Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Response to Walt's stupid Broncos season preview

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by blue5213 View Post
    asdqqq obviously just doesn't get that A) people don't recover as quickly or fully in their late 30s from things like torn muscles, broken bones, torn ACLs, etc.,.
    I get it. It's just a logical fallacy to get from that premise to Williams is garbage. I mean it is fully consistent with that statement for Williams to take 9 months to recover from a biceps tear instead of 6 months for a 28 year old, and for him to only make a 95% recovery instead of a 100% recovery. But he’s got a full year to recover, so the extra time doesn’t matter, and 95% of 2008 Williams is still a dang good nose tackle. Do you have any knowledge about this particular injury that you would like to share?

    Originally posted by blue5213 View Post
    B) Jamal Williams hasn't played in over a year,
    Wait what!!! You’re right, I totally missed that. Man, that changes everything. No one has ever missed a season to injury and then come back and had any kind of success. Particularly not any nose tackles in their early 30s.

    Originally posted by blue5213 View Post
    C) defensive tackles usually start breaking down in their early 30s, especially nose tackles,
    2 problems here. One, the flip side of that, essentially the same thing you are saying, is that most nose tackles play well into their early to mid 30s. They are not like running backs who common-belief would tell us start breaking down at or before 30 (whether this is true or not is a topic for another day). Two, while again perhaps generally true, it doesn’t tell us anything about which particular year is going to be the one when this player will decline to “garbage” status. It didn’t happen when Williams went from 31 to 32. Take a look at the NFL teams. There is a lot of money going to nose tackles in their early to mid 30s this year. They aren’t all stupid. You can expect a lot out of those guys if they can still pass your physical and show they can do the things a nose tackle needs to do.

    Originally posted by blue5213 View Post
    and D) he's using strawman arguments and I see no reason to dignify those with any more of a response than I already have.
    That’s my whole point! I’d love to have a real argument to address, but I just can’t get you to give me one. To me, this seems to be about how things are going:
    You say: Williams is garbage. He is old. I say: so, are you saying that Williams is garbage because he is old, because that doesn’t seem to be a very good argument. You say: stop using strawman arguments. I just see what Walter says and then say the same thing. I don’t have to explain my opinions.

    Seriously though, I appreciate the continued responses. I’m enjoying this little dialogue and I don’t mean to offend.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Walter View Post
      @asdqqq - I think it's a little crazy not to expect someone to suffer a dropoff every year in the 30s. The difference between a 33-year-old player and a 34-year-old player - especially one who didn't play at all the year before because of a season-ending injury - is pretty substantial. I mean, you can even look at someone like Torry Holt. Holt was still a very good receiver at 31. At 32, he was shot and he didn't even get hurt. Players simply decline rapidly in their 30s.

      Williams had a year off, so will he be in football shape? And why did the Chargers so willingly get rid of him? And don't give me anything about San Diego not being able to afford him; the Broncos gave him a $16 million deal over three years. Not exactly top dollar. If the Chargers wanted to, they could have easily re-signed him. Instead, they felt like going with a rookie was a better option.

      It's not out of the question that Williams could have a solid year, but expecting him to will probably lead to disappointment. There's a very good chance that he'll be a bust signing.
      Hey Walter,
      Thanks for the response.

      I think it’s more than a little crazy to assume a dropoff every year from a player in their 30s. While the overall general trend might point that way, it is so rife with exceptions that I think relying on it when there is a lot of other, more specific information available is superficial, unsatisfying, and basically just a crap shoot. Instead of looking at Holt’s drop off between 31 and 32 as an example, a guy who plays an entirely different kind of position and thus seems like an unlikely comparison, you could just as easily have looked at, say Williams himself. Between 31 and 32 he remained a very good, if not elite nose tackle. As to formerly elite nose tackles coming off season missing injuries in their 30s, Kelly Gregg seems like the closest recent example. He missed all of 2008 and returned in 2009 at age 33 to start 14 games for the best defensive line in the NFL last year.

      We also know a lot more relevant facts that aren’t included in your analysis. We know the particular injury that he is coming off of and, with a little research, the ease with which a 34 year old could recover from it and the likelihood and extent to which it might affect his future performance. With even a little more research, we could know whether 34 really is generally a tipping point for performance in formerly elite nose tackles. We know that San Diego cut Williams only after trying to renegotiate his contract, that they tried to resign him after he was cut, and that the same franchise has shown a strong willingness to sacrifice on-field performance due to fiscal restraints this off season.

      But more significantly, you have not assumed this drop off with many other players in their 30s. When Gregg was coming off his season missing injury to return at age 33, your preview of the Ravens, didn’t dismiss him as garbage. Instead, it stated, "Fortunately, all indications are that Gregg is completely healthy and ready to go," the same indications that we are getting about Williams now, but the conclusion for Williams is that he is garbage. (By the way, you also go out of your way in that preview to point out what a good job Bannan did filling in for Gregg while he was injured, another part of Denver's "garbage" line this year.) It makes it look like you don’t really believe this is a fundamental truth or reliable predictor so much as it is an after the fact rationalization for a preconceived opinion.

      And that in the end gets at the real problem I see with this article. I’m pretty confident that nothing I have seen indicates that Williams is definitely going to be garbage at this point, but I admit there are serious problems with counting on him to perform at an elite level this year. As I mentioned in my previous e-mail, my problem with your article isn’t necessarily with all of the conclusions, some of them I agree with. It is with the superficiality of the analysis by which you reach them. I understand that you might not have the time to gather the kind of facts it would take to make a more in depth analysis, (though, to be fair, that kind of is your job but it completely destroys your credibility when you proceed to make strong opinions unmoored from any sound factual or analytical basis. And it opens you up to criticism about your objectivity, because when your opinions are not based in any clearly presented and rationally sound facts and analysis, the question becomes, what are they based on? And when they almost universally reach a negative conclusion (including a refusal to acknowledge some of the things you actually feel positively about, like your refusal to grade the Tim Tebow pick. I mean seriously what’s that about? You’re biased against Tebow because you think he will succeed but you’re not biased against Thomas because you think he is going to fail?), coupled with snarky comments clearly directed at angering the fans of the team, can you really blame those fans for coming to the conclusion that the opinions are ultimately based in some sort of animosity towards the team? I personally don’t think that is actually the case, but I can sure see why others do. And I’m not looking for any “you’re right, I’m wrong, Williams will be the bomb” kind of admission here. You are totally entitled to your opinion, and it may just turn out to be right.

      Comment


      • #93
        "top 15 nose tackle in the league"

        "top 15 nose tackle in the league"

        I wrote this to Walter directly because I didn't notice that replies were allowed in the thread. Not sure if anyone's actually reading this, but whatever.

        Maybe you thought of this, maybe you didn't, but it annoys me when people don't think about what they're saying.

        How many teams run the 3-4? Steelers, Ravens, Patriots, Browns, Dolphins, Broncos, Cardinals, and maybe a few others. Point is, I bet less than half the league even runs a 3-4, so being in the top 15 of nose tackles doesn't mean squat.

        Here's the listing of every team (according to their depth chart on CBS Sports) and their front seven scheme:

        3-4
        Ravens
        Browns
        Steelers
        Bills
        Patriots
        Jets
        Dolphins
        Cowboys
        Cardinals
        Broncos
        Chiefs
        Chargers
        Packers
        49ers
        14


        4-3
        Bengals
        Giants
        Eagles
        Redskins
        Texans
        Colts
        Jaguars
        Titans
        Raiders
        Bears
        Lions
        Vikings
        Falcons
        Panthers
        Saints
        Buccaneers
        Rams
        Seahawks
        18

        Personally, I was surprised it was that close.
        So either this dude:

        1. meant that his buddy is in the top 15 of all DTs, regardles of scheme (so top 15 out of 51)
        2. thinks his guy should be second string on some team, OR
        3. doesn't know that some teams don't play the 3-4.


        Which do you think more likely?

        I've always found your articles on drafting and team strengths to be insightful. Even if you suck as a Bengals commentator -- Just kidding. It's nice to see some Bengals commentary that's not glowing (like bengals.com) and not scathing (like my coworkers and Bengals fans who are just tired of losing).

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by BroncosCon View Post
          sigh.....how many super bowls did Brady win without a number one WR?
          Hopefully someone said this, but

          6(Tim Tebow+Kyle Orton+Brady Quinn)^4<Tom Brady/3

          EDIT: Translation - If you added Tim Tebow, Kyle Orton, and Brady Quinn together, multiplied that figure by 6, raised that result to the fourth power, and then , you wouldn't reach a third of Tom Brady.

          EDIT2: To put some subjective numbers to it, on a scale of 1-1000, I'd put Brady at about 950. Now, I'd say, if Tim Tebow was x, then Quinn would be 1.2x and Orton would be 1.5x. Math time...

          6(x+1.2x+1.5x)^4<950/3

          6(3.7x)^4<316 2/3

          x<0.73

          So, if Tom Brady was a 95, then Orton would be a .11, Quinn a .09, and Tebow a .07

          OK, MAYBE these numbers are a little over-exaggerating.... but you get my point.
          Last edited by Centurion; 06-23-2010, 08:19 PM.
          Can you spare a septim?

          Comment


          • #95
            From Jonathon M:

            I am quite a fan of your websites and
            follow your work consistantly. Your views about football are usually solid and make sense (though your hate-plan to ruin Colt McCoy's draft status was quite annoying) I saw a few Broncos fans upset about your analysis about the upcoming season so I figured I'll throw in my 2 cents:

            first off, I agree 100%, Josh Mishandles is an idiot. The best thing he has done for this team is bring in Brain Dawkins. Anyway your views on Demaryus Thomas are completely wrong. He ran great routes at GT and made some freaky catches to boot. Even if he struggles it will all be masked in the offense. Next, on to Tim Tebow. Mishandles foolishly overdrafted Tebow when he could could stolen the best QB in the draft: Colt McCoy. That's right Colt McCoy. He fits our offense PERFECTLY (duable arm, very accurate, smart, and a true team leader) instead we went with the developmental 3-4 year prospect in Tebow. Though he will have amazing work ethic, he just doesn't have the QB role yet. Your are correct in the fact that Eddie Royal was not used properly last year. Whether you agree or not, Royal is the most talented receiver on our team and should be used in the slot or to fill Brandon Marshall's shoes. On to the defense: what do you mean safeties played well
            MOST ofhe time??? Brian Dawkins played well ALL of the time! And sen Brandon Marshall says Champ Bailey is stillthe top CB in the NFL. Dumervil will continue to thrive in the outside linebacker role while D.J. Williams remains one of the best linebackers in the NFL. Lost against the run??? Inthe 3-4 Manu offensive line blocked him giving the tackles to Andre Davis. Even still D.J. Posted 122 tackles, 3.5 sacks and 3 forced fumbles. Do I like the fact that I lost my former favorite Bronco GAY Cutler? Or one of the top WRs Brandon Marshall? Or a great TE in Scheffler? No no and no but in our offense we don't need a passing TE, Marshall is a crybaby and the girly-armed Orton still had better stats than Cutler. I think you are over critizing the Broncos. The new defensive coordinator has a good foundation to work with and Jabar Gaffney probed that any receiver can be decent in the WR1 role. So ease up and stop trying to cyberkill Colt McCoy! Broncos finish
            8-8 2nd in the AFC West.


            My Response:

            I'm not sure what you mean by my plan to ruin Colt McCoy's draft status. I had him mocked in the third round throughout draft season, but moved him to the second round at the very end because I knew Mike Holmgren liked him. But I agree, McCoy is the type of QB Josh McDaniels loves for his offense - the no-talent, but smart and accurate in the short passing game, Matt Cassel type.

            Demaryius Thomas didn't run any routes at GT, so I'm not sure how he ran great routes. The offense he played in translates very poorly to the NFL, so there should be an adjustment period.

            Brian Dawkins played well most of the time, but I definitely remember him getting abused in coverage against the Chiefs in the finale.

            I could see the Broncos finishing 8-8. I think their win range is between 5-8, though a 9-7 record wouldn't completely shock me (I'd just be semi-shocked). I still say 6-10 or 7-9 is most likely.
            2016 NFL Mock Draft

            Sales Tips, Sales Techniques, Sales Planning and Sales Blogs to Increase Sales Commissions

            Comment


            • #96
              Colt McCoy isn't accurate. He routinely made his receivers work for the ball, whether it was overthrown, underthrown, or just plain off-target. As someone else said, McCoy is Chad Pennington without the football smarts. And Pennington can at least hit his receivers in stride five yards out.
              Originally posted by jepg
              I apologise to the entire Walter Football community for my bigoted views.

              I should be put on an island and nuked.
              Originally posted by jepg
              Blue is right

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by asdqqq View Post
                Hey Walter,
                Thanks for the response.

                I think it’s more than a little crazy to assume a dropoff every year from a player in their 30s. While the overall general trend might point that way, it is so rife with exceptions that I think relying on it when there is a lot of other, more specific information available is superficial, unsatisfying, and basically just a crap shoot. Instead of looking at Holt’s drop off between 31 and 32 as an example, a guy who plays an entirely different kind of position and thus seems like an unlikely comparison, you could just as easily have looked at, say Williams himself. Between 31 and 32 he remained a very good, if not elite nose tackle. As to formerly elite nose tackles coming off season missing injuries in their 30s, Kelly Gregg seems like the closest recent example. He missed all of 2008 and returned in 2009 at age 33 to start 14 games for the best defensive line in the NFL last year.

                We also know a lot more relevant facts that aren’t included in your analysis. We know the particular injury that he is coming off of and, with a little research, the ease with which a 34 year old could recover from it and the likelihood and extent to which it might affect his future performance. With even a little more research, we could know whether 34 really is generally a tipping point for performance in formerly elite nose tackles. We know that San Diego cut Williams only after trying to renegotiate his contract, that they tried to resign him after he was cut, and that the same franchise has shown a strong willingness to sacrifice on-field performance due to fiscal restraints this off season.

                But more significantly, you have not assumed this drop off with many other players in their 30s. When Gregg was coming off his season missing injury to return at age 33, your preview of the Ravens, didn’t dismiss him as garbage. Instead, it stated, "Fortunately, all indications are that Gregg is completely healthy and ready to go," the same indications that we are getting about Williams now, but the conclusion for Williams is that he is garbage. (By the way, you also go out of your way in that preview to point out what a good job Bannan did filling in for Gregg while he was injured, another part of Denver's "garbage" line this year.) It makes it look like you don’t really believe this is a fundamental truth or reliable predictor so much as it is an after the fact rationalization for a preconceived opinion.

                And that in the end gets at the real problem I see with this article. I’m pretty confident that nothing I have seen indicates that Williams is definitely going to be garbage at this point, but I admit there are serious problems with counting on him to perform at an elite level this year. As I mentioned in my previous e-mail, my problem with your article isn’t necessarily with all of the conclusions, some of them I agree with. It is with the superficiality of the analysis by which you reach them. I understand that you might not have the time to gather the kind of facts it would take to make a more in depth analysis, (though, to be fair, that kind of is your job but it completely destroys your credibility when you proceed to make strong opinions unmoored from any sound factual or analytical basis. And it opens you up to criticism about your objectivity, because when your opinions are not based in any clearly presented and rationally sound facts and analysis, the question becomes, what are they based on? And when they almost universally reach a negative conclusion (including a refusal to acknowledge some of the things you actually feel positively about, like your refusal to grade the Tim Tebow pick. I mean seriously what’s that about? You’re biased against Tebow because you think he will succeed but you’re not biased against Thomas because you think he is going to fail?), coupled with snarky comments clearly directed at angering the fans of the team, can you really blame those fans for coming to the conclusion that the opinions are ultimately based in some sort of animosity towards the team? I personally don’t think that is actually the case, but I can sure see why others do. And I’m not looking for any “you’re right, I’m wrong, Williams will be the bomb” kind of admission here. You are totally entitled to your opinion, and it may just turn out to be right.
                The one game Williams did play before getting injured, the Chargers gave up 100+ rushing yards (>4 ypc) to the JaMarcus Russell-led Oakland Raiders (ie, no threat of passing and a horrific offensive line). While one player is not responsible for the performance of the entire defense, Williams' game is entirely tied to stuffing the run. The previous year, the Chargers had only allowed 72 (<4 ypc) and 54 rushing yards (<4 ypc) against the Raiders. Smells like a decline to me, even before the injury.

                Additionally, Gregg is surrounded by better players overall - he can afford to play at a lower level with Haloti Ngata next to him, Ray Lewis behind him, and Terrell Suggs coming off the edge. The Broncos really only have Elvis Dumervil as a weapon in the front seven - meaning more attention is going to be paid to Williams. He needs to maintain a higher level of play while aging.

                I'm not sure I see the problem with Walter's analysis - after all, there are several trends at play here:
                Older players tend to decline. -> Declining players see a drop-off in play
                Older players tend to take longer to recover from injuries. -> Players recovering from injuries see a drop-off in play as they can't go 100%
                It's harder for older players to get back in football shape/missing a whole season is not conducive to staying in football shape -> Players not in football shape see a drop-off in play

                The probabilities indicate that Williams will not be able to play at a high level next year.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by belgariontheking View Post
                  Point is, I bet less than half the league even runs a 3-4, so being in the top 15 of nose tackles doesn't mean squat.
                  Just in case you didn't know the term "Nose-tackle" doesn't only mean the guy between the two 3-4 DEs. There are 4-3 teams that use nose tackles. Pat Williams for example.

                  Michael Floyd > Justin Blackmon

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                    The one game Williams did play before getting injured, the Chargers gave up 100+ rushing yards (>4 ypc) to the JaMarcus Russell-led Oakland Raiders (ie, no threat of passing and a horrific offensive line). While one player is not responsible for the performance of the entire defense, Williams' game is entirely tied to stuffing the run. The previous year, the Chargers had only allowed 72 (<4 ypc) and 54 rushing yards (<4 ypc) against the Raiders. Smells like a decline to me, even before the injury.
                    Excellent! Here is an actual argument! This is the kind of thing I would have loved to see in Walter's piece. To counter the merits of your argument, 1 game is an awfully small sample to draw conclusions from; as you pointed out this is a team statistic and the Chargers were also starting a new DE next to him after Olshansky left, which also likely had a large effect ; and the rest of the defense around him proved to be considerably worse after he left then while he was there, prompting an article by Barnwell from Footballoutsiders.com saying "Losing nose tackle Jamal Williams has thrown the San Diego Chargers' defense into a state of disarray. His absence, more so than any other factor -- including the unfortunate presence of Norv Turner -- might end up costing the Chargers their shot at a Super Bowl."

                    Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                    Additionally, Gregg is surrounded by better players overall - he can afford to play at a lower level with Haloti Ngata next to him, Ray Lewis behind him, and Terrell Suggs coming off the edge. The Broncos really only have Elvis Dumervil as a weapon in the front seven - meaning more attention is going to be paid to Williams. He needs to maintain a higher level of play while aging.
                    This may all be true. But I don't see how it shows in any way that Williams will be garbage this year. It might mean that the Broncos d-line won't be as good as the Ravens' next year, but they were the best, so there is long way between worse than the Ravens and garbage. And your right, the Ravens have a ton of talent. Including a ton of D-line talent. And yet they were still starting Gregg. So he must not have been garbage.

                    Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                    I'm not sure I see the problem with Walter's analysis - after all, there are several trends at play here:
                    Older players tend to decline. -> Declining players see a drop-off in play.
                    Yes, but does that mean that you should conclude that every player over 28 (when players reach their physical peak) is garbage? Plenty of nose tackles have played well while 34 or older. Where are you drawing the line here? If Walter said, there's a good chance Williams won't be as good as he was in 2008, because he is older, I'd be totally on board, but instead he goes to an extreme unsupported by that analysis. And he has been totally inconsistent when applying this reasoning.

                    Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                    Older players tend to take longer to recover from injuries. -> Players recovering from injuries see a drop-off in play as they can't go 100%
                    Reports are that Williams is 100% recovered and can go 100%. His particular injury is unlikely to have any lasting impact on his play. So while they may "tend" to do this, it doesn't matter under the facts of Williams' case.

                    Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                    It's harder for older players to get back in football shape/missing a whole season is not conducive to staying in football shape -> Players not in football shape see a drop-off in play
                    According to reports, Williams is 100% in football shape, or at least as much as anyone is prior to training camp. He's been fully recovered for a while now. So again, this generalization just does not apply given the facts that we actually know about Williams. In fact, one could argue that the time off likely helped Williams more than hurt him at this point in his career, because, as you noted above, it takes longer to recover for players who get older, and Williams has had a whole year for any nagging injuries to completely heal. Plus, he has had a year less of the grind of playing football than your typical 34 year old d-lineman.

                    Thanks for the response, though. If you had written the preview, I probably wouldn't have any problem with it.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by asdqqq View Post
                      Excellent! Here is an actual argument! This is the kind of thing I would have loved to see in Walter's piece. To counter the merits of your argument, 1 game is an awfully small sample to draw conclusions from; as you pointed out this is a team statistic and the Chargers were also starting a new DE next to him after Olshansky left, which also likely had a large effect ; and the rest of the defense around him proved to be considerably worse after he left then while he was there, prompting an article by Barnwell from Footballoutsiders.com saying "Losing nose tackle Jamal Williams has thrown the San Diego Chargers' defense into a state of disarray. His absence, more so than any other factor -- including the unfortunate presence of Norv Turner -- might end up costing the Chargers their shot at a Super Bowl."
                      Still - it's the Raiders. Maintaining the defensive status quo from that game would have been disastrous against any good team (giving up >4 ypc and 100+ yards to a horrible O-line and a team with no threat to pass with Jamal Williams does not translate well). As the NT's responsibilities are primarily against the run, maintaining a level of play similar to what Williams put forth against the Raiders would have reflected very poorly on him. And if he did in fact maintain that play for a whole season, it'd be safe to say that he was in decline.

                      New personnel or not, a NT cannot allow the Raiders, of all teams, to consistently pick up solid chunks of yardage on the ground. I wouldn't call a NT garbage based on one game, but I think it's safe to say that a Williams 3 years younger wouldn't have been blown off the ball so easily by mediocre talent.

                      This may all be true. But I don't see how it shows in any way that Williams will be garbage this year. It might mean that the Broncos d-line won't be as good as the Ravens' next year, but they were the best, so there is long way between worse than the Ravens and garbage. And your right, the Ravens have a ton of talent. Including a ton of D-line talent. And yet they were still starting Gregg. So he must not have been garbage.
                      Gregg might be garbage - we won't know because there's so much talent around him. Bad play can be masked by that much talent.

                      At the same time, Williams will be exposed with no talent around him whatsoever (besides Dumervil). Walter, in his preview, only claimed the Broncos' D-line was going to be garbage - not specifically Williams. There's a chance he can be great and can mask his teammates' weaknesses, just as there's a chance that he is in decline (which will be amplified by his teammates' weaknesses). Given the Raiders game, it doesn't appear as if Williams is capable of covering for his teammates any more. And given all the trends I mentioned, the latter option is the most sensible to assume.


                      Yes, but does that mean that you should conclude that every player over 28 (when players reach their physical peak) is garbage? Plenty of nose tackles have played well while 34 or older. Where are you drawing the line here? If Walter said, there's a good chance Williams won't be as good as he was in 2008, because he is older, I'd be totally on board, but instead he goes to an extreme unsupported by that analysis. And he has been totally inconsistent when applying this reasoning.
                      Again, Walter only categorized the D-line as garbage. I think that assumption is fair when the two ends are garbage and the nose tackle has a significant probability of being in decline.

                      Reports are that Williams is 100% recovered and can go 100%. His particular injury is unlikely to have any lasting impact on his play. So while they may "tend" to do this, it doesn't matter under the facts of Williams' case.

                      According to reports, Williams is 100% in football shape, or at least as much as anyone is prior to training camp. He's been fully recovered for a while now. So again, this generalization just does not apply given the facts that we actually know about Williams. In fact, one could argue that the time off likely helped Williams more than hurt him at this point in his career, because, as you noted above, it takes longer to recover for players who get older, and Williams has had a whole year for any nagging injuries to completely heal. Plus, he has had a year less of the grind of playing football than your typical 34 year old d-lineman.

                      Thanks for the response, though. If you had written the preview, I probably wouldn't have any problem with it.
                      There are plenty of reports of people looking good in the offseason, when there aren't any pads on and nothing is at game speed. We'll know whether or not Williams is fully healed when he steps foot onto the field on a Sunday. Until then, it's more realistic to make a projection based on probability.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Descendency View Post
                        Just in case you didn't know the term "Nose-tackle" doesn't only mean the guy between the two 3-4 DEs. There are 4-3 teams that use nose tackles. Pat Williams for example.
                        Thanks. Actually, I didn't know that.

                        So, some of the details in my post are invalid, but the overall point stands. Maybe there are 17 NTs in the league. Being top 15 still doesn't mean anything.

                        Comment


                        • Well 3-4 NT's mostly play the 0 technique directly over the Center. 4-3 NT's play 1 technique and play between the strong side C and G. There's a little difference.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BroncosCon View Post
                            Well 3-4 NT's mostly play the 0 technique directly over the Center. 4-3 NT's play 1 technique and play between the strong side C and G. There's a little difference.
                            It's not like they aren't terribly similar either. Kris Jenkins was drafted by the Panthers before going to the Jets. I know there is a difference between them, but they are very similar as well.

                            edit: When someone says "nose tackle" I don't know whether they mean both or 34 NT. I tend to assume they mean both though.

                            Michael Floyd > Justin Blackmon

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Descendency View Post
                              It's not like they aren't terribly similar either. Kris Jenkins was drafted by the Panthers before going to the Jets. I know there is a difference between them, but they are very similar as well.

                              edit: When someone says "nose tackle" I don't know whether they mean both or 34 NT. I tend to assume they mean both though.
                              I give you props for having the knowledge which most don't know. The 0 technique is harder because he will be doubled by either guard/center depending on what side the play goes on. The 1 technique will either get doubled or be one-on-one with the guard, depending on the blocking scheme or play.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                                Still - it's the Raiders. Maintaining the defensive status quo from that game would have been disastrous against any good team (giving up >4 ypc and 100+ yards to a horrible O-line and a team with no threat to pass with Jamal Williams does not translate well). As the NT's responsibilities are primarily against the run, maintaining a level of play similar to what Williams put forth against the Raiders would have reflected very poorly on him. And if he did in fact maintain that play for a whole season, it'd be safe to say that he was in decline.

                                New personnel or not, a NT cannot allow the Raiders, of all teams, to consistently pick up solid chunks of yardage on the ground. I wouldn't call a NT garbage based on one game, but I think it's safe to say that a Williams 3 years younger wouldn't have been blown off the ball so easily by mediocre talent.
                                I agree that if he had played badly the whole season it would definitely indicate decline. I just don’t think you can take anything from the stats from one particular game, even if it was against the Raiders.

                                I mean the Raiders rushed for 119 yards and 6.3 yards a carry against the Jets last season, but over the whole season the Jets had the second best defensive line in the league according to footballoutsiders. And they rushed for 67 yards and 2.7 yards a carry in their first meeting with the Chiefs, yet the Chiefs ranked dead last over the course of the whole year. And just to look at your “3 years ago” comment more closely, in 2007 San Diego allowed 122 yards and 4.2 per carry to Oakland with Williams at NT.

                                Individual games are fluky, and a lot more in-depth analysis is involved to know what it is the stats actually indicate.


                                Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                                Gregg might be garbage - we won't know because there's so much talent around him. Bad play can be masked by that much talent.
                                Gregg was the starting NT and Bannan (now of the garbage Broncos d-line) was his primary back up. Apparently you think that you can have the best defensive line in football with an all garbage NT position. I’ll just respectfully disagree. Everything I’ve heard is that solid NT play is essential in the 3-4.

                                Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                                At the same time, Williams will be exposed with no talent around him whatsoever (besides Dumervil). Walter, in his preview, only claimed the Broncos' D-line was going to be garbage - not specifically Williams. There's a chance he can be great and can mask his teammates' weaknesses, just as there's a chance that he is in decline (which will be amplified by his teammates' weaknesses). Given the Raiders game, it doesn't appear as if Williams is capable of covering for his teammates any more. And given all the trends I mentioned, the latter option is the most sensible to assume.

                                Again, Walter only categorized the D-line as garbage. I think that assumption is fair when the two ends are garbage and the nose tackle has a significant probability of being in decline.
                                I have only been looking at Williams as an example, so I’m not going to get into the conclusion that there is no talent around him whatsoever, other than to say that even Walter acknowledges the secondary was very good last year and that Dumerville and DJ, half of the starting linebacking core, are dynamic talents.

                                And I think it is a much fairer implication from what he wrote to say that he thinks the Broncos d-line will be garbage because Williams will himself be garbage then to read it as saying it will be garbage in spite of Williams playing well. And his comments on this thread certainly back that view up.

                                Originally posted by EliteBeatAgent View Post
                                There are plenty of reports of people looking good in the offseason, when there aren't any pads on and nothing is at game speed. We'll know whether or not Williams is fully healed when he steps foot onto the field on a Sunday. Until then, it's more realistic to make a projection based on probability.
                                It would be fine to take that stance if Walter didn’t repeatedly rely on such reports in his other season previews, including the reports that Gregg was healthy last year. It's this "selective hearing" that makes it look like he's got an agenda outside of fair and balanced analysis, even if it is really only indicative of a lack of discipline or laziness.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X