 then I see offense at around 6 and defense anywhere from 12 to 20. A lot depends on how much we run the ball, how Rob Ryan’s schemes affect existing talent. Also have to factor in possible FA’s. There is not a formula you can use to figure this out because the number of intangibles is to high.

by BigDinLA on Feb 4, 2011 4:54 PM CST up reply actions

I can

Depends on what we do on rounds 2-7.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 5, 2011 3:53 PM CST up reply actions

*I can't judge that.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Feb 5, 2011 3:53 PM CST up reply actions

That is why we disagree...

You think that with no changes the offense is better because Romo returns. Do you think that the O-Line will play “just as well” next year given their age? I think that is doubtful.

I think the defense in 2010 played well below its talent level (considering 2008 and 2009) and young players are getting better. Add Rob Ryan coaching the Def and I see a huge improvement.

In short, with no changes, I see both the Off and Def being a bit better than average.

by Kegbearer on Feb 4, 2011 8:22 AM CST up reply actions

there you go.

Do you think that the O-Line will play "just as well" next year given their age? I think that is doubtful.

Gurode’s degenerative knee worries me. In general, I think the big issue with age is injury. You better make sure you have a decent backup. Holland has been ok so I’m probably more comfortable than most that Kossier / Davis / Holland isn’t going to result in a huge drop.

And the silver lining with Colombo is that he was so bad just replacing him with an average tackle should be an improvement.

So yes, I think that the OL could perform at a similar level, although I acknowledge its getting old and Dallas needs a replacement plan.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 9:03 AM CST up reply actions

"it could perform at a similar level"...

and it might now. The stats you’ve posted about offensive and defensive ypa reflect the past not the future. PFF showed every player aside from Doug Free was significantly worse run blocking this year. If we go into the year with a subpar replacement for Columbo and the rest of the starters in tact, I don’t think its unreasonable to suggest that we will have the very worst run game in the league, and the pass blocking will be about the same if not worse.

This team needs viable replacements. Fast. Frankly, finding a mediocre starting RT isn’t as easy as you say – starting tackles almost never reach FA and if we don’t take one in the first round, we in all likelihood will miss out till the 3rd or 4th, when the talent drops off. Also, this line got two qbs significantly injured this year, and its truly a miracle Romo isn’t hurt every year with the situations they put him in. There is a good chance we could replace Columbo with Sam Young and hold steady or improve at that position, but we would probably still be one of the worst in the league

Defensive line is a big issue too – many of those guys are free agents this year. But that is an area filled a little easier through FA.

by foyesboys on Feb 4, 2011 1:58 PM CST up reply actions

it might not*

by foyesboys on Feb 4, 2011 2:01 PM CST up reply actions

Also, this line got two qbs significantly injured this year

pet peeve.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Feb 4, 2011 3:56 PM CST up reply actions

Watkins

I think NE plans to use 28 or 33 to take Watkins and let Mankins test the waters. If they did want to move up, I would want their 17 and 28, so I could fix the right side of the OL with those two picks, 17 on a tackle and 28 on Watkins. I don’t think they will deal, but if they want number 9 that would be my asking price. Steep, yes, I might throw in the 5th rounder but I don’t trust them to let Watkins get away. I think Atlanta will be sweating their FA line situation and might want to roll on Watkins with their 1st rounder too. I have a feeling someone is going to want him. And just hope our 2nd and thirds will be enough to get us the safeties we need. Even if we decide to drop some money on FA safety help I think we need a couple of good young talents capable of being starters and/or depth without dropoff.

by reddmann10 on Feb 3, 2011 7:07 PM CST reply actions