Another Vinny Special: Deangelo Hall

Maybe he's not "as good" (although I've never been a huge Rogers fan) I don't think the disparity is as wide as you portray in their coverage abilities. Opportunities are opportunities. Teams threw at Deion and Darrell Green until they gave them reasons not to in the way of interceptions. Ignoring the positive impact that interceptions can have is kinda silly. You're way smarter than that.

I don't have the statistical capabilities to show how many of Hall's INT led to points vs. the number of dropped Roger INT led to opponents points but obviously it would tilt towards Hall.Well, I'm not ignoring the positive impact. I'm just suggesting that I have some reason to believe that it's a small impact.

I can make some quick assumptions based on expected points. But, while this is based on information from expected point studies, none of this is at all scientific.

It's generally believed that:

30 expected points = 1 win
average INT = 3 ex. points (more or less depending on field position)
20 yards of field position = 1 ex. point (this is not linear, every yard is worth more closer to either end zone)

Assuming the above, Hall's INTs are worth 8 points per year more than Rogers INTs. That's about 1/3 of a win. But we also have to determine what % of that difference is purely circumstantial. And I think that would be at least half, though, there's no way I could prove that since I'm guessing. If I'm right though, we're talking about 4 total points difference between Hall and a second Rogers.

In my opinion, when you compare that to the 30-35 expected points (90-100 plays compared to 3-5 interceptions) that Hall will allow on completions that Rogers won't in any given year, it just seems really, really insignificant. But I could be looking at this completely wrong, not to mention that my estimations are fuzzy.

I think you are being a little loose with stats on this one Tripp, of course I don't have any better. Hall's best talent is his opportunistic INTS, I think he has played in 5 games for us, and has at least 3 INTs. Carlos had a ball hit in stride and in his hands and he dropped it. That said I would rather have 2 Carlos' then 2 Halls any game of the year. Carlos will not get beat (I haven't seen it in the last year). Hall will give up a lot of plays. I just wish Carlos had better hands, but I imagine having bad hands forced him to play his position better to stay ahead of those flashy guys that get INTsWell, just last year, I charted Rogers with 3 dropped INTs in 6 attempts (he's the new 50-50!), and charted Hall with 2 dropped INTs in 4 attempts. And no, I don't have any numbers prior to last season, so I had to adjust subjectively.

But more importantly, what is it saying that Hall plays 7 games here, and had 4 INT attempts, while Rogers plays 16 games, with only 6 INTs. Consider: Rogers was 2nd in all of football with 24 passes defended. Certainly, he's getting to the ball. No, I think it says more about where the ball is going.

I think you could also make an argument that Hall is simply better at returning INTs than Rogers is, and you could probably support it, but I don't even want to try to quantify that.

Definitely agree with that. And we need Hall on our defense because he seems to be our only threat to make a play (talking about the D Backs specifically). For all his faults, I have faith that he'll get an interception every time I see him out on defense. Rogers, on the other hand, who I think is a very efficient DB is never a threat to get an INT. And we need turnovers. So if Rogers can lock down one side and Hall can get me the INTs on the other side, I'm fine with that.

Springs could do both, but it's not 2004 anymore.Problem with this SS, is that Al Davis already gambled eight figures on this, and decided after 8 games that he couldn't take it anymore.

And Hall did pick off three passes as a Raider. He just cost them way, way more than that.

We do need the big plays from somewhere though. I prefer Orakpo and Haynesworth (and Carter).

Very creative thread, just as creative and as effective as our offensive playcalling against the Giants. :doh:

It's already bad enough we have to suffer through a bad game (since you know they do happen), but then we have to come here to these wonderful threads.

You don't have to anything. Except, well nevermind.

What do you got against Leigh?

My point was that Torrance got cut after he gave up one completion against the Rams last year. Hall gave up 5 or so yesterday and he's got 20+ mill guaranteed. Plus, he seems to be operating under the misconception that the NFL is two hand touch.

There's also a lot of evidence to suggests that defenses can't do anything to create interception opportunities, and that they always regress to the mean every year. In this case, this would suggest the difference in INTs between Rogers and Hall are entirely circumstantial.

Of course, Rogers still obviously drops a higher percentage of his INTs, that's not at all in dispute. But how many of Hall's INTs are of the variety from Sunday: only there for the taking because it was thrown at a receiver he was lined up against, and someone else made the play?

If Hall had been in better position coverage wise, he probably wouldn't have made the pick yesterday. He was three yards off the intended when Landry tipped the ball to him.

Here's my thinking, if JCutler were throwing int's into the hands of Hall - you know he likes to throw them right into the DB's hands ;) - Hall would catch 4 out of 4 last night, Rogers would have to catch one of those beauties wouldn't he?

:P its a new week, new opponent, who IS the Rams qb anyway?

Marc Bulger.

Look, lets give the guy another chance, it was one game. The defense only gave up 16 points.

Hmm, TO is being covered tonight and he's only caught one ball. I wonder who's covering him? Oh, it's the guy that's always hurt and over the hill. SHAWN SPRINGS!! Still doing it.