Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Like Bedard or not, he writes and easy analysis on a players weakness and strength via film review. WHat are your thoughts on the signings after reading the reviews?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    link?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    By Greg A. Bedard, Globe Staff

    Have watched the better part of four games each from DT Tommy Kelly and WR Emmanuel Sanders (including the 2011 Steelers-Patriots game), and I have a few thoughts on the possible impact for both as Patriots (if the Steelers don't match Sanders' offer):

    DT Tommy Kelly

    • Probably the best role for Kelly with the Patriots will be as a situational pass rusher from the inside. That's where his strength is at this point in his career, but that's limited. He really needs to be singled up, and against weaker opponents. Kelly is pretty much a one move and then he's done kind of guy. He gives his best shot and if there's an opening, he pursues aggressively. If not, Kelly plays read and react. He does play to the whistle but his want-to depends on if he thinks he has an opening.
    • Kelly will likely be this year's version of Gerard Warren -- the guy they had in 2010; he lost a bit of a step in '11.
    • Was surprised by his average play against the run. For such a big man (6-6, 325 pounds), Kelly is easily moved because he plays very high two steps into a play. Right now, pending any improvement from coaching, Kelly lags well behind Kyle Love and Brandon Deaderick against the run. Kelly doesn't shed blocks as well as Love, though he's close with Deaderick.
    • The biggest challenge to Kelly getting more time on first and second downs will be his ability to sit in his gap. He didn't do that very well last season for the Raiders, although it was tough to tell if that was because of scheme or talent. On film, Kelly likes to freelance a bit against the run. He won't play much if he does that with the Patriots. They want their interior linemen to hog space and let the linebackers and edge players make plays.
    • Kelly's better than both Love and Deaderick in pass rush. The latter has more potential but hasn't realized it to this point.
    • Kelly has a lot of interior versatility. For the Raiders, he played everywhere from zero (head up against the center) to four-i technique (inside shoulder of the tackle). The Raiders preferred Kelly in the three technique (outside shoulder of the guard) in pass rushing situations.
    • Kelly seemed to get a lot more attention from opponents than Richard Seymour last season. It's either an indication of how good Kelly is, or a reflection that Seymour is far from the player he once was.

    WR Emmanuel Sanders

    • Watched the better part of five games of Sanders, including the 2011 game against the Patriots (to see if he did something to catch their eye -- nothing stood out);
    • Puzzling why the Steelers, knowing they were going to lose Mike Wallace in free agency and had no other young receivers, didn't at least pony up the extra $700,000 that would have made Sanders a second-round draft pick tender;
    • Plays all the receiver positions in Steelers offense -- even lined up in the backfield on occasion -- which would indicate he has a high comprehension level. The less a team asks a player to do, the less they think he can retain.
    • Sanders' Wonderlic score of 18 is on the low end for the receivers they've drafted (David Givens at 19, Taylor Price at 18). This is important because the Patriots' scheme is so complicated after the snap. Physical attributes are almost useless for the Patriots because if the receiver can't gain the trust of Tom Brady, it doesn't matter. Deion Branch led at 26;
    • On film, Sanders' on-field intelligence is average. Sometimes he does well to recognize coverages, other times he and the quarterbacks are not on the same page. Sanders tends to stay vertical instead of crossing the field when presented high safety looks. This could be the reason why the quarterbacks don't show a ton of confidence in him -- he's well down the read list for all of the QBs (Ben Roethlisberger, Byron Leftwich, Charlie Batch) who threw to him last season, despite being the inside receiver. This will be something to watch if Sanders does join the Patriots.
    • New England doesn't have any inside knowledge on Sanders as far as his football IQ, like previous experience with a Patriots assistant coach. This is significant because after the failed 2011 acquisitions (Albert Haynesworth, Chad Ochocinco, Shaun Ellis), the Patriots vowed to have someone who could vouch for the player's mind and/or heart. It served them well last season.
    • The Patriots have their college evaluation of Sanders, pro tape and his free agency visit, where you would assume they put him on the whiteboard and quizzed him extensively to see if he was a fit for their system.
    • The facet of Sanders' game that stands out the most is his blocking. He's excellent in that regard and is often used as the lead blocker on receiver screens.
    • This is likely why Sanders basically took over Hines Ward's role in the Steelers' system -- including a lot of motion -- when he was injured/retired.
    • Does a good job of beating press man coverage with his feet and hands.
    • Has 4.4 speed. It shows up at times on the field, but it's inconsistent. He does not have the type of speed that will make defensive coordinators pay him extra attention, but you have to respect his ability down the field. He can get behind you if you're not paying attention.
    • Basically, Sanders is a good, solid all-around receiver who his above average in most categories. He runs decent routes, has decent hands (had some key drops, and an open-field fumble vs. Ravens last year). Best receiving attribute is his ability to find soft spots in the zones.
    • Tough player. Doesn't back down in rivalry games.
    • Last season, in multiple games, he showed issues with right shoulder and back injuries that removed him for some plays.
    • Overall, while Sanders was an inside player for the Steelers, his skill set would indicate an outside "x" receiver role for the Patriots. He can do a lot of things Brandon Lloyd did, but better and faster. With Wallace and Antonio Brown on the outside -- both are more explosive than Sanders -- there wasn't a need for him outside. But for the Patriots, he could fill that role. That being said, Sanders' immense versatility could allow him to play anywhere -- even Aaron Hernandez's role as a hybrid TE/WR in case of injury.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Thanks, I basically realized after I asked for the link that it was prob on the front of BDC's Pats

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Compared Kelly to a gwarren type signing. Said he doesn't play the run as well as love , but offers more of a pass rush than deaderick...not an every down player at this point in his career...situational pass rusher from the interior...its what the pats need, but don't break the news to russ...

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Has anyone even given thought to the idea that they are going to play Sanders in the slot and Amendola at the X receiver position? Just a thought. Edelman can play the slot as can Donald Jones. A lot of potential slot receivers...

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Plus Hern and Vereen...lots of slots

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

     

    Has anyone even given thought to the idea that they are going to play Sanders in the slot and Amendola at the X receiver position? Just a thought. Edelman can play the slot as can Donald Jones. A lot of potential slot receivers...

     




    Umm, yeah. This has been the ideology that some of us have been trying to explain to the BB bashers and Welkerites.


    Ideally, you want each WR to be able to be used in every spot or 2/3 spots (X and Y or Z and Y). It's rare you can get a WR to be equally effective in every spot, so 2/3 is what you want.

    For example, Brown would never line up at the Z, but the Y was his usual spot or on the left flank. Also, they used a lot of motion with him. When was the last time anyone can name a time Welker was used in motion?

    Can't use motion when you're in the shotgun all the time, can you? Nope. No, you can't. But, that is another discussion.

    It's like a double edged sword  For this offense to be at peak efficiency you don't want Moss at the Z and Welker in the Y over and over. The only reason that worked for most of 2007 was because of what those players' skills meant for the first time a D had to prepare for that kind of offense.

    Think about 2004's offense.  Givens was the X, but did he have to be the X? No.  Branch was the Z, Brown the Y, but to move the sticks, it wasn't just about where those guys lined up.

    Givens scored his TD in SB 39, if I am not mistaken from the Z.  He usually lined up at the X.

    For whatever reason, Welker could only get open on the inside.  Branch could get open back in the day on the outside and inside which was the reason why he was so effective.

    Not saying Welker wsn;t effective, but he was ONLY effective out of the slot which made our offense predictable in terms of approach.

    People need to go pop in a 2003, 2004 or even a 2001 tape and see the difference. 2007 absolutely destroyed some of our own fans' understanding of what makes a West Coast (or a variation of that offense) go.

    Moss and Welker were freaks at what they did here with a top flight QB, but that didn't mean we were ever balanced.

    Remove Moss's name and pop in Gronk/Hern and it became overloaded over the middle.

    Finally, Bedard cannot be trusted because he's anti-BB. His attitude changed QUICK, about 3 months in to his tenure here. He probably expected his ego stroked, and he didn't get it. Since then (2010), he's totally been incredibly irrational in terms of looking at the minor flaws of things, usually on D, to try to bash BB.

     




    just sad....

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Bedard is 100% right that Kelly is over the hill but can still add things to the pass-rush that our existing DT's can't. Perhaps Armstead the unknown will be even better, but for now, in that sense, he is a great addition b/c he is cheap and in the 1-2 downs per 3 he plays he will improve what Love or Deaderick give there if the QB is dropping back.

    Bedard seems to downplay the toughness and multi-talented skills Sanders would bring. Clearly his wonderlic from 3 years ago is less significant than his being used all over the field and trusted with major responsibility in Pitt. He is right however that the guy is on the short side and not a red zone threat. But we saw what Brady was able to do with Patten and Lloyd and Sanders is more athletic, faster, etc. then both of them. He could really shine here.

    Rusty's paranoia when it comes to media 'hate' is pretty amusing and obviously tiresome... but he is spot on that we'd have 4 WR's able to play slot and then also contribute all over the field in Amendola, Sanders, Edelman and even Jones. If Wes was back he could really only play the slot, and his chemistry with Brady and precise route-running can only take the team so far as he and his QB aged and remained predictable.

    With Sanders and Amedola on board the offense should be just as good or better than with Wes and Lloyd... the only issue is the health of the guys we have now, not the talent. Both are have rep's for not being able to stay on the field. But the Pats got 5 years younger with both guys as well. Can't discount that.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    Bedard is 100% right that Kelly is over the hill but can still add things to the pass-rush that our existing DT's can't. Perhaps Armstead the unknown will be even better, but for now, in that sense, he is a great addition b/c he is cheap and in the 1-2 downs per 3 he plays he will improve what Love or Deaderick give there if the QB is dropping back.

    Bedard seems to downplay the toughness and multi-talented skills Sanders would bring. Clearly his wonderlic from 3 years ago is less significant than his being used all over the field and trusted with major responsibility in Pitt. He is right however that the guy is on the short side and not a red zone threat. But we saw what Brady was able to do with Patten and Lloyd and Sanders is more athletic, faster, etc. then both of them. He could really shine here.

    Rusty's paranoia when it comes to media 'hate' is pretty amusing and obviously tiresome... but he is spot on that we'd have 4 WR's able to play slot and then also contribute all over the field in Amendola, Sanders, Edelman and even Jones. If Wes was back he could really only play the slot, and his chemistry with Brady and precise route-running can only take the team so far as he and his QB aged and remained predictable.

    With Sanders and Amedola on board the offense should be just as good or better than with Wes and Lloyd... the only issue is the health of the guys we have now, not the talent. Both are have rep's for not being able to stay on the field. But the Pats got 5 years younger with both guys as well. Can't discount that.



    Rusty's paranoia when it comes to media 'hate' is pretty amusing and obviously tiresome...

     

    It's also silly to the point of inanity

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     

    Bedard is 100% right that Kelly is over the hill but can still add things to the pass-rush that our existing DT's can't. Perhaps Armstead the unknown will be even better, but for now, in that sense, he is a great addition b/c he is cheap and in the 1-2 downs per 3 he plays he will improve what Love or Deaderick give there if the QB is dropping back.

    Bedard seems to downplay the toughness and multi-talented skills Sanders would bring. Clearly his wonderlic from 3 years ago is less significant than his being used all over the field and trusted with major responsibility in Pitt. He is right however that the guy is on the short side and not a red zone threat. But we saw what Brady was able to do with Patten and Lloyd and Sanders is more athletic, faster, etc. then both of them. He could really shine here.

    Rusty's paranoia when it comes to media 'hate' is pretty amusing and obviously tiresome... but he is spot on that we'd have 4 WR's able to play slot and then also contribute all over the field in Amendola, Sanders, Edelman and even Jones. If Wes was back he could really only play the slot, and his chemistry with Brady and precise route-running can only take the team so far as he and his QB aged and remained predictable.

    With Sanders and Amedola on board the offense should be just as good or better than with Wes and Lloyd... the only issue is the health of the guys we have now, not the talent. Both are have rep's for not being able to stay on the field. But the Pats got 5 years younger with both guys as well. Can't discount that.

     



    Disagree on Kelly.  Seymour mailed it in and Kelly was the better player. Many analysts agree.

    I remember Bedard saying how great Seymour was in 2010, but he was lazy and only looking at past laurels.

    Sorry, but it's not some "100%" fact like you just tried to spin off.  Seymour was paid 14 million per and Kelly outperformed him. Kelly was there before King Richard. I would venure to guess that Kelly will be rejuvenated under BB and a sniff for a ring.

    Pretty simple.

     




    It is pretty simple that all we can 'expect' is what the stats and film showed from a year ago. DT's can fall off a cliff pretty quick after age 30. Look at Seymour and Ty Warren. We can be pleasantly surprised by anything more than what Bedard predicts, but we can't expect it. His analysis of his last season was 100% correct.

    I would venture to say that Kelly could get back to the 40 tackle 7 sack guy he was in '10 and '11. But for now he remains a 32 (33 by the playoff run) guy who may or may not be washed up. Time will tell.

    Gerard Warren gave us 3.5 sacks at age 32 in 2010 and that is clearly the expectations for age, salary, etc with Kelly. As long as he doesn't pull a Fanene or Fat Albert I'll be happy with that.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    Nice to know Bedard basically said all the things I've been saying about Kelley since the signing. Nice conformation.

    As for Sanders I think we all knew this. He's a #2/3 WR who can play outside and provides nice versatility but does what BB likes the most (blocking), it's one reason I took a couple of players off WR draft board (like Davis) because the Pats highly value blocking ability with their WRs. I thought Sanders was smarter then what Bedard says though. I think the bigger thing is he's physical at the line and can beat press coverage. Aside from the minor ding ups Sanders has been healthy which should be a huge plus given the current core.

    The one thing I'm wondering about is that BB is again filling the team with #2-4 type WRs. I'm hoping he can find a true Z flanker and I know that the TE are most likely going to be the main targets but throwing a bunch of cheaper #3 Wr's on the field and moving them around doesn't always work. With any luck they find a Z flanker in the draft who comes in and wins the job immediately. Then we'd have something special between the 3 TE's, Amendola (if he can stay healthy), and Sanders as more of a platoon x WR with Amendola

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Bedards analysis of Kelly and Sanders

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     

    Bedard is 100% right that Kelly is over the hill but can still add things to the pass-rush that our existing DT's can't. Perhaps Armstead the unknown will be even better, but for now, in that sense, he is a great addition b/c he is cheap and in the 1-2 downs per 3 he plays he will improve what Love or Deaderick give there if the QB is dropping back.

    Bedard seems to downplay the toughness and multi-talented skills Sanders would bring. Clearly his wonderlic from 3 years ago is less significant than his being used all over the field and trusted with major responsibility in Pitt. He is right however that the guy is on the short side and not a red zone threat. But we saw what Brady was able to do with Patten and Lloyd and Sanders is more athletic, faster, etc. then both of them. He could really shine here.

    Rusty's paranoia when it comes to media 'hate' is pretty amusing and obviously tiresome... but he is spot on that we'd have 4 WR's able to play slot and then also contribute all over the field in Amendola, Sanders, Edelman and even Jones. If Wes was back he could really only play the slot, and his chemistry with Brady and precise route-running can only take the team so far as he and his QB aged and remained predictable.

    With Sanders and Amedola on board the offense should be just as good or better than with Wes and Lloyd... the only issue is the health of the guys we have now, not the talent. Both are have rep's for not being able to stay on the field. But the Pats got 5 years younger with both guys as well. Can't discount that.

     



    Disagree on Kelly.  Seymour mailed it in and Kelly was the better player. Many analysts agree.

    I remember Bedard saying how great Seymour was in 2010, but he was lazy and only looking at past laurels.

    Sorry, but it's not some "100%" fact like you just tried to spin off.  Seymour was paid 14 million per and Kelly outperformed him. Kelly was there before King Richard. I would venure to guess that Kelly will be rejuvenated under BB and a sniff for a ring.

    Pretty simple.

     



    Agree that coming to the pats should reinvigorate him as now he has a chance for a ring. As long as we use him correctly, we should reap the benefit. The challenge I think we still have after the Kelly acquisition, is that we don't have a dominant 3 down lineman like Vince. Love better against the run, deaderick decent in pass rush, same with Kelly, but I don't yet see a dominant force like Vince..

     

Share