2017 Patriots Defense

[Super Nomario]

Mentioned this in the game thread, but when they showed the starting lineups on CBS yesterday, they had 5 DBs (DMC, Chung, Harmon, Butler, Gilmore) and only two LBs (Van Noy and I don't even remember who).

I know the starting lineups the networks use is generally kind of meaningless and not connected to who's actually playing, but that was the first time I've ever noticed anything other than a 4-3 or 3-4.

They've played a ton of that lineup this year with the three safeties, but it's interesting based on the snap counts how much regular nickel they played. Butler played wire-to-wire (74 snaps), Gilmore / Bademosi basically did (58 / 18), as did Jonathan Jones (70). Harmon actually played his fewest snaps all season (36), and Richards basically only played when Chung went out for a stretch.

Points scored against seems to me to be a total team stat at least in part. It's definitely complimentary to how the offense is playing and how special teams are doing with time of possession and field position being very important. When the offense is clicking you force their offense to go away from game script and you give them fewer opportunities. Force them to go on fourth down, funnel them into more time consuming drives by defending over the top and giving them short in bounds stuff. Until the last 20 seconds, Patriots had one punt and Oakland had only 8 drives. It kind of all goes together.

Plus, not committing penalties on offense or defense is huge.

They're allowing 5.7 yards per play from Week 5 and on, which is still pretty bad (it would be like 7th-8th worst in the league). But the offense keeps them off the field, the O and ST keep them with favorable starting field position (Oakland never started closer than their own 25 last night), the O is making opponents one-dimensional (the Raiders ran great last night but had to throw pretty much the whole second half), they're not having the fundamental breakdowns anymore, and they're making just enough plays to get stops. The defense would look a lot worse if the offense wasn't so good, but it's doing plenty for what they need at this point.

 

[ifmanis5]

Mentioned this in the game thread, but when they showed the starting lineups on CBS yesterday, they had 5 DBs (DMC, Chung, Harmon, Butler, Gilmore) and only two LBs (Van Noy and I don't even remember who).

I know the starting lineups the networks use is generally kind of meaningless and not connected to who's actually playing, but that was the first time I've ever noticed anything other than a 4-3 or 3-4.

Yes, KVN and E.Roberts. Both played well.

 

[pokey_reese]

They're allowing 5.7 yards per play from Week 5 and on, which is still pretty bad (it would be like 7th-8th worst in the league). But the offense keeps them off the field, the O and ST keep them with favorable starting field position (Oakland never started closer than their own 25 last night), the O is making opponents one-dimensional (the Raiders ran great last night but had to throw pretty much the whole second half), they're not having the fundamental breakdowns anymore, and they're making just enough plays to get stops. The defense would look a lot worse if the offense wasn't so good, but it's doing plenty for what they need at this point.

This is exactly why there is such a huge disconnect between the points per game allowed and more advanced metrics like DVOA, that attempt to specifically isolate the play of the defensive unit. In terms of winning and losing it might not matter as much, since the contributions of all three units count, but if we are talking just about the performance of the defense, points allowed is not necessarily a useful metric. One of the most useful things Football Outsiders does is provide per-drive stats that are at the down series level, which helps remove the offensive time of possession and field position considerations. While it hasn't been updated to include yesterday's game, as of yesterday morning the Pats were ranked 31st by yards allowed per drive (about 39 yards, compared to 23 for JAX at #1, and an average of 30), and dead last in opponent 'Drive Success Rate,' which measures the percentage of opponent down series that end with a first down or touchdown (about .733 opponent success rate, with JAX #1 at .601 and the average of .682). There are some better numbers, we are 19th in points per drive (so missed field goals, fumble luck, and red zone success help there), and obviously are still a top team in terms of average opponent starting position and time of possession.

But yeah, the defense has slightly improved from the beginning of the season, but it is still one of the worst in the league, and has mostly just been benefitting from better complimentary football and having the O and ST units cover for them. Wins are wins, and they definitely look a bit better by the eye test, but this is still a liability for the team, not a strength. Luckily, we have the best offense in football, so they don't need to make a ton plays to get it done come playoff time.

 

[koufax32]

I missed it if there was ever an official announcement but is it guaranteed that DHT will miss the rest of the year?

 

[DJnVa]

Yes, he's done.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

They're allowing 5.7 yards per play from Week 5 and on, which is still pretty bad (it would be like 7th-8th worst in the league). But the offense keeps them off the field, the O and ST keep them with favorable starting field position (Oakland never started closer than their own 25 last night), the O is making opponents one-dimensional (the Raiders ran great last night but had to throw pretty much the whole second half), they're not having the fundamental breakdowns anymore, and they're making just enough plays to get stops. The defense would look a lot worse if the offense wasn't so good, but it's doing plenty for what they need at this point.

Isn't this a little chicken/egg? Yesterday was a perfect example. Pats got up big, they put in a large package on offense to slow the game down, and kept plays in front of them to ensure the Raiders had to burn clock.

The Patriots have the 3rd most passing attempts against, the 5th least rushing attempts against. Yards per play is going to be skewed for this team. I think this context matters.

 

[Super Nomario]

Isn't this a little chicken/egg? Yesterday was a perfect example. Pats got up big, they put in a large package on offense to slow the game down, and kept plays in front of them to ensure the Raiders had to burn clock.

There might be a little chicken/egg, but I don't think it's a major factor. Just looking at the first half (to control for game script issues), they're 30th in NY/A (7.3) and 27th in rushing YPC (4.7). Since Week 5 they have been better against the pass - 20th in NY/A (6.5) - and a little worse against the run (30th, 5.2 YPC). They've had games where they've played worse in the first half, like against the Jets.

I agree they probably didn't give a shit about the Raiders running two 13+-play, 5+-minute drives against them late down big, but I don't think such drives are really distorting the team defensive performance overall.

The Patriots have the 3rd most passing attempts against, the 5th least rushing attempts against. Yards per play is going to be skewed for this team. I think this context matters.

That's fair. But they're 27th in NY/A (7.1) against and 32nd in YPC against (5.0), so it's not like there's a Simpson's paradox issue and they're secretly kind of good at both. They are sucky at both and the distribution of them makes them look even a little more sucky than they really are.

 

[Stitch01]

This is exactly why there is such a huge disconnect between the points per game allowed and more advanced metrics like DVOA, that attempt to specifically isolate the play of the defensive unit. In terms of winning and losing it might not matter as much, since the contributions of all three units count, but if we are talking just about the performance of the defense, points allowed is not necessarily a useful metric. One of the most useful things Football Outsiders does is provide per-drive stats that are at the down series level, which helps remove the offensive time of possession and field position considerations. While it hasn't been updated to include yesterday's game, as of yesterday morning the Pats were ranked 31st by yards allowed per drive (about 39 yards, compared to 23 for JAX at #1, and an average of 30), and dead last in opponent 'Drive Success Rate,' which measures the percentage of opponent down series that end with a first down or touchdown (about .733 opponent success rate, with JAX #1 at .601 and the average of .682). There are some better numbers, we are 19th in points per drive (so missed field goals, fumble luck, and red zone success help there), and obviously are still a top team in terms of average opponent starting position and time of possession.

But yeah, the defense has slightly improved from the beginning of the season, but it is still one of the worst in the league, and has mostly just been benefitting from better complimentary football and having the O and ST units cover for them. Wins are wins, and they definitely look a bit better by the eye test, but this is still a liability for the team, not a strength. Luckily, we have the best offense in football, so they don't need to make a ton plays to get it done come playoff time.

I think that undersells the improvement, but only because of just how bad the defense was for the first month of the season. They're back to a solidly coached, below-average unit that's showing a positive trendline week-to-week. That is a godsend, and that makes them clear AFC favorites and one of the very few teams with legitimate Super Bowl aspirations since the quarterback basically has cheat codes that mortals cannot access.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I would feel better about this defense if they had one more quality pass-rusher. I know that isn't really the Pats system, but the pressure is really missing this year. They have been trying to compensate (Butler has to have had more corner blitzes this year than rest of his career combined, for example) but loss of Nink, unexpected loss of Rivers, and injury to Hightower have taken a borderline weakness into the biggest concern, one much more likely to bite them against good teams. Perhaps just stating the obvious, but to me that's the key thing to hope they figure out over next few weeks, in some way or at least at some level

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

There might be a little chicken/egg, but I don't think it's a major factor. Just looking at the first half (to control for game script issues), they're 30th in NY/A (7.3) and 27th in rushing YPC (4.7). Since Week 5 they have been better against the pass - 20th in NY/A (6.5) - and a little worse against the run (30th, 5.2 YPC). They've had games where they've played worse in the first half, like against the Jets.

I agree they probably didn't give a shit about the Raiders running two 13+-play, 5+-minute drives against them late down big, but I don't think such drives are really distorting the team defensive performance overall.


That's fair. But they're 27th in NY/A (7.1) against and 32nd in YPC against (5.0), so it's not like there's a Simpson's paradox issue and they're secretly kind of good at both. They are sucky at both and the distribution of them makes them look even a little more sucky than they really are.

Just admit it, nerd. You hate the Patriots.

 

[Toe Nash]

Mentioned this in the game thread, but when they showed the starting lineups on CBS yesterday, they had 5 DBs (DMC, Chung, Harmon, Butler, Gilmore) and only two LBs (Van Noy and I don't even remember who).

I know the starting lineups the networks use is generally kind of meaningless and not connected to who's actually playing, but that was the first time I've ever noticed anything other than a 4-3 or 3-4.

McCourty, Chung and Harmon have been on the field for 80%+ of snaps this year. Flowers, Butler and Van Noy are the only other players that high. The nickel is the Pats "base D" and has been for a while.

Of course, Chung is often covering a TE or giving run support which is usually the linebackers' job, so it's not like they run a Cover 3 every play.

 

[EricFeczko]

This is exactly why there is such a huge disconnect between the points per game allowed and more advanced metrics like DVOA, that attempt to specifically isolate the play of the defensive unit. In terms of winning and losing it might not matter as much, since the contributions of all three units count, but if we are talking just about the performance of the defense, points allowed is not necessarily a useful metric. One of the most useful things Football Outsiders does is provide per-drive stats that are at the down series level, which helps remove the offensive time of possession and field position considerations. While it hasn't been updated to include yesterday's game, as of yesterday morning the Pats were ranked 31st by yards allowed per drive (about 39 yards, compared to 23 for JAX at #1, and an average of 30), and dead last in opponent 'Drive Success Rate,' which measures the percentage of opponent down series that end with a first down or touchdown (about .733 opponent success rate, with JAX #1 at .601 and the average of .682). There are some better numbers, we are 19th in points per drive (so missed field goals, fumble luck, and red zone success help there), and obviously are still a top team in terms of average opponent starting position and time of possession.

But yeah, the defense has slightly improved from the beginning of the season, but it is still one of the worst in the league, and has mostly just been benefitting from better complimentary football and having the O and ST units cover for them. Wins are wins, and they definitely look a bit better by the eye test, but this is still a liability for the team, not a strength. Luckily, we have the best offense in football, so they don't need to make a ton plays to get it done come playoff time.

The problem with DVOA isn't the concept, its that DVOA tends to overfit, leading to hilariously inaccurate rankings. Derek Carr and the Raiders have had a medicore offense this season by any other metric, yet DVOA ranks the raiders with the 7th best passing game.

Washington, Eagles, Patriots, Steelers, Rams, Vikings, Seahawks, Chiefs, Chargers, Lions, Bucs, Saints, and Falcons all seem to be perfoming better.

 

[pokey_reese]

The problem with DVOA isn't the concept, its that DVOA tends to overfit, leading to hilariously inaccurate rankings. Derek Carr and the Raiders have had a medicore offense this season by any other metric, yet DVOA ranks the raiders with the 7th best passing game.

Washington, Eagles, Patriots, Steelers, Rams, Vikings, Seahawks, Chiefs, Chargers, Lions, Bucs, Saints, and Falcons all seem to be perfoming better.

I don't totally disagree with the criticism of DVOA, which was why I tried to focus on some stats that make up the underlying concepts, rather than just going with the composite result. However, I don't think that by this point in the season, DVOA has many hilariously inaccurate rankings. I'm also not sure that I see the Seahawks, Bucs, and Falcons offenses the same way that you do...

 

[pokey_reese]

I think that undersells the improvement, but only because of just how bad the defense was for the first month of the season. They're back to a solidly coached, below-average unit that's showing a positive trendline week-to-week. That is a godsend, and that makes them clear AFC favorites and one of the very few teams with legitimate Super Bowl aspirations since the quarterback basically has cheat codes that mortals cannot access.

Yeah, I wish I could see splits based on week, but all I could find on FO was an aggregate table that gets updated every Wed.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

I think that undersells the improvement, but only because of just how bad the defense was for the first month of the season. They're back to a solidly coached, below-average unit that's showing a positive trendline week-to-week. That is a godsend, and that makes them clear AFC favorites and one of the very few teams with legitimate Super Bowl aspirations since the quarterback basically has cheat codes that mortals cannot access.

This sums it up well, IMO.

The other encouraging thing is that they've played three very good QBs (and passing attacks overall, although Eric's post above about OAK is well taken) in the past four games and handled each of them pretty well. Generally speaking, I think people dwell on aggregate season statistics a bit too much in thinking about football. What matters is how well you're playing at the end of the year and while past performance is predictive of future performance, there are big error bars involved. Especially with a team that was integrating a lot of new players on defense at the beginning of the year, its not obvious that the entire season's results are more predictive of future performance than just the last four games.

 

[RedOctober3829]

This sums it up well, IMO.

The other encouraging thing is that they've played three very good QBs (and passing attacks overall, although Eric's post above about OAK is well taken) in the past four games and handled each of them pretty well. Generally speaking, I think people dwell on aggregate season statistics a bit too much in thinking about football. What matters is how well you're playing at the end of the year and while past performance is predictive of future performance, there are big error bars involved. Especially with a team that was integrating a lot of new players on defense at the beginning of the year, its not obvious that the entire season's results are more predictive of future performance than just the last four games.

Every other word out of Brady and Belichick's mouths in a post game press conference is week-to-week related. Different plan to execute, different players to prepare for, etc. The NFL is truly a week-to-week league.

 

[H78]

I’m starting to think I was quite wrong in feeling that Gilmore is a total bust.

Looks like he may have just been a slow learner, and now that he seems to “get it,” he’s looking pretty good. Still don’t know if he was worth the money over just keeping Ryan, but it’d be disingenuous not to acknowledge his improvement over the last couple of weeks.

I hope I’m not jinxing the some good juju right now.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I’m starting to think I was quite wrong in feeling that Gilmore is a total bust.

Looks like he may have just been a slow learner, and now that he seems to “get it,” he’s looking pretty good. Still don’t know if he was worth the money over just keeping Ryan, but it’d be disingenuous not to acknowledge his improvement over the last couple of weeks.

I hope I’m not jinxing the some good juju right now.

It can't be surprising that Gilmore is performing, can it? He was a really good player in Buffalo and played well enough to earn the contract he got from the Pats. You just don't all of a sudden forget how to play the game. As long as the effort was there and it wasn't a Haynesworth-type situation, he was going to get the schemes down at some point.

On another point altogether w/r/t the defense: Is Kyle Van Noy the best defensive acquisition of the Bill Belichick era in terms of value? The Pats moved back 25 spots from the late 6th to the late 7th round and they got a player who has played 96% of this year's defensive snaps.

 

[slamminsammya]

It can't be surprising that Gilmore is performing, can it? He was a really good player in Buffalo and played well enough to earn the contract he got from the Pats. You just don't all of a sudden forget how to play the game. As long as the effort was there and it wasn't a Haynesworth-type situation, he was going to get the schemes down at some point.

On another point altogether w/r/t the defense: Is Kyle Van Noy the best defensive acquisition of the Bill Belichick era in terms of value? The Pats moved back 25 spots from the late 6th to the late 7th round and they got a player who has played 96% of this year's defensive snaps.

Is playing 96 percent of the snaps on a bottom 5 defense a good thing?

 

[Dogman]

My guess would be that BB looks at that bottom 5 defensive ranking as all but worthless, so yeah, it is a good thing.

 

[Super Nomario]

The other encouraging thing is that they've played three very good QBs (and passing attacks overall, although Eric's post above about OAK is well taken) in the past four games and handled each of them pretty well. Generally speaking, I think people dwell on aggregate season statistics a bit too much in thinking about football. What matters is how well you're playing at the end of the year and while past performance is predictive of future performance, there are big error bars involved. Especially with a team that was integrating a lot of new players on defense at the beginning of the year, its not obvious that the entire season's results are more predictive of future performance than just the last four games.

I don't think the team was really integrating more new defensive players than in a typical season.

The aggregate performance vs recent performance question is interesting. FO calculates both a full-season DVOA and one that weights recent games more heavily, but they've found the full-season is more predictive (I can't find a source on this; I think Schatz has said it on podcasts). It's a tough balance between getting a bigger sample size (and we're dealing with small sample problems in football all the time) and getting a smaller cross-section that may be more relevant.

On another point altogether w/r/t the defense: Is Kyle Van Noy the best defensive acquisition of the Bill Belichick era in terms of value? The Pats moved back 25 spots from the late 6th to the late 7th round and they got a player who has played 96% of this year's defensive snaps.

I don't remember what Vrabel signed for initially, but it couldn't have been much - I'd think he's the obvious choice. Ninkovich comes to mind, too (leaving aside guys like Butler and Asante Samuel who were late draft picks). Van Noy has a lot in common with Vrabel and Ninkovich, though, and I could see him traveling their path. I don't watch a ton of college football, but I remember watching the 2012 Poinsettia Bowl randomly and I've kinda followed him since.

 

[MuppetAsteriskTalk]

Rodney was pretty great value for 6 years and 15 million without having to give up anything for him.

 

[Stitch01]

I don't think the team was really integrating more new defensive players than in a typical season.

The aggregate performance vs recent performance question is interesting. FO calculates both a full-season DVOA and one that weights recent games more heavily, but they've found the full-season is more predictive (I can't find a source on this; I think Schatz has said it on podcasts). It's a tough balance between getting a bigger sample size (and we're dealing with small sample problems in football all the time) and getting a smaller cross-section that may be more relevant.


I don't remember what Vrabel signed for initially, but it couldn't have been much - I'd think he's the obvious choice. Ninkovich comes to mind, too (leaving aside guys like Butler and Asante Samuel who were late draft picks). Van Noy has a lot in common with Vrabel and Ninkovich, though, and I could see him traveling their path. I don't watch a ton of college football, but I remember watching the 2012 Poinsettia Bowl randomly and I've kinda followed him since.

Roman Phifer came to mind as well from the same free agent class, but didnt really know if acquisition meant just trade or something broader.

 

[DJnVa]

Is playing 96 percent of the snaps on a bottom 5 defense a good thing?

Yes, I'm sure if you ask the other starting QBs in the NFL to list the top 5 defense they want to play against you'll see the Pats listed before teams like the Browns, Niners, Colts, Dolphins, Cardinals, Redskins, Giants, Raiders, and Jets every single time.

 

[Ed Hillel]

I’m assuming Red meant trades, in which case I’d counter with Talib (4th). Van Noy looks like a solid, versatile cog, however. Ted Washington was pretty awesome the year he was here, as well (4th).

Also, not a bottom five D at this point. The secondary is uber talented/deep and appears to have the communications issues ironed out. The pass rush is pure ass, unfortunately.

 

[tims4wins]

Yes, I'm sure if you ask the other starting QBs in the NFL to list the top 5 defense they want to play against you'll see the Pats listed before teams like the Browns, Niners, Colts, Dolphins, Cardinals, Redskins, Giants, Raiders, and Jets every single time.

Exactly. Collinsworth had a line during the ATL game along the lines of "Matt Ryan is thinking, THIS is the same defense that everyone is saying is historically bad??"

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I’m assuming Red meant trades, in which case I’d counter with Talib (4th). Van Noy looks like a solid, versatile cog, however. Ted Washington was pretty awesome the year he was here, as well (4th).

Also, not a bottom five D at this point. The secondary is uber talented/deep and appears to have the communications issues ironed out. The pass rush is pure ass, unfortunately.

Kind of leaving Revis out on an island, man.

 

[Van Everyman]

What did we trade for Revis?

 

[Ed Hillel]

Kind of leaving Revis out on an island, man.

Revis was a free agent.

 

[Super Nomario]

Wait, goddammit, Randy Moss only cost a fourth.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Wait, goddammit, Randy Moss only cost a fourth.

I said defensive acquisition because Randy Moss is clearly the trade acquisition that brought the most value for the cost.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Wait, goddammit, Randy Moss only cost a fourth.

Well, he did play D against hail maries. I think he intercepted one, if memory serves.

 

[Red Right Ankle]

I don't think the team was really integrating more new defensive players than in a typical season.

The aggregate performance vs recent performance question is interesting. FO calculates both a full-season DVOA and one that weights recent games more heavily, but they've found the full-season is more predictive (I can't find a source on this; I think Schatz has said it on podcasts).

Do you recall what it was more predictive of? The next year's performance? Playoff performance?

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Revis was a free agent.

Why did I think we traded for him?

Oh, right. I'm an idiot.

 

[Super Nomario]

I said defensive acquisition because Randy Moss is clearly the trade acquisition that brought the most value for the cost.

I'm dumb.

Do you recall what it was more predictive of? The next year's performance? Playoff performance?

I don't exactly. I'm pretty sure it was intra-season, not next year, but I'm not sure exactly how they measured it.

 

[Red Right Ankle]

I'm dumb.


I don't exactly. I'm pretty sure it was intra-season, not next year, but I'm not sure exactly how they measured it.

Lol. I think I misunderstood what you meant by full season. I took it literally and was like, "No shit a full season's data would tell you how good a team's defense was over that season."

I... I ain't too bright sometimes.

 

[SumnerH]

Why did I think we traded for him?

Oh, right. I'm an idiot.

Why did Jay Payton ever sign here, anyway?

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Why did Jay Payton ever sign here, anyway?

Like.

 

[dbn]

I'll make some plots later today when the FO drive stats are updated, but after last week the N.E. defense was the 3rd most Bend but Don't Break-iest D of the last 17 years, even after accounting for starting field position and turnovers. I do not claim to know what, if anything, this implies about what to expect going forward.

 

[dbn]

I'll make some plots later today when the FO drive stats are updated, but after last week the N.E. defense was the 3rd most Bend but Don't Break-iest D of the last 17 years, even after accounting for starting field position and turnovers. I do not claim to know what, if anything, this implies about what to expect going forward.

This is still only through week 10, but not adjusting for field position and turnovers they were almost tied for the most bendbutdontbreaky defense in the BB/TB era, and would be dead last in yards per drive compared to that span (2017 Patriots' D in green).

 

[DourDoerr]

I would feel better about this defense if they had one more quality pass-rusher. I know that isn't really the Pats system, but the pressure is really missing this year. They have been trying to compensate (Butler has to have had more corner blitzes this year than rest of his career combined, for example) but loss of Nink, unexpected loss of Rivers, and injury to Hightower have taken a borderline weakness into the biggest concern, one much more likely to bite them against good teams. Perhaps just stating the obvious, but to me that's the key thing to hope they figure out over next few weeks, in some way or at least at some level

I'll second this. I think good teams really means good QB's and I wonder if they're saving some schemes for when they meet Rothlisberger and whatever comes out of the NFC (if they make it that far, obviously). I'm always skeptical of the idea of saving plays, but the pass rush has been so lacking due to standout players on the ends, that I think they're going to have to make do with some trickery and surprise when needed.

As for acquisitions, I was thinking Ted Washington too. He really plugged up the middle all by his lonesome that one season. A big beautiful human wall.

 

[pokey_reese]

One other thing that is covering for the Pats defense a bit and making it look better than it is, is the fumble recovery luck so far, which was on display both directions in the Raiders game (taking the ball away when the other team was about to score, keeping the ball when we were about to score). Out of fumbles forced by the Pats so far this year, they have recovered 5 out of 5, and of fumbles forced by the other team, they've recovered 6 out of 9. That's 11 out of 14 fumbles recovered by the Pats, either taking away opponent drives or keeping our defense off the field/preventing short fields, in almost 80% of such situations. Everything I've seen says that while forcing fumbles might be a skill, recovering them isn't and should regress towards 50/50 over time.

 

[j44thor]

Is there any place that charts opponents drops? Seems like they have had more than their share of drop luck by receivers as well.
Granted drops are a key part of the OAK offense but overall I seem to recall a big drop or two by each opponent during the streak.
Don't know if they are league average or not in that category but my gut thinks we have benefited more from drops than average.

 

[ifmanis5]

Is it fair to kill BB for screwing up his evaluation of Ealy and also not dealing JG before the draft to get a better pick to select a stud pass rusher? I say yes.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Is it fair to kill BB for screwing up his evaluation of Ealy and also not dealing JG before the draft to get a better pick to select a stud pass rusher? I say yes.

Ealy has one sack and 12 tackles. Gets his arms up to bat some passes, but not exactly a stud out there. Bill probably thought he could do better for cheaper, though Marsh is a complete bum.

If reports are accurate BB was never offered at least a mid-first for Jimmy, hard to blame him there.

 

[Super Nomario]

Is it fair to kill BB for screwing up his evaluation of Ealy and also not dealing JG before the draft to get a better pick to select a stud pass rusher? I say yes.

In terms of the draft, Wise has been one of the best rookie pass rushers already. And Rivers was also one of the more intriguing edge players coming out. I don't know how much throwing a third rookie in the mix adds. Sure, Barnett (4.5 sacks) has been good, but what about Charles Harris and Taco Charlton (1 sack each).

 

[DJnVa]

Is it fair to kill BB for screwing up his evaluation of Ealy and also not dealing JG before the draft to get a better pick to select a stud pass rusher? I say yes.

On the JG thing though, supposedly the best offers were long before training camp and BB's philosophy is to wait til camp. With a 40 year old QB that seems prudent.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Any chance Bill bites on Freeney, who was put on waivers by SEA? Not really Bill's type of end, but 10 snaps a game on third down and passing situations could offer value. They don't really have anything past Flowers and Wise right now, and a pass rushing specialist strikes me as a bigger value add given their relative depth at specials than a guy like Brandon Bolden.

 

[Oppo]

Bolden leads the team in ST snaps at 179

 

[bsj]

Any chance Bill bites on Freeney, who was put on waivers by SEA? Not really Bill's type of end, but 10 snaps a game on third down and passing situations could offer value. They don't really have anything past Flowers and Wise right now, and a pass rushing specialist strikes me as a bigger value add given their relative depth at specials than a guy like Brandon Bolden.

I've wanted Freeney on a cheap deal for multiple offseasons. I still think. He could offer something