Where does D. Hall rate as a CB for the Redskins all time?

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Not to nitpick, but if you consider Safeties he's got a ton of work to do to get into the Top 10 Redskin DB greats:

D. Green
Champ Bailey
Pat Fischer
Paul Krause
Joe Lavender
Mike Bass
Sammy Baugh (if he's considered a CB and not a S)

Ken Houston, Brig Owens, Sean Taylor, Mark Murphy

It was a typo on my part, and I mean CB'.s Yes, Hall has a long way to go if you include in ALL DB'S. I agree...

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

None? I think you're just uninformed. I have a pro-Hall post or two in this thread. Again, you stated you didn't go back and read because you could just assume what my position is.

The fact that my posts which support the premise that Hall isn't very good outnumber the ones that suggest we're lucky to have him is NOT indicative of bias. It's you're attempt to prove otherwise that has drawn my ire.

Like I said.. This is your opinion, and it will continue to be no matter how hard you attempt to jam them down someones throat.. I think we are lucky to have him. Our starting secondary could be Westbrook, and Wilson,

Not that I have anything against Westbrook, but I don't think he'll ever form into a starting 1/2 CB, but then again, I could be wrong, and it's my opinion.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Bucket

Like I said, and you must of missed it because of your blind hatred.

Stats are misleading. We had the 31st ranked defense, and even though our secondary was weak because we lost Landry, and Moore was our starting FS. Our Dline, LB's were more to blame and it's not only my opinion.

Defense works together, and a great CB can be molded from a great defense. There is many reasons why some players leave systems on both offense and defense and don't excel in other programs.

So comparing a CB stats for yards giving up etc when the defense was NEVER off the field for most games, and we had one of the worse pass rushes in the NFL is kinda like saying Tom Brady sucked in the Super Bowl against the Giants, and it had nothing to do with his Oline breaking down.

Or Randy Moss playing for the Raiders, and then coming to the Pats to have one of his best seasons in his career?

But we are biased because of your "stats"

Stop. Please stop. Let's recap:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

By the way, the "accepted" yardage conversion for an interception, if you assume 100% credit to the interceptor, is 45 yards. You could argue that either way, but that's the number that people who work with stats seem to be comfortable with. No, it's not set in stone.

5 x 45 = 225 yards created by DeAngelo Hall through his interceptions in 2010. If you want to add in his two TDs at 20 yards per event, we're up to 265 yards of value "created" by DeAngelo Hall in 2010. Eyeballing that, this is somewhere between half a win and a win added to the 2010 Redskins thanks to positive plays by DeAngelo Hall.

This all assumes that Jay Cutler and Johnnie Knox/Devin Hester were at zero percent fault for those four INTs in Chicago.

Originally Posted by 12thMan

My thoughts exactly. For every stat someone points to that says Hall is a bum, there's another one that would suggest otherwise. It is what it is.

GTripp's Response: that's not true.

Originally Posted by Bucket

How many times are WR's or QB's not at fault during a INT? See? You're arguement is totally biased on the fact that all your negative approach toward D. Hall is based on your OWN belief that he's not a good CB for the Redskins.

In that total yardage allowed by Hall.. How many times did Moore, or Doughty/Horton blow coverage and not help over the top? How many times did the QB have more then 3 seconds to throw, or were we in Zone coverage? Blitz?

It's all biased statistical information and not even halfway accurate to what D. Hall actually does on the field. He produces plays..

2 defensive TD's, Pro Bowl, Pro Bowl MVP, 16 pass deflection, 6 INT's, and 95 tackles. All on the 31st ranked defense in the NFL

Sorry but there is not much more to argue about that.

What GTripp thought as soon as you posted this: that's a mostly silly response that addresses none of what I actually said. He called the numbers biased. The guy who thinks I have a bias thinks the numbers themselves have a bias His only point here that amounts to anything about trolling is that Hall's teammates were lackluster (bolded). Does such trolling really deserve a legit response?

What I actually replied with:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

LOL at pro bowl MVP. Quit with the biased crap. Stick to facts.

Now here was the crux of the argument, the knockout punch if you will:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The 31st total ranking is entirely based on total yards against. DeAngelo Hall gives up more yards against than any other corner. The correlation between the Redskins hemmorhaging yards and Hall's performance is a perfect one.

No one thinks Hall is the only problem, that's just you twisting the argument I'm making. But no one player is responsible for lowing his teams defensive ranking than DeAngelo Hall, at least according to game charting numbers. Lets stick only to the facts and leave emotions out of it.

Remember, the NFL yards rankings dont include INTs or touchdowns, so if you think those are valuable things then Hall simply doesn't play on the second worst defense in the league. His teammates have their issues, but they're much better than bucket is giving them credit for.

The responses all said pretty much the same thing:

Originally Posted by Chico23231

CB play was the least responsible area for that entire unit's 31st ranking. Saftey, LB and a league worst DL far more responsible for that ranking. Maybe if Fat Alberta woulda acted like a man maybe the DL woulda been better.

Originally Posted by 12thMan

But see you laugh at the facts and stats Bucket produced, while at the same time holding up your own "facts" and stats to prove otherwise.

Is the real argument you're right and we're wrong?

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

How can you post this and not think people would say you're hating?

This thread has so much god d- noise in it, and for my part in that, I apologize. Nothing here is remotely evidence of hating.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Bucket

Like I said.. This is your opinion, and it will continue to be no matter how hard you attempt to jam them down someones throat.. I think we are lucky to have him. Our starting secondary could be Westbrook, and Wilson,

Not that I have anything against Westbrook, but I don't think he'll ever form into a starting 1/2 CB, but then again, I could be wrong, and it's my opinion.

This was never, ever part of my argument.

And for the record, I agree. But hey, we'd have an 100% chance of saving some money.

[12thMan]

By the way Tripp, I confused Ruhskin with Bucket for a second regarding stats. Still, my opinion about your argument hasn't changed one bit.

[SmootSmack]

A wise man told me today (to paraphrase) "sometimes you have to just have the courtesy to say 'shut the **** up' and move on"

So...shut the **** up. Thread locked