Joyner: Reed, Taylor Overrated from Coverage Standpoint

[SmootSmack]

Metrics aren't going to tell you the impact of Sean Taylor missing the Tampa game two years ago, allowing Chris Simms to own the middle of the field deep and resulting in over 30 points scored by the Bucs. And possibly costing us the division title in the long run.

Metrics aren't going to tell you the impact of when Todd Pinkston (was it Pinkston?) hears Taylor's footsteps and looks the other way out of fear instead of focusing on the ball.

Metrics aren't going to tell you Sean Taylor's vision and awareness (and pure athletic ability) to run full speed, pick a ball up off a bounce and take off leading to the winning field goal in dramatic fashion.

True, there's plenty Taylor needs to improve on. But we're much better off with him on the field than without him.

[BigSKINBauer]

^^^ Very true. One of the first moments we could see what sean meant to us was when we played green bay his rookie season and he was to sit out due to his DUI charge. That game we got destroyed downfield relative to our other games that year. His absense leads to the team not working. He does so much that it hard to realize for some people unless he is off the field.

I still hurt from that stupid illegal motion call the ref made. F...ing idiot. The refs had it out for us that year and the year after too.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Metrics aren't going to tell you the impact of Sean Taylor missing the Tampa game two years ago, allowing Chris Simms to won the middle of the field deep and resulting in over 30 points scored by the Bucs. And possibly costing us the division title in the long run.

Who cares about things like heart, leadership, the ability to inspire fear in opposing teams, and a dozen other immeasurable qualities when metrics teach us that Taylor can't play safety, Betts is as good as Portis, and Brunell is a great quarterback?

[freddyg12]

I get sick of people always singling out db's who get beat a few times, especially safeties. The safety's job is to get there, not cover man to man. Of course they're going to bite on fakes or pursue the wrong area of the field sometimes. That doesn't make them poor in coverage. Even Roy Williams; yes coverage is not his strong point, but at least give him credit for making some big plays in coverage, e.g. he picked 1 against us last year at about the 2 yrd. line, which pretty much ended our chances to get in the game. He also took one back against philly in 05 to win a game.

I will agree w/the overall assessment of Taylor for last year though. He tried to make too many plays & ended up late on deep throws. He CAN cover though, he's just got to commit to that aspect of his game & accept the responsibility as the last man to beat on the field.

[MTK]

Taylor had a bad year last year, just like the entire D. I don't think we needed an expert to tell us that.

I wonder what his metrics looked like in prior years though.

[4mrusmc]

What our defense needs are more guys like ST. He just flies around, to, and through the ball.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Taylor had a bad year last year, just like the entire D. I don't think we needed an expert to tell us that.

I wonder what his metrics looked like in prior years though.

Exactly what I was thinking. 2006 Sean Taylor was not the same Sean Taylor that we all saw in 2005. I also thought his play in the Pro Bowl (not just the hit on the kicker, but his overall play) suggested what he is capable of given a competent supporting cast.

[STBonecrusher21]

I think ST is gonna prove hes good in coverage this year.

[Pocket$ $traight]

You could tell in the Minnesota game that his focus was all wrong last year. I distinctly remember at least one play where he chose the hit over an int and that is fundamentally wrong. An additional turnover in that game and we win.

I think that Williams is doing the right thing with Taylor this year. He has told the world that his job is to play center field and reel in balls. And Taylor seems to be on board with his weight loss.

As far as the Pro-bowl, there seems to be a lag. Taylor became an alternate off of the reputation of his first two years more than his performance last year. And I have said this before. No one can say a single word about Taylor after Roy Williams made it last year. He was pathetic absolutely pathetic last year in coverage.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Taylor had a bad year last year, just like the entire D. I don't think we needed an expert to tell us that.

I wonder what his metrics looked like in prior years though.

I would think they were a lot better.

Its worrisome that he regressed in his third season...thats not suppossed to happen. Hopefully we can sit here a year from now and see what an abberation year 2006 was here for the guy.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

I feel he "regressed" (and I use that term lightly) last year because he felt he had to do everything while also covering for Arch. But I think he realized it is not all about the hitting and he lost some weight and gained some speed. I think the addition of Landry, Smoot, Fletcher, and a healthy Griffin should improve him greatly. I am expecting a 6+ interception season from taylor.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Metrics aren't going to tell you the impact of Sean Taylor missing the Tampa game two years ago, allowing Chris Simms to own the middle of the field deep and resulting in over 30 points scored by the Bucs. And possibly costing us the division title in the long run.

Actually, I think Metrics WILL tell us this. And I'm guessing they would prove your point correct.

Metrics aren't going to tell you the impact of when Todd Pinkston (was it Pinkston?) hears Taylor's footsteps and looks the other way out of fear instead of focusing on the ball.

Well, no. Todd Pinkston is no longer relevant in this league though, in no small part to this play.

Metrics aren't going to tell you Sean Taylor's vision and awareness (and pure athletic ability) to run full speed, pick a ball up off a bounce and take off leading to the winning field goal in dramatic fashion.

True, there's plenty Taylor needs to improve on. But we're much better off with him on the field than without him.

I wouldn't disagree. But the thread points out that he's probably overrated based on the fact that he played in the pro bowl last year, and I don't think theres too many of us that would disagree with that.

All the metrics do is tell how how many yards per play an opponent got when he worked on Sean Taylor. In 2006, that was a lot. We're all free to draw our own conclusions, but I personally won't lay the blame for that at the feet of anyone but #21. He needs to step it up.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Who cares about things like heart, leadership, the ability to inspire fear in opposing teams, and a dozen other immeasurable qualities when metrics teach us that Taylor can't play safety, Betts is as good as Portis, and Brunell is a great quarterback?

Who cares about on field performance?

Me, thats who.

[SmootSmack]

Yeah...well here in America we don't use the metric system! No one says it's First and 914 centimeters.

USA! USA!

Seriously though, I'm sure you're well aware that there's a lot more to evaluate a player and his value that what a stat sheet says

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Seriously though, I'm sure you're well aware that there's a lot more to evaluate a player and his value that what a stat sheet says

Of course. Thats the fun part!

Statistics are my starting point. Once I understand where the process begins, I can develop all sorts of crazy observations that may or may not be reality.

I just don't fly in the face of the evidence, I try to build on it. I realize I can come off condecening at times, but its frusterating to sit here and see two parties bicker over the irrelivant/simple issues. I by far prefer the complex football-related issues, but I feel that the mainstream fan will never even discover these issues because the current accepted method of player evaluation is so poor, and the sports media is more than okay with that.

For example, I'd love to debate whether or not we can expect ST to rebound based on the historical expectation of the position and his college and professional merits. Unfortuanately, theres a handful of people who don't even yet realize how poor his play was last year even after linking the article. Makes it hard to move on to the fun points when I have to argue the for granted ones.

Ah, whatever. All in a days work.

End rant.