Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

    Also, going to add this.

    People really overlook Armstead as a 4-3 END. I think he has utility there. A lot of teams have used larger players on the edge in 43 lineups. I could see them coming out with something like Jones, VW, TK, AA. It certainly would give you solid edges.

     



    Hey this is a good point, they could always go the other direction with this defense.  Put Wilfork and Kelly inside with Jones and Armstead on the ends, all the posters agonizing over my insistence the Pats still run a 3/4 with a 2/4/5 nickel as their base could relax because we'd be running a true 4/3.  In that case I might rotate Hightower and Spikes in the middle, Mayo and  Collins on the outside.  This might be a big picture move, maybe they can't come to an agreement with Spike's agent for an extension?  

     

    But I still think BB has always been working his way back to having enough personnel to run either a 3/4 or 4/3, in a perfect world you have enough depth of talent along the front to run either or both, depending on injury.




    Wozzy, I think you are looking at the wrong personel for he 3/4. Dont lok at the DL. Look at the DB's. The CB's in a 3/4 need to play more zone than man, zone is not a strength of Dennerd or Talib. They are better press cover/jam/man on man CB's. ALso, the S need to have ange to cover more ground. McCourty is fine, but TWilson, AWilson and Gregory dont cover a lot of ground

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    The intentional grounding in the endzone is a passing turnover. It happend on a "passing" play.

     




    That isn't a "turnover". Just as going for it on 4th down and failing isn't a "turnover" ( that is called a "turnover on downs"). Just as punting the ball isn't a "turnover". "Turnovers" are fumbles recovered by the other team and intercepted passes.

     

     


    That is just semantics in my opinion.

    Generally speaking, the turnover is defined as a loss of possession. They will often add the following two qualifiers you mentioned, "Fumble or Interception" into the definition as they are the two most typical ways in which that will happen.

    Brady's Intentional grounding in the endzone resulted in a safety which gave the other team both points and possesion of the ball. It will often be categorirzed as a score and kick because the safetly is sometimes situationally intentional. However Brady's  happened "prior" to down #4(the normal minimum length of a possession) and was NOT situationally intentional. That by definition, in my opinion, is a loss of possession and therefore a turnover/giveaway. It is also NOT, by definition, a turnover on downs.

    The following is a definition of give-away by the NFL.

    "A giveaway is when an offensive player turns the ball over to the other team.  A giveaway can be an interception, fumble, or other inadvertent miscue that results in the opposition gaining possession of the ball.  The term applies because by committing a turnover, the offending team, "gives the ball away," to the opposition."

    So we'll agree to disagree on the semantics but Brady had two costly mental mistakes/decisions in that superbowl resulting in lost possesions/turnovers.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    I'd count the safety as a turnover.  I don't think, however, that Brady is completely at fault on that play.  The Pats were in max protect and their blocking didn't hold.  The play broke down very fast once Vollmer lost control of Tuck and Brady had no good place to go.  He could have taken a sack, which would have had the same result or tried to throw somewhere else, but he was in the pocket (so throwing the ball out of bounds would have been intentional grounding too) and he only had three receivers (maybe four if you want to count BJGE who was starting to untangle himself from one of the Giants' rushers), all of whom were pretty well covered, since the Giants dropped seven and were rushing only four.  Risking an interception for a potential pick six wasn't exactly a good thing to do either.  Brady tossed the ball down the middle of the field in the general direction of Branch, a throw which often isn't called grounding (though it should be).  That may have been the best of a lot of bad options.  

    When seven blockers can't stop four rushers, you're just in trouble.  Typical Pats-Giants Super Bowl really. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    The intentional grounding in the endzone is a passing turnover. It happend on a "passing" play.

     




    That isn't a "turnover". Just as going for it on 4th down and failing isn't a "turnover" ( that is called a "turnover on downs"). Just as punting the ball isn't a "turnover". "Turnovers" are fumbles recovered by the other team and intercepted passes.

     

     



    Sorry Babe but that is incorrect, a fourth down failure is called a "turnover on downs," the reality is a safety is worse than an interception or fumble (assuming it doesn't get returned for a TD) because you spot the opposing team two points than give them possession of the ball.  

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    That being said the blame game between the offense or defense is nonsensical, we lost to the Ravens because we weren't tough enough on either side of the ball, didn't score enough, didn't stop them from scoring or take the ball away from them.

    With added beef to the interior of the D Line, a physical game changing safety like Adrian Wilson, larger more physical receivers and added tight ends like Ballard and the re-signed Huey we'll be tougher.

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

     

    Wozzy, I think you are looking at the wrong personel for he 3/4. Dont lok at the DL. Look at the DB's. The CB's in a 3/4 need to play more zone than man, zone is not a strength of Dennerd or Talib. They are better press cover/jam/man on man CB's. ALso, the S need to have ange to cover more ground. McCourty is fine, but TWilson, AWilson and Gregory dont cover a lot of ground

     



    Baloney, good corners can do either and we have good corners and safeties, the problems with our defense since the departure of Seymour and Ty Warren is and always has been lack of interior pressure in the trenches.

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

     

    Wozzy, I think you are looking at the wrong personel for he 3/4. Dont lok at the DL. Look at the DB's. The CB's in a 3/4 need to play more zone than man, zone is not a strength of Dennerd or Talib. They are better press cover/jam/man on man CB's. ALso, the S need to have ange to cover more ground. McCourty is fine, but TWilson, AWilson and Gregory dont cover a lot of ground

     



    Baloney, good corners can do either and we have good corners and safeties, the problems with our defense since the departure of Seymour and Ty Warren is and always has been lack of interior pressure in the trenches.



    I dont agree. I feel Talib and Dennerd are best able to press the WR rather than cover a zone. Ditto Arrington.

    I also think that the S needs to be able to cover a zone in a 3/4, which last year TWilson was not ready to do that. We dont know about AWilson as he was taken off the field for most passing downs with AZC

    I do agree that the DL pressure is important to coverage...do you think the Pats addressed that need enough this off season?  

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I dont agree. I feel Talib and Dennerd are best able to press the WR rather than cover a zone. Ditto Arrington.

    I also think that the S needs to be able to cover a zone in a 3/4, which last year TWilson was not ready to do that. We dont know about AWilson as he was taken off the field for most passing downs with AZC

    I do agree that the DL pressure is important to coverage...do you think the Pats addressed that need enough this off season?  



    You'd be hard pressed to find an NFL team that plays either zone or man all the time, just doesn't happen.  Teams also play partial zones and leave one defender manned up on an opposing receiver all the time.  Obviously our corners play press coverage well, both are big and physical, but there are zones that call for pressing at the line of scrimmage as well, so I don't think this has any bearing on whether you employ a 3/4 or 4/3 like you suggested.  Also if you can quickly crush a pocket and hurry the QB, than the coverage you run behind you is almost irrelevant.  I like the acquisition of Kelly and Armstead, we still have to address another nose tackle in the next couple years since Vince isn't getting any younger.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to JohnHannahrulz's comment:

    Please keep in  mind that the Pats D is not a dominant D meaning two things: this current incarnation of the PATS D is still largely dependent on TOs and 2) cannot afford to carry the offense if the O is turning the ball over. In short, the Pats need to win the TO differential game. I would like to see time-consuming drives by the O because the Pats D needs to play better in the 2nd half (not exhausted/ rotational players Kelly Armstead) and the Pats team needs to learn how to win a TOP game.



    Just saying NE's defense is not dominant, so ... we gotta win some other way ... really just kind of sidesteps the thread.

    The idea is improving some aspect of the team that isn't good enough.

    It IS reliant on TOs, but the problem is that those TOs come in games where they are allowed to play from ahead. They seem to disappear in close games.

    For instance, NE is averaging about .5 turnovers created per game in the playoffs in the last 8 years, and has created none in some pretty nip and tuck games in which they exited.

    So sure, we could just say ... well they aren't dominant ... find another way, but I guarantee BB and the Pats' FO isn't thinking that way.

    So we could talk about whether the team took enough steps (point of the thread) to improve the defense so that it can create turnovers against teams that don't have their back to the wall because the offense is scoring 30+ points. 

    Lastly, TOP is determined as much by the defense as it is the offense. Running can artificially remove clock time, but during the course of a game, you win TOP by getting first downs and preventing your opponent from getting first downs. Everything else is secondary. The "milk the clock" running is something you shift too when getting first downs is less important than running a couple minutes off the clock or burning your opponent's time outs. There are far, far too many  examples of dominating TOP through an admixture of short passing and running, but every TOP winning performance has the same two basic ingredients: the offense gets tons of first downs, and the defense doesn't allow many. 

    When you are consistenly ranked in the bottom in defensive 3rd down percentage, and your opponents routinely get 2-3 first downs even on drives they do not score, the defense needs to own it's share of the TOP game. Not that it's terrible to begin with, but you can't have a conversation about TOP, have a defense that is 22nd in 3rd down percentage and 25th in 1st downs allowed, and not bring up what could be done to improve that. Especially when your offense is 1st or top 3 in both of those categories. 

    Now ... the REAL question of the thread after the "theoretical" stuff is done away with: has NE addressed this in the offseason?

    You generate turnovers by forcing the other team to operate under pressure or by simply stripping the ball from them. The best way to get at this is to increase the pressure you can apply to their QB and running back. 

    The addition of Collins with their first selection, the addition of a few other guys on the line show they are aiming at this. Is it enough to improve what they had last season?

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to JohnHannahrulz's comment:

    Rusty. Pretty sure I referred to Brady "throwing a clinker"; this phrase would apply to both the post-season and regular season (see Arizona or Seattle games)and essentially means he can't throw INTs at critical times in either case. Also mentioined that the current stable of RBs could allow the Pats D (and team) to win in tough time of possession game (see Pittsburgh and Balt) against reasonably good defenses and that Kelly and Armstead would improve the DL rotation (already good). Wilson signing and Ryan drafting will improve the secondary.

     



    Hog, discussing this stuff in this thread is off-topic. There are other threads (I'm sure) that discuss this. If there aren't enough, you can always start one of your own. I'll contribute for sure. This is a thread about whether the defense has improved, not one about the offense, certainly not *another* one about a few select posters posturing to assign blame in any direction.

    Lastly, it's certainly not a thread about the running game in particular. NE ran the ball into the ground against Baltimore last season, the end result was what a lot of people here predicted: they don't have a good enough defense to play "power control offense," and even running the ball leads to turnovers (evidenced by the fumble that essentially ended their chances to win). 

    Now if you want to focus the discussion on what NE has done to build the kind of defense that actually compliments a running attack .... we are all ears. Last year, they did not have a defense that compliments a runnning attack/keep away game. Playing low-scoring football plays to this defense's weakness, which is keeping the opponent off the field, and preventing passing scores, which often come as late game scoring in close games.

    IF you want a defense that compliments a running attack, even turnovers aren't enough, you need one that consistently stops the opponent before they even get first downs. Running the ball effectively, while your opponent is passing it effectively is usually a recipe for a loss because passing tends to score more efficiently.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to Macrawn's comment:

    I think they have done enough but barely enough. Dennard and Talib are a good Duo with Arrington in there for the slot. They have enough safeties that if there is an injury McCourty could go to corner. They need one of these picks at corner to be able to learn fast because they are just not deep enough to sustain more than 1 injury at corner. 

    I think the Pats starting D can get the job done. The problem is the depth and I think they did okay in bolstering it but we will see. 

    WR is the biggest issue. If neither of the WR picks pan out and Amendola gets hurt the Pats are going to be searching the reject basket for a guy to come in and play. That's not going to cut it. Given the way the Pats offense is, probably neither of the WR rooks will start the first few games and it's going to look ugly. 



    I agree WR is an issue, but that is another thread. I'm probably going to start one myself. 

    I disagree that NE "has enough" safeties. 

    The idea is having quality, not quantity. Sure, they got bodies into camp. 

    But they are going to need more from TWO of the three safety roles. 1.) they need a guy who can man up underneath against TEs and play in-the-box. BB loves this formation, and will continue to try and use it. 2.) the safety play opposite DMC was horrible last season. True,a  pass rush will allow a lot more cover-1, but you need something better than what Wilson/Gregory/Chung have given you in the past back there. 

    A. Wilson, I think, helps in the first respect. Perhaps development from Tavon Wilson, or a quick maturation process for Duron Harmon could answer the other spot. But going to cover-2 and still giving up big gainers (a familiar sight to Pats fans) is crushing to a defense: you've gone through the steps to commit an extra player somewhere and still failed, leaving you weakened at both ends of the field. 

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    The intentional grounding in the endzone is a passing turnover. It happend on a "passing" play.

     




    That isn't a "turnover". Just as going for it on 4th down and failing isn't a "turnover" ( that is called a "turnover on downs"). Just as punting the ball isn't a "turnover". "Turnovers" are fumbles recovered by the other team and intercepted passes.

     

     

    So we'll agree to disagree on the semantics but Brady had two costly mental mistakes/decisions in that superbowl resulting in lost possesions/turnovers.



    Well, we will disagree, because I find Brady much less at fault for that safety than his teammates.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    ZB, first off I totally respect your opinion; secondly i referred to the Pats playing better  football (includes nickel, dime and 3rd down). This can happen with a better pass rush (someone other than Jones applying pressure and Wilfork and Dreaderick collapsing the pocket); Collins as edge rusher? I add that we have to see what the new D (Wilson, Ryan, Collins) is capable of in both 4-3 and 3-4 alignment (is Chandler the elephant?). I see everything as a function of the personel you have (this is why I can see Collins as an edge rusher or coverage OLB 4.6 speed/long arms). As an optimist I do think or hope that Kelly and Armstead will help provide some rotational flexibility on the defensive line. I've stated numerous times that I did feel the Pats had a D that often played well the 1st half and lost some of its edge in 2nd half giving up 3rd and longs too often (hence the comment about situational football). I do believe that, to some degree, this defense is predicated on turnovers. It just looks like it is functioning better when they create TOs. Also think that some players on the Pats D a very valuable; in the sense that the Pats D cannot afford to lose Wilfork, Mayo or Talib. It was fairly clear that after Talib went down the secondary noticably suffered (see Marquice Cole). The primary reason that I mention Collins and Wilson is that ,ideally, I could see both as providing coverage on TEs and RBs both in the box and outside the box. Curiousity tempered with some mild optimism is how I view this defense.

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to JohnHannahrulz's comment:

     

    ZB, first off I totally respect your opinion; secondly i referred to the Pats playing better  football (includes nickel, dime and 3rd down). This can happen with a better pass rush (someone other than Jones applying pressure and Wilfork and Dreaderick collapsing the pocket); Collins as edge rusher? I add that we have to see what the new D (Wilson, Ryan, Collins) is capable of in both 4-3 and 3-4 alignment (is Chandler the elephant?). I see everything as a function of the personel you have (this is why I can see Collins as an edge rusher or coverage OLB 4.6 speed/long arms). As an optimist I do think or hope that Kelly and Armstead will help provide some rotational flexibility on the defensive line. I've stated numerous times that I did feel the Pats had a D that often played well the 1st half and lost some of its edge in 2nd half giving up 3rd and longs too often (hence the comment about situational football). I do believe that, to some degree, this defense is predicated on turnovers. It just looks like it is functioning better when they create TOs. Also think that some players on the Pats D a very valuable; in the sense that the Pats D cannot afford to lose Wilfork, Mayo or Talib. It was fairly clear that after Talib went down the secondary noticably suffered (see Marquice Cole). The primary reason that I mention Collins and Wilson is that ,ideally, I could see both as providing coverage on TEs and RBs both in the box and outside the box. Curiousity tempered with some mild optimism is how I view this defense.

     



    Yeah. That is a good assessment. I think at the end of the day what you mean to say is NE's defense is thin. That is an issue people don't talk about enough. I think Mayo is great, but not someone they would miss as bad as Fork (for instance), simply because they have quality at ILB/OLB. 

    But they have very, very little after a few guys at their positions.

    At this point I would say it goes Fork > DMC > Jones/Talib > Mayo for importance. That isn't a reflection of how good each player is only, but a combined look at that and how bad the people who back them up are. What is the talent drop off, I guess I'm asking. 

    Really, I think they would miss DMC MORE than Talib. Why? Everyone at safety not named DMC has been a nightmare, whereas NE doesn't really have a shutdown corner, per se, but Dennard was good. If Dennard or Talib go down you can mask it a bit by rolling DMC over their backup.

    I really was glad NE went for a CB in the third with Ryan. They really need a 3rd corner who can play outside. They also need a few more quality big bodies, because, as I elaborate in this thread, NE is really farther behind there compared to the halcyon days (lol) than at any other roster spot.

    Don't mind optimism at all. I'm in the middle. Pessimism and optimism are both fine with me. 

    As far as getting tired out goes ... I don't buy it. It's something you hear about from a few posters on this forum, but they never apply it to other teams (why are their defenses never tired?) or offenses (they don't get tired?). 

    If NE's defense is only good for a half, you have major, major conditioning issues. Baltimore scored right out of the gate in the 3rd. That is after the defense had a long playoff halftime, plus two  drives by their own team separating it. Then they gave up another score on the very next drive. 

    I think it has to do with BB being a very good coach with some marginal talent to work with. He can scheme his way around some deficiencies, but at the end of the day, once an opposing HC has had a two or three quarters to look at his plan, the players simply have to execute. 

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    Well I look at what was added this off season...Armstead, Kelly, Wilson, Collins and Talib (I'm going to pretend he's new).

    We really have no clue what Armstead will bring, but I've got to say I've been very impressed with just about every video I've seen of him online. To me this guy moves better than any defensive lineman we have on the roster, and maybe better than any big man we've had since Seymore was young. His addition (along with Collins confuses me though)....I picture Armstead in the middle pass rushing in a 43. I picture Collins in a 34 playing outside.

    Kelly should be a solid addition.

    Wilson I could see maybe coming in and helping the team before wearing down and getting tired. I think if we were to ever get the bye this year it would help a guy like him.

    Collins was a head scratcher to me to be honest, but I like his talent. I think this team really was missing what Mark Anderson gave us two years ago...I can see him coming in on third downs and giving us that type of speed rush. Jones really opened up things on the other side of the line for us, yet no one really took advantage of it as well as they could - I can see Collins capitalizing on that.

    Talib (along with Dennard) really gives us two corners that make things at least so opposing qb's aren't allowed to complete passes that high school quarterbacks could hit. I mean it's been ridiculous how easy our secondary has made it on these quarterbacks over the years...these guys changed that a bit. I remember the game we played against Denver last season and Manning really tested Dennard...Dennard made the throws difficult to complete and he actually stopped some of them. Those are things that we didn't have before. If Talib stays healthy we will have two guys that can do that...that's huge. Huge.

    So there are some questions for sure, but I think progress has been made. I will say I thought they could of done better and I've lost some confidence in their ability to acquire players through free agency, but I think Talib and Dennard automatically make the defense better.

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    I jumped from screen 1 to screen 4 so if this is redundant I apologize.

    I think the D is greatly improved fom the START of last season. Partly due to the judicial system of Nebraska allowing Dennard to play this year. Talib and Dennard big improvement! Arrington and Collins nickel guys depending upon spread sets, extra WR or Hback, 2TE .

    adressing Abraham . living in New York , I would listen to WFAN ( Joe Bonigno especially ) and they were constantly complaining about Abrahams injury absence late in the season. That was with the Jets .. how much older and susceptible to injury is he now? I do not know his recent track record ..Atlnta???

    ill take Kelly and really want to see this Armstead guy

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    This seems like a good one to bump. Look at the comments on this thread Wozzy. Some like Z are a little hesitant to say what he will be, but you clearly are leading the charge. You say on page 1 that you expect him to start day 1 in the 3-4. Mt Hurl also noted he is like a 2nd round pick and you said even though he was signed, you consider him a draft pick. I'll go back a but further and find more.

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

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

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    This seems like a good one to bump. Look at the comments on this thread Wozzy. Some like Z are a little hesitant to say what he will be, but you clearly are leading the charge. You say on page 1 that you expect him to start day 1 in the 3-4. Mt Hurl also noted he is like a 2nd round pick and you said even though he was signed, you consider him a draft pick. I'll go back a but further and find more.

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver



    Don't really know why it was bumped, but it's a good thread. To me the key is still Armstead...we need another talented big guy, if we don't get that from him (or another), is Kelley enough?

    I remember when we were winning those Super Bowls, we could roll out three superior defensive linemen and that was key. At one point we had three first round picks starting on that line (Wilfork, Seymore, Warren), those were three 300 pounders that could move...and not be moved. I remember the day Wilfork fell into our laps - I was so excited - I watched him destroy tripple blocks in college...tripple!! He would just power into two guys and then run right over the other to blow up plays. Parcells at the time said you could build an entire team around Wilfork, he was right. It really can't be understated how much he does for this defense, he is the one guy who if goes down the lights will go out. I saw Mayo go down for four weeks and Guyton came in and with Wilfork in front of him, it didn't matter.

    We need three of them...we got Kelley...we need one more.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Don't really know why it was bumped, but it's a good thread. To me the key is still Armstead...we need another talented big guy, if we don't get that from him (or another), is Kelley enough?

     

    I remember when we were winning those Super Bowls, we could roll out three superior defensive linemen and that was key. At one point we had three first round picks starting on that line (Wilfork, Seymore, Warren), those were three 300 pounders that could move...and not be moved. I remember the day Wilfork fell into our laps - I was so excited - I watched him destroy tripple blocks in college...tripple!! He would just power into two guys and then run right over the other to blow up plays. Parcells at the time said you could build an entire team around Wilfork, he was right. It really can't be understated how much he does for this defense, he is the one guy who if goes down the lights will go out. I saw Mayo go down for four weeks and Guyton came in and with Wilfork in front of him, it didn't matter.

    We need three of them...we got Kelley...we need one more.




    Warren and Seymour were top 15 picks.  I don't think we are going to have another one of those anytime soon.  I would love to have another guy to go along with Kelly and Vince, but DT might be the thinnest position in the NFL.  Are there any defenses in the NFL right now that can put out a line that rivals what the dynasty teams had?  I have high hopes for Armstead as well, but I think we're going to have to make due with what we have (which should be better than last year as Kelly appears to be a pretty big upgrade to Love and Deaderick).

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Don't really know why it was bumped, but it's a good thread. To me the key is still Armstead...we need another talented big guy, if we don't get that from him (or another), is Kelley enough?

     

    I remember when we were winning those Super Bowls, we could roll out three superior defensive linemen and that was key. At one point we had three first round picks starting on that line (Wilfork, Seymore, Warren), those were three 300 pounders that could move...and not be moved. I remember the day Wilfork fell into our laps - I was so excited - I watched him destroy tripple blocks in college...tripple!! He would just power into two guys and then run right over the other to blow up plays. Parcells at the time said you could build an entire team around Wilfork, he was right. It really can't be understated how much he does for this defense, he is the one guy who if goes down the lights will go out. I saw Mayo go down for four weeks and Guyton came in and with Wilfork in front of him, it didn't matter.

    We need three of them...we got Kelley...we need one more.

     




    Warren and Seymour were top 15 picks.  I don't think we are going to have another one of those anytime soon.  I would love to have another guy to go along with Kelly and Vince, but DT might be the thinnest position in the NFL.  Are there any defenses in the NFL right now that can put out a line that rivals what the dynasty teams had?  I have high hopes for Armstead as well, but I think we're going to have to make due with what we have (which should be better than last year as Kelly appears to be a pretty big upgrade to Love and Deaderick).

     



    I agree and really Wilfork should of been a top 15 pick (easy), I just hope we have enough because I've been surprised how thin we've been at that spot for four years.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

     

    I see surprise kids coming from other teams all the time. Lets be real,  the picks Pryor, Deaderick, Brace, etc all hurt this team by not providing anything. I like Kelly but of course you need more. Guys get hurt. My biggest problem is seeing things like last year. We played Wilfork and Love by themselves on the line for half a season before Deaderick made the field and allowed those guys to rest. We wasted roster spots on them last year. With a whole offseason, if we come away with only Kelly, thats disappointing. Armstead aint gonna make the team if he stays hurt. Thats my point and whats after that? Fortson?  We got waaay too many fringe players that play olb/de and not enough pure 3-4 Ends. If they arent there, then draft another position but dont draft stiffs just to say u did.

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    This seems like a good one to bump. Look at the comments on this thread Wozzy. Some like Z are a little hesitant to say what he will be, but you clearly are leading the charge. You say on page 1 that you expect him to start day 1 in the 3-4. Mt Hurl also noted he is like a 2nd round pick and you said even though he was signed, you consider him a draft pick. I'll go back a but further and find more.

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver



    You seem to think I am denying my saying Armstead will be a good player, I'm not.  I'm saying lumping Armstead and Vega into the same boat is nonsensical, Vega was a long shot and didn't even play the same position.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    This seems like a good one to bump. Look at the comments on this thread Wozzy. Some like Z are a little hesitant to say what he will be, but you clearly are leading the charge. You say on page 1 that you expect him to start day 1 in the 3-4. Mt Hurl also noted he is like a 2nd round pick and you said even though he was signed, you consider him a draft pick. I'll go back a but further and find more.

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver



    Are you bumping this about Kelly or Armstead?

    If Kelley, I'm still on the fence, not about whether he starts but about his total impact as a player. And a lot of that has to do with how much he can see the field. He has the potential to be a good player here. I don't think he'll be a dominant force though, but a guy who assists by offering something that NE doesn't currently have -- a big man who can get into the backfield a bit. 

    On the snaps ... you could be looking at a guy that gets you 25-35% of the snaps? Or are you looking at someone who is going to give you 40-60% A workhorse 70-90%?

     

    Vince Wilfork led the charge last season totalling 888 of 1096 defensive snaps, 81%. That is actually quite a bit for a big man.

    Love finished up behind Fork with 543 of 1096 defensive snaps for 49% with Brandon Dreaderick on his heels at 374 of 1096 for 34%.

    The Pats were only in their 4-3 under base front for 40% of the snaps, and Love really filled that "undertackle" type role, next to Wilfork's "hybrid" role where he was flexed around the front in various one and two gap assignments.

    Because of the alignment the Raiders run, Kelley has been in the 70-80% area the last few seasons, notching 73% last season with a total of 756 snaps.

    I don't think NE will need that many snaps from him, and looking at his skillset and its synergies with Willfork's I think they could bother get a breather more often than they are used to.

    1.) Tommy Kelley is an average run defender. There is a great breakdown of this in his Scouts Inc report, and in a feature on Bleacher Report.

    2.) Tommy Kelley is great at shooting gaps when he has someone there to get the heat off of him (witness how he really blossomed in the respect when Oakland brought in Sey).

    3.) VW isn't the best pass rusher but is more of a garbage eater.

    Perhaps snaps in base will see an even distribution, but he gives them an option to breath Wilfork on some sub-packages with three man fronts.  

    Given the amount NE subs, it might not be an issue overall. I think penciling him in to start is easy, partly because he is a quality player, partly because NE has no other great options up front, partly because starting in NE (and the NFL) isn't the load that it used to be.

    I think NE will use him effectively, but will limit his snap count. He is a guy who can play three downs, but will get spells. Barring injuries, I think he will produce for 45-65% of the snaps, and will do so productively. 

    I think that keeps him fresh, and it allows him to complicate things for offenses espcially from sub packages and on later downs, where NE has lacked a presence like that. He adds a dimension, in that regard, that Love never did. Though I don't think he adds it for many more snaps, and should slot in just a bit more, while letting Wilfork rest a little.  

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    We got waaay too many fringe players that play olb/de and not enough pure 3-4 Ends. 

     



    So. NE doesn't run a "3-4" and haven't for a few seasons. Jones also put on another 10 pounds and ha come in looking like 270-5 lb guy. NE doesn't need any more 300 lb guys just as depth ... the questions we are looking at should be ... what can be expected at DE from some combination of Jones and Ninkovich, et al. Not about the rare situations where TK might be lined up at end.  

    They run a 43 under-hybrid. It really only requires two big men. You still need a three or four big guys, but Dreaderick, et al, can suffice as depth. 

    Tommy Kelley is an improvemnt in this regard, he is a far better pass rusher than Love. That is enough for me.  

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Gasper pre-draft: Have Pats improved their D?

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    This seems like a good one to bump. Look at the comments on this thread Wozzy. Some like Z are a little hesitant to say what he will be, but you clearly are leading the charge. You say on page 1 that you expect him to start day 1 in the 3-4. Mt Hurl also noted he is like a 2nd round pick and you said even though he was signed, you consider him a draft pick. I'll go back a but further and find more.

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

     



    Are you bumping this about Kelly or Armstead?

     

    If Kelley, I'm still on the fence, not about whether he starts but about his total impact as a player. And a lot of that has to do with how much he can see the field. He has the potential to be a good player here. I don't think he'll be a dominant force though, but a guy who assists by offering something that NE doesn't currently have -- a big man who can get into the backfield a bit. 

    On the snaps ... you could be looking at a guy that gets you 25-35% of the snaps? Or are you looking at someone who is going to give you 40-60% A workhorse 70-90%?

     

    Vince Wilfork led the charge last season totalling 888 of 1096 defensive snaps, 81%. That is actually quite a bit for a big man.

    Love finished up behind Fork with 543 of 1096 defensive snaps for 49% with Brandon Dreaderick on his heels at 374 of 1096 for 34%.

    The Pats were only in their 4-3 under base front for 40% of the snaps, and Love really filled that "undertackle" type role, next to Wilfork's "hybrid" role where he was flexed around the front in various one and two gap assignments.

    Because of the alignment the Raiders run, Kelley has been in the 70-80% area the last few seasons, notching 73% last season with a total of 756 snaps.

    I don't think NE will need that many snaps from him, and looking at his skillset and its synergies with Willfork's I think they could bother get a breather more often than they are used to.

    1.) Tommy Kelley is an average run defender. There is a great breakdown of this in his Scouts Inc report, and in a feature on Bleacher Report.

    2.) Tommy Kelley is great at shooting gaps when he has someone there to get the heat off of him (witness how he really blossomed in the respect when Oakland brought in Sey).

    3.) VW isn't the best pass rusher but is more of a garbage eater.

    Perhaps snaps in base will see an even distribution, but he gives them an option to breath Wilfork on some sub-packages with three man fronts.  

    Given the amount NE subs, it might not be an issue overall. I think penciling him in to start is easy, partly because he is a quality player, partly because NE has no other great options up front, partly because starting in NE (and the NFL) isn't the load that it used to be.

    I think NE will use him effectively, but will limit his snap count. He is a guy who can play three downs, but will get spells. Barring injuries, I think he will produce for 45-65% of the snaps, and will do so productively. 

    I think that keeps him fresh, and it allows him to complicate things for offenses espcially from sub packages and on later downs, where NE has lacked a presence like that. He adds a dimension, in that regard, that Love never did. Though I don't think he adds it for many more snaps, and should slot in just a bit more, while letting Wilfork rest a little.  




    I bumped it more so to look at Armstead maybe getting cut but I appreciate the info on Kelly as well. I agree he is more of a sub rusher than a run defender but I think the Pats play him a lot. They dont have much else. The other option is hybrid fronts. 2-2- 5's, 3-3-5's like last year and the big nickel. IN Nickel I think you see guys subbing in like Collins, Bequette, Benard, Buchanan,etc. So Kelly can rest when they go to subpackages. I mean there is talent there but a guy like J.Jones didnt sign for THAT much. Would have liked to see less quantity and maybe a couple cant miss free agents. We tried for Red Bryant 2 years ago and were too cheap and then got Fanene who fleeced us with his bad knee injury we should have known about. Got to spend there sooner or later but due to Wilforks conctract, they probably have reached thier spending limit with D-lineman..

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share