Sean Taylors play

Didn't we used to make the same arguements for another highly capable, pro-bowling, fan favorite and overall specimen named LaVar? don't get me wrong, i loved LaVar, but he was grossly overrated. In my eyes, so is ST. He COULD be great, but has yet to live up to expectations (more so last year, where he was not good at all).

And i'm aware that injuries led to Arrington's demise, but i'd argue he was given WAY too much credit and made pro-bowls based on popularity. Note- i stuff ballots too...

Didn't we used to make the same arguements for another highly capable, pro-bowling, fan favorite and overall specimen named LaVar? don't get me wrong, i loved LaVar, but he was grossly overrated. In my eyes, so is ST. He COULD be great, but has yet to live up to expectations (more so last year, where he was not good at all).
So I guess that he got voted to the Pro Bowl by his peers based on his college performance huh? I don't care if he was an Alternate, he still went which means that he received more votes than at least 12 of his peers in the same confrence. Overrated my ass. He was doing something right.

So I guess that he got voted to the Pro Bowl by his peers based on his college performance huh? I don't care if he was an Alternate, he still went which means that he received more votes than at least 12 of his peers in the same confrence. Overrated my ass. He was doing something right.

Pro-bowls have little use in determining akill...its a popularity contest.

Using tackles to measure the impact of a safety is a very bad metric. Having your safeties make a ton of tackles is the last thing you want; you want the ball carrier tackled before he reaches that level of the defense.

The fact that Taylor had 129 tackles speaks more to the ineptitude of our front 7 than it does to Taylor's "production".

INTs are a decent measure, but even those are driven by the opportunities to make INTs. For many years, Champ Bailey had only 2 or 3 INTs per season because nobody threw at him. QBs went after Archuleta a lot more than they tested Taylor. Plus, a defensive line that gets to the QB can often force an ill-advised pass, increasing the opportunities for your safeties to intercept the ball. If you have a worthless pass rush, you can't expect that many INT opportunities.

Defensive player performance can't be easily measured by statistics. You really just have to watch the guys play. I saw Taylor taking bad angles at times last season. I also saw him having to cover for Archuleta's inept play, which Taylor deserves credit for. I saw Taylor make a handful of impact plays, ripping fumbles loose, a couple INTs, and several huge tackles (the Carolina game). And I also saw him fail to get on the same page in terms of communication with the rest of the secondary (Taylor may not be to blame here, that could have been the coaching staff's fault for all we know). Overall he had a good season but has some room for improvement.

To my point, the higher number of tackles, I feel, contributed to some of the lapses in coverage and so forth.

So when I speak of production, I consider that to be synonymous with "impact"...which sometimes can be measured by stats and sometimes it can't.

Honestly, I feel Sean Taylor was trying to do too much. A lot of times if you see him in the picture it's him going after someone else's man. Don't get me wrong, he's made his share of mistakes. He's still learning and I think this could be a real big year for Taylor if Landry is ready to step in and be productive as a rookie.

The instability at the other safety spot and the secondary in general definitely hurt Taylor's play.

Using tackles to measure the impact of a safety is a very bad metric. Having your safeties make a ton of tackles is the last thing you want; you want the ball carrier tackled before he reaches that level of the defense.

The fact that Taylor had 129 tackles speaks more to the ineptitude of our front 7 than it does to Taylor's "production".

INTs are a decent measure, but even those are driven by the opportunities to make INTs. For many years, Champ Bailey had only 2 or 3 INTs per season because nobody threw at him. QBs went after Archuleta a lot more than they tested Taylor. Plus, a defensive line that gets to the QB can often force an ill-advised pass, increasing the opportunities for your safeties to intercept the ball. If you have a worthless pass rush, you can't expect that many INT opportunities.

Defensive player performance can't be easily measured by statistics. You really just have to watch the guys play. I saw Taylor taking bad angles at times last season. I also saw him having to cover for Archuleta's inept play, which Taylor deserves credit for. I saw Taylor make a handful of impact plays, ripping fumbles loose, a couple INTs, and several huge tackles (the Carolina game). And I also saw him fail to get on the same page in terms of communication with the rest of the secondary (Taylor may not be to blame here, that could have been the coaching staff's fault for all we know). Overall he had a good season but has some room for improvement.Seconded. Good post.

Defensive rate stats are in their early stages. While these stats do measure what you want to know about a certain defender, the sample size is just too small to know anything conclusive.

Just for fun, here were some of the conclusions drawn from 2005 albiet in a small sample size:

-No corner defended the pass better in 2005 (in the entire league) than Shawn Springs.
-No corner defended the run better in 2005 than Carlos Rogers.
-Adam Archuleta (while in STL) allowed only 5 yards per play on plays he was involved in--a wonderful year for a safety.

As you can see, these numbers don't always stay consistent from year to year. One year's data is never conclusive. It will get more accurate with time though.

If you are an ESPN.com insider, check out some of KC Joyners work. He does a lot of stuff with yards per attempt for receivers and CBs. Obviously, Y/A is somewhat unscientific and dependant on QB/Line play, but in general everything a DB or WR does is based on QB/Line play.

The instability at the other safety spot and the secondary in general definitely hurt Taylor's play.I don't think that hurt him as much as the weaknesses in the front seven.

I can see how we would think the Landry addition would help our defense, but that to me seems like the one pick on defense that wouldn't help ST. I mean, so much of how a safety's play is percieved is based on the 9 guys who play in front of him...and who do we draft? The one guy beside him.

While the team as a whole will benefit from having Landry back there, ST most certainly will not.