Mattyk72 Presents the "Redskin Most Likely to Bounce Back in '07" Poll

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Stats tell you who produced, and who didn't. Don't turn a blind eye just because they don't tell you why a guy performed poorly. Sometimes, "why" is irrelivant.

We didn't stop RBs, we didn't stop TE's and we didn't stop #2 WRs. Whats so bad about knowing where our problems lie so we can appropriately fix them?

Yes, that's true and I'm not turning a blind eye to stats, per se.

That is a valid stat you pulled, but the defense as a whole ranked at the bottom of the league. We sucked when it was time to stop the pass and we sucked when it was time to stop the run. To me that's a 'nitpick' stat.

I think a better question, in my mind, is how well did we do stopping teams on third down conversions? How many passing touchdowns did we give up inside the twenty? I'm not asking you to pull it up, but do you see where I'm going?

Another thing, in my football ignorance, I still can't my mind around exactly what is a number one as opposed to a number two receiver.
A team is going to use the best option available and try to create mismatches. Reggie Wayne torched us, yet he's considered a number two.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Yes, that's true and I'm not turning a blind eye to stats, per se.

That is a valid stat you pulled, but the defense as a whole ranked at the bottom of the league. We sucked when it was time to stop the pass and we sucked when it was time to stop the run. To me that's a 'nitpick' stat.

I think a better question, in my mind, is how well did we do stopping teams on third down conversions? How many passing touchdowns did we give up inside the twenty? You see where I'm going?

Another thing, in my football ignorance, I still can't my mind around exactly what is a number one as opposed to a number two receiver.
A team is going to use the best option available and try to create mismatches. Reggie Wayne torched us, yet he's considered a number two.

All valid points. Our ranking vs certain receiver is just that, a ranking vs. certain receivers. Generally the CBs (or nickel backs) are responsible for the #1 and #2 wideouts, and the safeties and LBs for the TE, RBs, and slot receivers.

Actually, the #1 vs #2 wideout is a fairly subjective process. Generally I would say the #1 is the guy that gets the most passes thrown to him on a seasonal basis. Sometimes you do get teams like Indy who have a 1 and 1a. However, over the course of 16 games, if the numbers vs a #1 and #2 show a large discrepancy (as these do), then there is likely a significant value in the numbers.

I don't think it's nitpicking at all to use numbers to determine the safeties and linebackers are much farther below league average than the corners are. These numbers tell me that we need to improve the LBs (i.e. sign London Fletcher) and the S (get Taylor to play with more discipline--or bench him). We could use some improved CB depth in case of another Springs injury, but Rogers and Springs did a pretty good job with No. 1 receivers COMPARED to Wright/Rogers/Rumph/Jimoh with No. 2s and Washington/Marshall/Holdman/Taylor/Archuleta/Vincent/Fox with TEs and espicially RBs.

These numbers were charted under a consistent Redskin pass rush (or lack thereof), so it eliminates that varible.

Things like stopping 3rd down conversions and red zone TD passes are conducive to winning (and important statistical columns to improve in), but stats like that don't assign responsibility at an individual level. What I'm saying is that if we find statistically significant evidence that our team is poorly adept to stop a 3rd down conversion (a very reasonable theory) compared to other teams in the league, how is it that we can go about improving that? It's not specific enough to fault a position or player for this defensive shortcoming, so it's tough to fix the problem.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

All valid points. Our ranking vs certain receiver is just that, a ranking vs. certain receivers. Generally the CBs (or nickel backs) are responsible for the #1 and #2 wideouts, and the safeties and LBs for the TE, RBs, and slot receivers.

Actually, the #1 vs #2 wideout is a fairly subjective process. Generally I would say the #1 is the guy that gets the most passes thrown to him on a seasonal basis. Sometimes you do get teams like Indy who have a 1 and 1a. However, over the course of 16 games, if the numbers vs a #1 and #2 show a large discrepancy (as these do), then there is likely a significant value in the numbers.

I don't think it's nitpicking at all to use numbers to determine the safeties and linebackers are much farther below league average than the corners are. These numbers tell me that we need to improve the LBs (i.e. sign London Fletcher) and the S (get Taylor to play with more discipline--or bench him). We could use some improved CB depth in case of another Springs injury, but Rogers and Springs did a pretty good job with No. 1 receivers COMPARED to Wright/Rogers/Rumph/Jimoh with No. 2s and Washington/Marshall/Holdman/Taylor/Archuleta/Vincent/Fox with TEs and espicially RBs.

These numbers were charted under a consistent Redskin pass rush (or lack thereof), so it eliminates that varible.

Things like stopping 3rd down conversions and red zone TD passes are conducive to winning (and important statistical columns to improve in), but stats like that don't assign responsibility at an individual level. What I'm saying is that if we find statistically significant evidence that our team is poorly adept to stop a 3rd down conversion (a very reasonable theory) compared to other teams in the league, how is it that we can go about improving that? It's not specific enough to fault a position or player for this defensive shortcoming, so it's tough to fix the problem.

I think it's fair to say we just need help on that side of the ball. As I've also stated in previous posts, I think coaching played a role in our demise.

That's a theory or reality which hard to quantify statistically.

I also might add, I'm not sure about the idea London Fletcher being the answer in the middle. We'll see.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think it's fair to say we just need help on that side of the ball. As I've also stated in previous posts, I think coaching played a role in our demise.

That's a theory or reality which hard to quantify statistically.

I also might add, I'm not sure about the idea London Fletcher being the answer in the middle. We'll see.

So, if I understand you right, you believe we need to 1) change the scheme and 2) gut the defensive roster and rebuild it from relative scratch? Or are you saying keep the roster, and just add as much help as cost allows for?

It doesn't get any worse than last year, but are there any players (outside of our recent draft picks like Taylor and Rogers) you'd want to keep around (as starters)?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So, if I understand you right, you believe we need to 1) change the scheme and 2) gut the defensive roster and rebuild it from relative scratch? Or are you saying keep the roster, and just add as much help as cost allows for?

It doesn't get any worse than last year, but are there any players (outside of our recent draft picks like Taylor and Rogers) you'd want to keep around (as starters)?

I think change the scheme would be an overstatement, tweek yes.

I said nothing about gutting or rebuilding the defensive side of the roster.

Personally I think we're maybe two good players, a good offseason, and looking at the cover-two scheme away from laying a hurting on some teams next year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think change the scheme would be an overstatement, tweek yes.

I said nothing about gutting or rebuilding the defensive side of the roster.

Personally I think we're maybe two good players, a good offseason, and looking at the cover-two scheme away from laying a hurting on some teams next year.

It actually seems to me that Gregg Williams IS changing the system and started to do so at this time last year. A lot of the defenses we ran last year seemed vastly different from the ones that were successful in 2004-05. It seems that Grilliams was taking a proactive approach in trying to alter the schematics of his defense, espicially before it got old. He got away from blitzing, which is a good thing, because blitzing more times than not leads to a big play. He just didn't have the pieces up front to get pressure on the QB by themselves.

I agree that we are two good players away from at least being mediocre to above average--but then again, isn't everyone? To make our defense good again, we have to find the root of the problem. I was using stats to identify that the root of the problem (within the back 7) is with the LBs and Safeties. Obviously the defensive line is horrible, and we probably need to replace 3 guys on that line. But taking things one step at a time, signing a good MLB will fix a LOT of our defensive problems. If we can get into the top 20 against TEs and RBs, that would do wonders for our defense.