NFC West Roundtable: Inside Linebacker
Middle linebacker Lofa Tatupu started his career with three consecutive Pro Bowl appearances. His fourth season was shot to shit to by injuries. Tatupu badly bruised his knee in week three of the preseason. At the time the diagnosis was a relief, but a bone bruise is painful and can linger for months. Tatupu was listed as probable for the first two weeks of the season. He broke his thumb against Buffalo and didn't have surgery to repair it until January. As of April 9, 2009, he was still wearing a cast. In week seven at Tampa Bay, Tatupu suffered a concussion in the second quarter and missed the remainder of the game. He played in week eight against San Francisco, but was again forced out of action in the first half. This time Tatupu suffered a strained groin. Tatupu appeared as "questionable" in week nine and didn't play against the Philadelphia Eagles. It was the first missed game of his career.
To some—and most confoundingly so—that validated their belief that Tatupu is overrated. It’s a label that started at the 2005 NFL Combine. Tatupu measured an eighth of an inch shorter than six feet and weighed a stocky, but small for a linebacker, 238. His forty time, 4.83, is surpassed by some linemen. That led Tim Ruskell’s decision to trade up to acquire Lofa Tatupu in the middle of the second round to be widely criticized by draft pundits and those that ape their opinions. His early success and quick fame fueled the backlash.
Now, Pro Bowls are not a particularly keen measure of talent. Many scouts are dubious that Tatupu is an elite middle linebacker. His range isn’t exceptional. Even in his better seasons, his tackle numbers are pedestrian and that’s always going to be the money number for linebackers. It shouldn’t be.
Some players produce tackles all over the field. Others are just cleaning up. Oakland Raiders Kirk Morrison and Gibril Wilson ranked fifth and sixth in total tackles for 2008. Their team ranked first in opponent rushing attempts and 27th in rushing yards allowed per attempt. Their run defense sucked. Morrison and Wilson converted the tackles others didn’t.
Tatupu makes productive tackles. He doesn’t get too far outside the tackles box, but the ball carrier doesn’t get too far from the line of scrimmage either. In 2007, he was involved in 63 fewer plays, but had the same number of defeats* as Patrick Willis: 30. He stopped 66 runs and those runs averaged just 2.2 yards.
Tatupu also excels against the pass. He has nine interceptions and 29 passes defended over four seasons. He is smart and disciplined in a zone and makes up for his average speed with great decision making and precise angles. Tatupu is mostly a support blitzer: Bating the lead blocker or pressuring and sometimes hitting, but rarely converting the sack.
What makes Tatupu special though is his leadership. I shy from celebrating what is often a media creation, but Tatupu isn’t a presence or a legend, he’s player that smartly audibles stunts, picks out routes and points out plays before they happen. That is, he isn’t the kind of leader that contributes swagger, he’s the kind that teaches, directs and maximizes the talent around him. Kind of like Mike Singletary…
Mike Singletary the player, that is.
Seattle’s depth is debatable. D.D. Lewis is a serviceable starter at all three linebacker positions that has improved as a run stopper and is capable enough in pass pro. David Hawthorne is a hard hitting run stopper that’s not yet ready for Sunday. The wildcard is Aaron Curry. A player that probably could play middle linebacker in a pinch, and like almost everything football related, would be damn good at it. But no one expects Tatupu to miss time, and so because Seattle is starting a Hall of Fame-potential middle linebacker in his prime, I’m giving the Seahawks an A+ -- rules be damned.
San Francisco 49ers
Blogger: Fooch
The 49ers don't have a ton of depth at inside linebacker. If Patrick Willis were to go down, the team would be in a whole heapload of trouble. Nonetheless, Willis is a tough guy who has played through pain in the past. Additionally, guys like Ulbrich and McKillop will be able to spell an older veteran like Takeo Spikes. That helps the grade, but the talent that is starting for the 49ers alone gives me sufficient reason to grade them out as an A unit.
Arizona Cardinals
Blogger: cgolden
For at least one more season the Arizona Cardinals should boast an inside linebacking crew that well above average, at least as far as the starters are concerned. I say for at least one more season because it's pretty clear that Karlos Dansby is ready and waiting to jump into what he hopes is a very lucrative free agent pool in next year's uncapped NFL. He's quietly become one of the better inside linebackers in the league and there's no reason to think that this season couldn't be his best yet. As you'd expect from an inside backer, Dansby is capable of making plays from sideline to sideline and he can deliver a significant blow once he reaches the ball carrier. What sets him apart from many backers though is his ability to rush the pass just as well as he plays the run or drops into coverage. There are a certain faction of fans that even champion moving him to the OLB spot in the Cardinals new 3-4 defense since he'd likely be the pass rusher on the team from the outside. Despite the backwoods campaign though Dansby isn't moving and the Cardinals are expecting big things out of the 27 year old backer, especially considering that they're paying him almost ten million dollars this season.
The unsung hero of the Cardinals defense for the past several years is Gerald Hayes. Since missing the entire 2005 season with in injury, he's played in 46 of 48 games and averaged 93 tackles per season. He isn't flashy or dynamic but he's the perverbial 'thumper' in the middle of the Cards defense and he'll jar a couple of fumbles loose every season with his punishing hits. He's at his best when he can diagnose a play in front of him and move downhill towards the ball and along the same lines he's a decent pass rusher, although he'll prefer to run over a defender as opposed to running around or spinning around them. He's not necessarily a 'two down' backer but the Cardinals use Adrian Wilson like a linebacker on passing downs so Hayes will come off field at times in those situations. You won't find Hayes on Sportscenter but he's one of the 'glue' guys that hold this defense together.
The Cardinals lost their top backup LB, Monty Beisel, to the Chiefs in free agency so their depth is a bit thin. Ali Highsmith and/or Victor Hobson should get the first shot at backing up Dansby and Hayes. Highsmith, an undrafted rookie last year, showed promise during the preseason last year and was making a name for himself on special teams before a torn ACL ended his season prematurely. The biggest question for him will be his health and how much size he's put on during his first season of professional ball. Hobson is a veteran of the 3-4 defense and had a 100 tackle, six sack season in 2006, but since then he's been cut by the Jets, Patriots and Bengals. He played on the outside in 2006 but the Cardinals think that with his size (6-0, 254) he'll be better utilized on the inside. Also on the radar is Pago Togafua but his lack of size (5-10, 240) suggests that he's nothing more than a special team's contributor. Two undrafted free agents are also in the picture, Reggie Walker and Chase Bullock, but it's hard to tell how much of an impact they will make. With the lack of quality depth anything is possible though.
Overall the Cardinals have a very solid starting duo (dare I say A-range) but the depth leaves quite a bit to be desired. Taking that into consideration I can't go any higher than a grade of B.
Turf Show Times
Blogger: VanRam
In a division trademarked for its linebackers, the St. Louis Rams were embarrassingly substandard last year, thanks to poor decision making that left Will Witherspoon in the middle and arrogantly allowed an emerging Brandon Chillar to flee for greener, more frozen pastures. Addressing the situation at linebacker has been a top offseason priority for the defensive-minded new regime led by head coach Steve Spagnuolo and defensive coordinator Ken Flajole.
The Rams are in a much better place with their linebackers than they have been in a long, long time, thanks mostly to the addition of Laurinaitis and Witherspoon's move back to his natural spot. There are still very real concerns about depth here, and it would surprise no one to see the team pluck a roster casualty when teams start making cuts this fall. Spagnuolo and Flajole have reputations for finding diamonds in the rough among defensive players and their success with linebackers is being counted upon here.
0 recs |
180 comments
|
Comments
A+?
Atta boy. Rules are stupid.
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
by Dukeshire on Jul 24, 2009 12:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the confidence
and I honestly believe Tatupu will have a monster year
by TheSteelersRuinedMyBirthday on Jul 24, 2009 12:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dirty words and an A+ grade
Sounds like someone is drinking on the job starting their weekend a little early.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 12:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Leroy Hill was not mentioned at all?
Though Patrick Willis is the best player between the corps of SF & ARI, I think Arizona as a unit is slightly better & stronger.
Didn’t see the letter grade for the Rams in there, but they’re corps doesn’t look as bad as I thought. But we’re talking 2009, not 2008.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 12:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
starters....maybe but the depth behind Danby and Hayes is highly questionable at best
basically non-existent at worse
Be careful....to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
by Bezekira on Jul 24, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leroy Hill is an outside linebacker
not an inside linebacker
by rex92 on Jul 24, 2009 12:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So did VanRam
who wrote about the entire LB corps, not just the MLBs (and then didn’t grade them).
by The Ancient Mariner on Jul 24, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That said, didn't Leroy played MLB in college?
He could probably counted as depth.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He did
but his cover skills are iffy enough that he would be way down the depth chart.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Way to release the steam
…built up during your restrained analysis of all the position groups before now. You were bound to explode sooner or later, and this was as likely a position group as any. Good call, love the A+.
by maimster on Jul 24, 2009 1:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great stuff, John
In the middle of the dimmest doldrums of the off-season… here’s John Morgan continuing to publish great stuff week after week.
It will be a big improvement this year if we can see Tatupu stay healthy. We need him back 100%.
by Stevo's on Jul 24, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not even the middle
throughout, til the end. Rookies report in 6 days!
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every time I read these roundtables
I check out the comments on Niners Nation, where hordes of fans are apopleptic about anything remotely critical of their team or favorable about the Seahawks. Although in this case they may have a point.
by Suburban Shocker on Jul 24, 2009 3:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not yet drinking the kool aid
On Lofa.
Well, let me rephrase that. I think he’s awesome, but not in agreement with the A+. I think his leadership qualities and skills are fantastic. I think that for an MLB, he gets swallowed up by blockers way too easily, which seems to be a liability from your MLB. He’s getting increasingly ineffective when blitzing. He doesn’t seem to have very good closing speed, and gets beaten even when he has the angle.
I’d give him a B – which I think is great – there’s nothing wrong with that. Given his athletic shortcomings, that’s pretty impressive. He definitely requires the DTs to keep people off of him to have an “A” season, and the A+ middle linebackers in the NFL are able to slip or stand up blocks, since they play in constant traffic in the middle.
I don’t feel that Lofa is anywhere near Mike Singletary level – Singletary was physically relentless, had focus and leadership without peer, and was better than Lofa at every part of the game except perhaps zone pass coverage.
This doesn’t mean I’m not a fan – I think especially with getting a great athlete like Curry will help him focus on those things you mentioned that he’s so good at.
by PerryCollective on Jul 24, 2009 4:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I felt the same way during his rookie year.
His second season he wrapped up better, still struggled with traffic. His third season he looked like he had been on steriods, he was throwing OGs around all season long. Last year he didn’t look like that, but with reminders for all of the injuries I am not ready to blame the DT position on this team, rather I think he did his best with some very tough injuries.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Lofa has improved greatly at fighting through blockers. That’s one of the reasons he gets so many tackles for a loss and tackles close to the line of scrimmage.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would anyone trade Lofa Tatupu for another middle linebacker straight up?
Or even another inside linebacker?
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 4:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great question
and no. Urlacher and the like are a wash with him — Urlacher has incredible size and speed, but not quite as savvy or as good of a team captain. Ray Lewis was better. Tats is what Zach Thomas always wanted to be.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Demeco Ryans would make a short list of 'maybes'.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Jul 26, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I fail to see
How the Seahawks can be better a ILB than the Niners. Insult Singletary all you want, but Patrick Willis is better than Lofa Tatupu, period. The fact that takeo Spikes is better than any other ILB the Seahawks have is just gravy. And giving an A+ rating for a borderline probowler really makes me question the ridiculous bashing that you guys have for Fooch every time he grades the Niners a bit too high. QB’s aside, the analysis here has been just as biased.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 4:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually we agreed to rank both San Francisco and Seattle first.
“Patrick Willis is better than Lofa Tatupu, period.” is a compelling argument, though.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think any argument is needed.
Would you honestly debate that point?
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Patrick WIllis really isn't as good as Niners fans like to think.
He’s good, for sure, but you people seem to have elevated him to some kind of a demigod.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 24, 2009 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe not as good as we think
I do think it’s fair to say he one of the top 2-3 LB’s in the game though, and Tatupu is just not in that category.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
An argument is always needed if you want to be taken seriously.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Willis is better than Tatupu
Can I back that up with numbers or notes that I have, no. But I think that is a pretty fair opinion that many people share and I don’t think numbers are going to shed too much light on the situation.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just because alot of people think one thing
Doesn’t make it true.
Fox news, anybody?
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 24, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about we stay away from politics.
by russak on Jul 24, 2009 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, please.
Even the goddamned 49’ers > politicians.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 25, 2009 3:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please
We’re not even touching on politics here, it is simply a well known fact that Fox News uses repetition of a thing to get its viewers to believe their side of the story
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 25, 2009 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As opposed to other news channels.
by John Morgan on Jul 25, 2009 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh,
For the most part. At least the others aren’t as blatant.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 26, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So...
You prefer stations that pretend not to be biased but still are to one that flaunts it.
To be honest, I dislike both approaches, but I slightly respect Fox more for being open about their bias, even though I hate their method.
by cashless on Jul 26, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fox News: Fair and Balenced

No, not hiding their bias at all!
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 26, 2009 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, it could be implying
that they are being fair and balanced by showing a conservative side to balance out the liberal side from another station.
Lets cut them some slack, after all, they are letting us decide and that’s very gracious of them.
by LantermanC on Jul 27, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
GTFO, seriously
You can’t be in here just making stuff up. “Borderline probowler”? WTF does that mean?
Tatupu went to the Pro Bowl every year he was in the league until last year, when he was was plagued by injuries. Spikes hasn’t even sniffed a Pro Bowl in 5 years (while playing in much larger media markets than Seattle).
You can argue all you want that Willis is better, but I’m not going to get into that with you. Both players offer different strengths working in different schemes alongside different teammates. Willis is a physical beast that is a great individual athlete. He racks up great stats, but he’s also probably taking a few tackles away from less teammates. Meanwhile, Tatupu, though smaller and less athletic, offers a lot in terms of on-the-field leadership and scheming, in addition well-above-average play. Tatupu’s direction helps his teammates play better as a group.
I’m not going to defend the A+ rating, but I understand the thinking behind it.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Willis makes splashy plays
but Tatupu is a much better pass defender and pass defense is many time more important than run defense. Flashy run tackles are the RBIs of football.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When I think of Tatupu, I remember that game in Philly in 2007
11 tackles and 3 interceptions (with one on the Hawks’ 7 yard line with 2 minutes to go in the game). Dude was a straight-up beast.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has arguably starting-reciever-class hands
Now SPEED, that’s another thing, but he picks great lanes in that game for his returns.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 24, 2009 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never said Spikes was anything special
Just that he’s better than any of your other ILB’s (minus Tatupu). What I meant by borderline probowler is someone who deserves pro bowl consideration but is not a near lock to go, like an Adrian Peterson or a Patrick Willis. Sorry, should have worded that better.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean our MLBs suck because our backups aren't as good as your ILB starters?
What kind of sense does that make? The quality of the MLB/ILB corps isn’t additive.
We only play one MLB at a time. You guys play two ILB at a time. 100% of our starting MLBs are awesome. 50% of your starting ILBs are awesome. Does that mean our starting MLBs are twice as good as your starting ILBs? That makes about as much sense as what you were trying to say earlier.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's what makes the Niners clearly better in my mind
Willis > Tatupu
Spikes > D.D. Lewis
That’s it, simple as that. Unless we’re going to start arguing about the 3rd and 4th best LB’s on each team making up the difference, or if you disagree with my view on the top two, I don’t see what there is to debate here.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's an apples and oranges comparison
Lewis doesn’t start. Spikes does. A better comparison would be the average of Spikes and Willis compared to Tatupu alone.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
To me the rankings are about which group of players you would rather have. You mean to tell me you wouldn’t trade Tatupu, Lewis, et al for the Niners LB’s?
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rankings are about how effective a group of players is within the system they are playing.
To say San Francisco is better because it has two starters is ludicrous.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't recall saying that.
My point was the Niners best linebacker is better than the Hawks best linebacker, the Niners second best linebacker is better than the Hawks second best linebacker, the Niners third best linebacker is better than the Hawks 3rd best linebacker (not sure about that), and so forth. Therefore, I conclude that the Niners linebackers are better. Not so ludicrous.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure it is
Let’s, for arguments sake, say Willis and Tatupu are equal.
Then we can center on the both team’s second best linebacker. And again, let’s say for arguments sake that Spikes is a “C” and Lewis is a “D”. Lewis is likely to see 0-300 snaps in 2009. He had 277 in 2008 and that was with abnormally poor health from Seattle’s linebacker corps. Spikes is likely to get something like 600-1,000 snaps. I figure that’s about right without knowing a ton about Singletary’s substitution patterns.
Now let’s assign simplified but logical points to each grade.
A = 5
B = 4
C = 3
…and so on. If Tatupu and Willis both get 1,000 snaps and both are 5s, you could say they are worth 5,000 “points”. Spikes then averages 800 snaps at 3 points and Lewis averages 150 snaps at 2 points.
Seattle’s inside linebackers, because they play one elite linebacker and not one elite linebacker and one average linebacker, are worth 5,300 points over 1,150 snaps or about 4.61 points a snap. Whereas Willis and Spikes are worth 7,400 over 1,800 snaps. You’re saying that because 7,400 is larger than 5,300 (Ie San Francisco’s top two linebackers are better than Seattle’s top two linebackers) that San Francisco has the better inside linebackers. But, because San Francisco must have two inside linebackers on most plays and because that means a lesser player is involved in more plays, San Francisco’s inside linebackers are only worth 4.11 points a snap.
Spikes actually makes San Francisco’s linebackers worse not better.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll try to respond to this in more depth in a bit
But for now I’ll say that I think you are weighing schemes too heavily. If a team starts 4 WR’s and 0 TE’s or FB’s then I don’t think that means you should grade them more harshly. If their top 4 wideouts are better than another team’s top 4 wideouts, then their wideouts are better, regardless if the other team only starts 1 or 2 WR’s.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you believe the Raiders DTs should be rated higher than the Chargers NT?
Jamal Williams and the two no-name scrub backing him up(who wouldn’t play cause they would move Louis Castillo over to NT from starting DE) are not as good collectively as Gerard Warren, Terdell Sands, and Tommy Kelly?
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure they are
I’d take Jamal Williams and his backup over Gerard Warren and Tommy Kelly easily.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also though
This isn’t a good example because Jamal Williams is clearly better than all of the Raiders DT’s. Lofa Tatupu isn’t clearly better than all of the Niners ILB’s.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the issue is his backups are horrible.
A 4-3 might more likely take three DTs from the Raiders than Jamal Williams and two scrubs. Plus, Gerard Warren is no slouch when he isn’t injured, he makes up some of the ground.
Mostly this was an example about a scheme. A 4-3 team with Jamal Williams and two scrubs would never get an inside pass rush, and one of those DTs would negate the run stuffing ability that Jamal Williams has(at least somewhat), and when both scrubs are in and Jamal is resting it’s over. I’ll take the three-man rotation of the Raiders on a 4-3 team, but If I’m a 3-4 team I’m taking Jamal and the scrubs.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another way to look at it is a 2 Rb system versus a 1 Rb system
2 Rb system = 5(200) + 3(100) = 1,300
1 Rb system = 5(300) = 1,500
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hm, I see your point
I can agree with that. I do still think the Niners ILB’s are better just because I think if the two teams switched players then the Hawks would get better as a team and the Niners would get worse as a team. But I definitely see where your coming from and don’t consider your opinion so ridiculous. Thanks for that. ;-)
I suppose my rush to judge your ranking was more based on the way Fooch has been treated here when I feel some of your rankings were just as homerish. And of course there’s nothing wrong with that, we are all homers at times, I just think Fooch was treated unfairly. Sorry if I came across as a troll, I do enjoy your writing quite a bit.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is, Spikes would not start over Hill or Curry most likely.
And we would almost surely use each one before using any other player in the rotation as MLB in a 4-3 is so important of a position. Spikes would certainly start over our 4th best LB, but not our 2nd and 3rd. That is not to say that he is a bad linebacker, he was a very good one and still brings plenty to the table.
Spikes would improve our depth, although that would be at OLB where the depth would improve, and that neither the position under discussion, nor as important as MLB.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably
Then I guess the question is would you take Willis/Spikes or Tatupu/Curry? I would take the former, and while I don’t think it’s “wrong” to take the latter i don’t think I’m being absurd by taking the Niners guys. Not that you said that, but other people did.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you talking for for 2009? or for beyond that?
Because I don’t think there is anyway you would want Willis/Spikes over Lofa/Curry for 2010+. Even if Willis is better than Tatupu, you’d have to take Curry over Spikes.
by MFAN on Jul 24, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was under the impression
That these rankings were only for 2009. Also consider that if Curry is at ILB he’s not playing OLB so you need someone to play there too.
Basically, if the Niners instead had the Seahawks ILB’s their defense would be worse. If the Seahawks instead had the Niner’s ILB’s their defense would be better. That’s my belief anyways.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's too tough to say considering the two teams play a different defense.
by MFAN on Jul 24, 2009 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
The only way to look at this is by taking the combined talent of you 4-3 vs your 3-4. That would make sense when comparing preference. I’d rather have our 3 linebackers starting behind 4anydudes than your 4 linebackers starting behind 3anydudes of equal talent and cohesiveness. In this, our single ILB becomes more critical. Since we now have 1 elite talent in our LB corps and 1 young sniffing at a probowl LB (Hill, now IN position) and one “Best LB coming out of a draft ever” (arguable) behind a D-line that is, I’d say, better than a D-line of anydudes, then I’m happier than if I had your players in their scheme. You get it yet?
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
by Chickadee on Jul 24, 2009 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well no, I don't get it yet.
I agree if we’re talking about all of the LB’s as a group, I’d go with the Seahawks guys. If we are talking just ILB’s, I would go with Willis and co. Is that so bad?
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Spikes is near the end of his career.
Tatupu is a 3 time pro bowler that only missed in a year he was ravaged by injuries. The first pro bowl was not really earned, but a product of the Seahawks great record in 2005, like C Robbie Tobeck making the pro bowl.
His next two years he got significantly better, and was playing at a level that seems impossible for a guy of his dimensions and athleticism. It is not for nothing that the Seahawks fans to a man are willing to take Tatupu over Willis straight up.
However, Curry to Spikes is no comparison. Curry is an unproven rookie, however with Spikes being so old and having already suffered one horrific injury, although he is still an above average player his long term value is very low. I am guessing you meant for this year, but it is impossible for me to guess how much Spikes declines, and how well Curry plays in his rookie year. I can imagine scenarios where Spikes is way ahead of Curry in production and on-field value, and where Curry makes Spikes look like an old man that should just give up.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
That’s why I’d rather just consider Curry an OLB, and say I’d rather have the Niners ILB’s than the Seahawks ILB’s.
That doesn’t mean I think the Niners are better as a team or all of their LB’s are better even, it’s just a subjective opinion about a certain group of players on the defense that I think a lot of people would agree with.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 1:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would be like giving the Chargers a bad DE rating
Because only Merriman can play DE because Olshanksy and the other guy can only play DT. Evaluating a player without regard to the system he plays in is the equivalent of taking a sentence out of context and twisting it to serve your purpose; it sounds good in an argument, but if you do some research on it, it’s useless for arguing purposes.
by LantermanC on Jul 27, 2009 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That makes absolutely no sense
Your flawed logic that Player A is better than Player B without any sort of substantial evidence aside, without taking account of the differences between 3-4 and 4-3 defenses and comparing Spikes (a starter in the 3-4 defense) to D.D. Lewis who rarely sees the field on Sundays is inane.
by aerozeppelin on Jul 24, 2009 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Makes absolutely no sense", "inane"
Really? You really think the fact that I think the Niners top 2 is better than the Hawks top two makes “absolutely no sense”???
If you ask me, that’s pretty inane.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Jesus, does this guy even watch football?
Come back when you know the difference between 3-4 and 4-3 defenses.
K, thx.
by aerozeppelin on Jul 24, 2009 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"LOL Willis > Tatupu, no argument needed"
You too.
by aerozeppelin on Jul 24, 2009 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why don't you read the rest of the thread there buddy
I’ve written a lot more than you.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, because more text correlates with a more effective argument
by aerozeppelin on Jul 24, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least I had an argument
You instead just resorted to ridiculing my football intelligence. I think I understand enough about the differences between a 3-4 and a 4-3.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No worries
I just don’t think that thread was going anywhere.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
easy there
As much as people might be at each other’s throats during the season, this point in the offseason has people a little more on edge. I know that over at NN people have been at each other’s throats the last few weeks. Once training camp gets here folks can concentrate on their own team and not think as much about the other teams.
by Fooch on Jul 24, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps so
I should have tried to articulate better. I do feel though that the commenters here being completely unwilling to consider that they are being biased a bit infuriating.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you care how people at a blog you don’t frequent think?
Is there some great lesson you’re trying to impart, other then that everyone’s subjective (including your opinion on subjectivity), which we all already know anyway?
by B.B.Finnegan on Jul 25, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do we care how well DD Lewis plays?
Hopefully, he’ll never start for us again. He’s a backup while Spikes is a starter. Barring injuries, DD Lewis is involved in zero defensive snaps per game while Takeo Spikes is involved in (nearly) 100% of the defensive snaps per game. It makes absolutely no sense to try to compare them directly.
Do you understand the basic differences between the 3-4 and 4-3 defenses? I ask in all serious, as this very basic difference seems to go over your head.
We play one MLB and 2 DTs while you play 2 ILBs and 1 NT. It doesn’t matter how much better our backup MLB is than your second-best ILB. It doesn’t matter how good your backup NT is if he never takes the field.
As you learn more about defensive schemes, you’ll understand that 3-4 DEs don’t play the same role as 4-3 DEs and that you shouldn’t really compare the production of 4-3 OLBs with 3-4 OLBs just by considering their sack production.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I absolutely do understand the difference between the two schemes
And I have to say the condescending tone is fairly rude. We never got into evaluations of the players beyond simply who we thought was better. Obviously someone like Demarcus Ware or Terrell Suggs is a lot closer to Julius Peppers than he is to Lance Briggs.
Just take the talent of the whole group, who’s better?
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the reason that people are attacking your position
…is that you’re apparently giving equal weight to our backup as you are to your second-best starter. Starters have to count for more than backups, so arguing Spikes vs. Lewis is nonsensical.
by thebyron on Jul 25, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should care how he plays.
As a player(Tatupu) you don’t acquire that many injuries without having many underlying problems.
by Mullester on Jul 24, 2009 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Then why did he have practically no injuries the first three years he played with those “underlying problems?”
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This year.
I’m saying after acquiring that many injuries you are bound to have many underlying problems.
by Mullester on Jul 25, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then Frank Gore is screwed.
I’d probably just cut him. He’s been on the injury report like thirty times in the last three years.
by John Morgan on Jul 25, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather have those injuries spaced out.
Tatupu was listed for more injuries last year than Gore for his career.
by Mullester on Jul 25, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Source please?
I do not buy that for one second.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Jul 25, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From the same source that John found...
That Gore has been on the injury report 30 times in the last three years.
by Mullester on Jul 25, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that source specifically lists the amount of Tatupu's injuries for last year alone?
As well as the amount of injuries that Gore has had throughout his career?
I’m sorry, but I know about the knee, thumb, and groin issues that Tatupu had, and I have a hard time believing that Gore has had less issues throughout his career than Tatupu had last year.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Jul 25, 2009 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously you missed the sarcasm in the statement.
Tatupu also had a hamstring and concussion issue last year and probably more than I remember off hand.
by Mullester on Jul 26, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know you're kidding.
Right?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jul 27, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I just don't see Spikes as better than Lewis.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 25, 2009 3:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Television market question
In regards to Spikes and media markets, you should probably double check that. The links below aren’t the be-all-end-all, but give a good idea of things I think. Spikes spent one year in Philly and last year in SF, so yes two years in bigger markets. However, before that he was in Buffalo and before that Cincinnati. According to the links below Seattle ranks in the 13-14 range. Buffalo ranks in the 50s and CIncinnati is 34 and 38 in the two links.
I realize these links aren’t the best research, but I’d imagine most other sources would say something similar. Just wanted to point that out.
http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_North_America_by_media_market
by Fooch on Jul 24, 2009 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but his best seasons in the league 2003 (Pro Bowl) and 2004 (All-Pro) were in Buffalo.
And though Buffalo itself is a small market, it’s in the AFC North, a division that has three top ten media markets including New York.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
NFC West
The West has some pretty solid markets of their own:
Using the top link above:
San Francisco: 6th
Phoenix: 12th
St. Louis: 21st
Seattle: 14th
Buffalo: 51st
Boston: 7th
New York: 1st
Miami: 16th
Obviously there are some impressive markets in the AFC East (I’m assuming that’s what you mean when you said AFC North). However, I just think that the media market argument isn’t much of an argument.
by Fooch on Jul 24, 2009 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes AFC East
I agree the media market argument is hard to substantiate. I’m sure it factors, but how much I don’t know. Wikipedia has Miami listed as 9th.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
tv markets
I’ve always been fascinated by the whole big market-small market thing. Particularly with football. Even though it is an issue something seems different about it. Of course there might not be very many people as interested as me in this kind of thing.
by Fooch on Jul 24, 2009 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is interesting
but I think it’s more nuanced than just the size of the market. Pittsburgh is a small market, but I would never think of the Steelers as a small market team. So it’s more than just regional population in play.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree
And that nuance about football is what makes it interesting. In a sport like baseball, teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Cubs have huge followings in part b/c they’re in huge markets. For the Cubs WGN also helped (like the Braves with TBS in the 90s). In football it’s different. Not sure what it is that does it.
by Fooch on Jul 24, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seattle’s Rankings
QB – C
RB – C
WR – B
TE – A
C – B
OT – B
OG – D
DT – C
DE – B
49ers Rankings
QB – B
HB – B
WR – B
TE – C
C – B
OT – C
OG – B
DT – C
DE – C
According to Fooch, the 49ers have an above average or average offense at every position with no true weakness, so I expect to see around a 10th best offense this year. Which of Seattle’s ratings before the MLB spot is biased?
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
QB, RB, TE, WR are all arguably overrated.
I know Hass was good, but the key word is was. He’s old and he’s got a bad back. I can see a C but I wouldn’t doubt at all that the Seahawks QB is below average. It’s probably the most likely scenario.
Your RB situation is bad, there’s no other way to put it. I seem to remember John calling Julius Jones above average, which is ridiculous. Both Jones and Duckett are below average with few skills. If that is an average RB situation I’d like to know what teams are worse.
WR is fine. Housh is a decent #1 who has been helped by the offense he has been in for much of his career (obviously not last year though). Branch is pretty meh, and I don’t see what else there is to like in the WR core. This unit looks average, really.
John Carlson is good but he is not an A. He’s not one of the top few TE’s in the game and I don’t know why his salary should factor into the situation.
I don’t know enough about your O-Line to make an honest evaluation. I know the Seahawks offense (and the Niners) was really bad last year, and given the other rankings I wouldn’t be surprised if the Line was overrated as well. But truthfully, I don’t know enough about the players to say.
The point is not the John is bad at this or something, I honestly find his analysis quite good. But the hammering Fooch gets for his analysis seems absurd to me when the homerism here is nearly the same.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tell me what you would have considered Denver's RB situation last season.
The actual talent is not good, but the system led to great run games every year(except when they all were injured last season) even without a premium OL. That is the concept they are attempting to install, and to be honest none of us know what will happen. TJ Duckett and Julius Jones were both high draft picks that may have reborn careers in this offense. Being a 9ers fan you should remember JJ’s start against you guys when he was running great, his opportunities disappeared after Mo Morris got over his injury, but he ran very hard and was at the very least average. TJ Duckett is at the very least a top 3 goal line and short yardage back, and like he was in Atlanta could carry some of the load with great results.
The OL John was obviously hard on the OGs, the OTs would be higher if we weren’t waiting to see if our HOF LT was going to ever play again, and the center situation is fair, although higher than the OG situation, which I thought was not too dissimilar of a position on our team.
The Seahawks offensive line was so bad because we had every opening day starter on the IR by the end of the season, and some of them were on the IR at different times the entire year. We played Jones, Locklear, Willis, and Nashon Goddard at OT. Mike Wahle and Rob Sims started the year at OG, but Willis also had to play guard, Floyd Womack, and Mansfield Wrotto also started. At center, Chris Spencer was barely healthy in time for camp, and didn’t last the full year, with Steve Vallos(not a good player) able to play for him. That’s 10 different starters. Walter Jones, Mike Wahle, Rob Sims, Sean Locklear, and Chris Spencer all ended the season on IR, and they were the projected starting 5 offensive linemen.
That got lengthy, but that is the explanation for why the OL was bad, it was not a talent deficiency.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To sum that up, the OL seems fair to me.
Our starting-level talent at OT is A, but a B if you substitute Willis for Walter Jones half of the season, and a C if he is there all year. We have no idea who our starting OGs will be, and at C a 2nd round pick this year will be battling a former 1st rounder who is still quite talented, but not quite polished, so that is a good situation too.
At WR, you’ve already read the analysis so you know what we think of them. And at TE, as the #1 passing option for the year, John Carleson was firmly inside the top 10, despite starting slow and being a rookie. Maybe it wasn’t an A, but John kinda put an asterisk on it anyway.
And at QB, I believe you are sadly mistaken. Matt Hasselbeck did not have a running game two years ago(last year’s running game with the same rushers you think are horrible was definately better) and had the same WRs(except Engram instead of Housh and bad TEs instead of Carleson) and had his best season. The back is a legitimately big concern, but there is no reason to believe that IF he is healed that he is any worse of a QB than the last time he played with full health. A C(which includes our backup Seneca, a QB who is not much worse than Shaun Hill) is underrating our situation in my opinion.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a lot to respond to, I'll do my best. ;-)
I think the Denver O-line is one of the best in the league, and I know many other people have mentioned that they are as well, so obviously that was a big part of the running game. Also the passing game obviously helped, no one was going to put 8 men in the box against that offense. With Cutler, Marshall, and royal, I have to believe the fronts they were facing were not trying very hard to stop the run, it was the pass that concerned them. And even still when you are rating induvidual positions like this, I wouldn’t give most of the credit to the RB’s for Denver’s success.
I don’t buy into Jones or Duckett at all. I watched almost every one of Julius’ games with Dallas, and he just doesn’t have the talent to be an above average back. In the right system he isn’t terrible, but when he is your best back that is bad. Duckett is good at the one thing he does but has no other skills. I really would like to know who has a worse RB situation in the NFC than the Hawks. I can see Detroit, possibly the Cardinals, but otherwise I think you guys are clearly worse than everyone else in the NFC at RB. That’s an F, not a C.
Like I said, I can’t really argue your O-Line rankings. I don’t know enough about the players and I don’t trust FO’s adjusted line yards and stats like that enough to use them on their own. I will say that it doesn’t seem like Walter Jones is an elite player anymore even when he’s healthy, but that’s about as far as I can go.
I know what you think at WR I just disagree with you. Housh is an okay #1, not great, Branch is a decent/mediocre #2, and there is no one else that stands out. That’s a C to me.
Carlson isn’t an A, that ranking is I think the easiest one to pick on. He’s good and could be very good, but an A should be a Witten or a Gates type player. Carlson is not that, at least not yet.
At QB even if Hass is recovered from the back problems (a huge if) then you still have to consider that it’s been two years since he was good. It’s not like we’re talking about him being a good QB a few months ago, he hasn’t been good since 2007.He’ll be 34 around the time when the season starts, and for a player who was never great anyways I just wouldn’t feel very confident in him. I won’t argue Hill (I would have given the Niners QB situation an F personally) but that doesn’t make the Hawks situation any better.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Hawks QBs were rated a C
The 9ers were rating a B. I completely disagree with you, Hasselbeck has been a pro bowl QB because he HAS been great, but if that is your opinion that is fine.
The Denver offensive linemen individually have not been particularly impressive players, but rather perfectly chosen out of mid to late round picks for their ability to execute the system.
You may be right about the Seattle situation at HB, but we could both be right. Last year very little or no “above-average” talent was present at HB in Denver as in most years, yet when any of them were healthy they could run the ball. Julius Jones and TJ Duckett represent a huge improvement over the last couple Shaun Alexander seasons, and there is not as much “above-average” talent at HB out there as you seem to believe. The system makes the back in a lot of places.
by cashless on Jul 24, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When I said "he's never been great"
I meant never been like Payton or Brady status. And if your not a QB of that caliber you usually have started to decline quite a bit by the time your 34, especially if you have a bad back. The C grade is possible but I think it’s a bit on the high side.
I still don’t agree about the RB’s. Like I said, what team would you not swap RB’s with other than Detroit? Your RB situation is much worse than a C.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just can't see how...
you say Hass is overrated when he is a full grade below your debacle of a QB situation in the round table. He was very good 2 years ago, great 3 years ago. Instead of saying, “He hasn’t been good for 2 years,” try saying “He was injured and had a down year last year.” Now you’ve got our perspective. And if he is healthy, he should be around the 7th-14th best QB in the league by numbers, and arguably even more important for his team than that, given he is one of the more frequent audible calling QB’s in the league (though that could change with the new staff, I suppose.)
Regardless, that upside warrants AT LEAST a “C” grade.
If there were high and low grades with pluses and minuses, our TE would probably be a low “A” He is a complete player, and easily a top 10 in the league TE.
“C” is average, and system plays a part, and would again likely be a C- not a C for our RB’s. But… who cares? I mean, it isn’t like we over-ranked a high grade. You know, like your debacle of a QB situation. If it’s a D, it’s a D. But I still think it isn’t embarrassingly bad, therefore should get a C.
As far as our WR’s being ranked too high, we have talent at the position, and added a great one in Housh. Your WR’s are ranked the same as ours, despite there being very little history of first year WR’s coming out of the gate performing well, and yet Crabtree is anticipated to be huge for you guys, right?
I don’t know. I think we’re all homers, on that I’ll agree with you. But your team has been booty for years now, and you had a semi-up year with a cake schedule while we were beat to hell. We’ve been good for a long time and had a single down year. I’m not sure how we can’t look at your numbers and feel they are inflated too much due to last year’s performance and ours is downgraded significantly despite a long history of success.
I feel like if we did this in the 80’s or 90’s when we had a really good year and the Niners a semi-down year, you’d look at our ratings the same we we’re looking at yours right now…
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Jul 25, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say he was overrated
Just that he’s not that good anymore. And like I said, the Niners grades have nothing to do with it. I’d have given the Niners QB situation an F. C is fine I guess, but I can see a D.
For some reason you keep bringing up the Niners grades. I don’t know why, I’m not arguing that they aren’t biased. They obviously are, so if the Seahawks grades are similiar then they are biased as well.
But I just don’t see how the TE or RB grades are justifiable at all. I’ve said this numerous times but no one has responded, who’s RB situation is worse than the Hawks? If you can’t name more than a couple teams then it’s an F. And yes, having Julius Jones as your top back is pretty embaressing, if one gets embaressed by sports.
As for WR, I don’t see Crabree having more than 500-600 yards, but maybe he’ll surprise me. The Niners certainly have a lot more young talent there than the Hawks, but whether that talent actually performs this year is anyone’s guess. I’d give both teams a C.
You may be right about me underrating the Seahawks, after all they’ve been a good team for a while. I do think this should be an exciting season for the NFC West, hopefully both of our teams will have meaningful seasons.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which brings up an interesting point.
I think it would be more fun to let the other three teams fans vote on the one team for all four teams. Of course you would have to average out for the outlandish like if someone gave Steven Jackson an F.
by Mullester on Jul 25, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
It’d probably be better, because we all bring a much fairer perspective when we aren’t arguing for our own teams. At least we get a lot of good analysis this way.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That, I wouldn't agree with.
The emotion of a division rival can all but eliminate any level of “fair perspective” for many fans.
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
by Dukeshire on Jul 25, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Certainly not as much though
As fans rating their own team. I don’t know, I harbor no ill will towards the Seahawks, but perhaps other people do and that would cloud their judgement.
I think if all four of the managers graded (Fooch, John, VanRam, and cgolden) and then just took the average of the grades we would get fairer results.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps.
But these grades are always going to be subjective, to a degree. Aside from the discussions that they inspire, I don’t have much use for them.
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
by Dukeshire on Jul 25, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very true
The analysis has been very good in my opinion.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Hawks running back situation...
isn’t that bad. Jones is certainly serviceable when healthy, TJ is predictable but stolid, and there is some upside with Forsett getting some looks.
If I was grading/anticipating performances here are some lesser talented/lower performing backfields I would rather have the Hawks situation compared to them… and this is off the top of my head, so I may miss someone (either a another weak team, or a strong backup who is now in place I’m currently unaware of.)
NE
when was the last time Maroney was healthy
Fred Taylor? Really? Did I get the decade wrong?
Cleveland
Jamal Lewis is on fumes, who else do they have.
the Bungles
KC might be in trouble too… if LJ doesn’t resume early career performances.
What about the Giants losing Ward? Brandon Jacobs is great… all 8 games a year he plays. I’m not sure what they would do if he went out in the early season.
Philly. Yes, I said it. Westbrook was great for a long time, but his age and injury history have caught up to him.
Detroit. Kevin Smith is solid, but again I see Jones as being so too.
AZ. Not sold on Wells, though he could prove me substantially wrong— kind of like Jones will prove you wrong! ;)
SF. Yep, I’m saying that one too. Gore has taken a beating and with your lack of a passing game will continue to. I don’t see him playing healthy at all this year, I think he will be worn down and beat to a pulp by the end of the season…
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Jul 25, 2009 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
"The Niners certainly have a lot more young talent there than the Hawks, "
And why is that, exactly? Jason Hill has been inconsistent, Josh Morgan isn’t any more proven than our own Jordan Kent. Aside from Crabtree, the 49ers are just as desperate for young WRs as the Hawks.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jul 27, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And continuing on that note,
“I’d give both teams a C.”
That would mean both teams are equal in terms of WR talent, which would be wrong. Even if you assume Isaac Bruce’s bones don’t calcify in the middle of game and continues to be a decent receiver, TJ Houshmandzadeh is better. Behind Bruce, you have a rookie with an injury, 7th and 3rd round picks who haven’t done anything, and a receiver even the Titans didn’t care to keep. It’s conceivable that Nate Burleson could crack the starting lineup of the 49ers, and he’s the 3rd option in Seattle.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jul 27, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
correction
Josh Morgan was a 6th round pick.
by Fooch on Jul 27, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh?! Well, why didn't you say so earlier!
Count me in on the ‘Josh Morgan breakout season 1,000+ yds 8+ TDs’ bandwagon, now.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jul 27, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arguably.
QB: Yes it’s possible that Matt is below average, but it’s also possible that his injury is better. It’s certain that his WR corps will be significantly improved and quite likely that his O-line will defend him better (both WRs and O-line were decimated by unusually high injury rates last year). You can’t realistically rate a guy who’s one injured year away from a Pro Bowl season a D. The QB grade of C is good.
RB: Few skills? Jones is a very good blocker and a solid receiver; Duckett was great in short-yardage situations (26 first downs and 8 TDs in 62 attempts). I also disagree that either is a below-average rusher; Jones got 4.4 yards per carry last season. Rating them a D would be low in my book, but if I give it to you then our total wrong so far is one letter.
TE: John Carlson had 55 receptions, 627 yards and 5 TDs. “On an offense that couldn’t produce, Carlson did. Passes targeting Carlson were worth 143 DYAR, 9th best among all tight ends. He produced with three different quarterbacks, one named Charlie Frye. He produced when NFL teams adjusted to the Seahawks’ only weapon, assigning safeties to stop him and linebackers to bracket him.” This year there will be other threats to deal with. He’s not an A? Okay; John rated him “a qualified ‘A’”….let’s give him a B. We’re off by a letter and a half so far.
WR: First you say “WR is fine.” Then you say it’s average. (If you’re calling this unit average then I think you’ve been watching too many Patriots and Cardinals games.) Housh may not be T.O. but he’s been one of the NFL’s most productive backs in the last few years. Branch is certainly more than “meh” when healthy (an overrated concern); he’s a legitimate threat. Burleson is solid but not exceptional; Butler has potential. This was a B-rated group. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and call this off by another half-letter.
Frankly, I don’t agree with any of these other than maybe TE, but I’ve played along. That brings our total to two letter grades off. Fooch was off by that on the QB rating alone.
by thebyron on Jul 25, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Housh is a WR, not a back
I need to proofread.
by thebyron on Jul 27, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"John Carlson is good, but he is not an A"
If you cared to look at his DVOA and/or DYAR, you’d have found that he was in the top 10 in both categories. Couple that with his historic rookie season, the argument that he is an “A”-grade TE is plausible.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Jul 25, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carlson may not 'Be' Gates, but he played much like him last season:
Carlson in 08: 19.1% DVOA 10-RNK 143 DYAR 8-RNK
Gates in 08: 15.6% DVOA 14-RNK 140 DYAR 9-RNK
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Jul 26, 2009 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he also blocks
while guys like gates, witten, and clark are closer to big receivers than true tight ends. that has to be a factor in grades.
by cro-mag! on Jul 27, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, top ten shouldn't be an A.
That’s almost 1/3 of the league. Getting 70% on a test isn’t an A. This was the one grade that I thought JM missed….he did say it was “a qualified ‘A’” though.
by thebyron on Jul 27, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Willis makes a lot of tackles
but he misses more than you might think. Ranked 76th in stop % on run plays, at 59%, and ranked 94th in yardage allowed on run plays he did stop, at 4.4 yards.
That mirrors Tatupu’s worst year, his rookie year, against the run.
Compare it to last year Tatupu’s only injured year, a heavily injured year, a year most casual and intense fans consider his worst. Ranked 17th at 73% run stopping, and 57th at 3.7 yards per run.
In 2006 he was ranked in the 30’s in each category. In 2007 he was 11th and 7th, respectively.
This, I should note, is arguably Tatupu’s greatest weakness (he’s savvy and tough and great against the pass, but sometimes doesn’t make the tackle, sometimes has a hard time bringing down bigger backs on his own, and with some frequency gets blocked out of plays), which has routinely been statistically been far superior to Willis’ greatest and possibly only real strength.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's Football Outsiders Almanac 2009
And Football Outsiders Pro Football Prospectus 2006, 2007 & 2008 for the career stuff. They’re books, so not online, although cheaply bought on Amazon I think… Http://www.footballoutsiders.com is selling the 2009 Almanac as a PDF, right now, for $12, and it will come out as a book in the next week or two I think.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd forward the PDF to you
but that’d be pirating. The older years I wouldn’t feel bad about passing on, but I only have those in book form. I realize that all sounds incredibly convenient for me, but there it is. You could independently ask other FO fans for the numbers.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No problem.
I appreciate the info and will probably buy it myself thank you.
by Mullester on Jul 24, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah Jacobstevens.
LINK, or you’re obviously making stuff up. ;)
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 24, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get out, Gay Bay Troll.
And LOL to Takeo Spikes. Dude is garbage. Willis is good, but he really stands out because he’s the only good player the Niners have on defense.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 24, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't call Spikes garbage
The way he performed in Philly I wrote him off as washed up, but I dunno, he still has value, particularly in pass coverage.
This is just an interesting clash because both our teams aren’t top-shelf strong in most every category, but here we have two standout guys who are close to the best in the league, who are close to the best player on the team, or are the best player on the team, and for a team with so little to lean on, we want it clearly established that our guy is better. I admit the thought that Willis is better really bothers me. It’s no surprise that 49er fans would take contention with this at all.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stay classy man.
Nice to know your so open to discussion around here.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 24, 2009 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come on man.
“Gay Bay Troll” that’s weak on many levels.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not classy
Not original, not funny, not effective. There are ways to call people names without getting sexist/racist/homophobic.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know. I generally don't fall to that level.
But the influx of trolls that these roundtables bring gives me gas.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 25, 2009 3:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, we disagree with him...
but he is being civil and providing a fair argument. I think it’s a good thing he’s here having dialogue.
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Jul 25, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see trolling, not dialogue.
The only reason these guys come over from under their rock is because they get butthurt about the roundtable grades. In my opinion, John has been an incredibly strict grader, so the one time he lets up and gives our (aruguably) best player the grade he deserves, here these guys come, not making discussion, simply making inane judgements about the positions of the Seahawks. Tatupu is a borderline pro bowler, Hasselbeck is below average. Apparently Carlson’s great season was a fluke, Jones and Duckett are “bad,” etc, etc.
Then they start crying about how we laugh at “Fooch” and his unbelievably inflated grades when you know the same thing is going on over there about John’s analysis, as strict as it may be.
You know, I lost my father. Ah, he'll turn up. Have you checked the dumpster out back? He used to like to take a nap in there."
-George Carlin
by Wayward Llama on Jul 25, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think these roundtables have been interesting.
I too think John has been a strict grader (to his credit), but you realize you all are arguing over what are essentially power rankings? They have no meaning or impact on anything of consequence. Is he trolling? Perhaps. Don’t feed the troll. (by the way, this was a fun discussion to read this morning.)
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
by Dukeshire on Jul 25, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“atupu is a borderline pro bowler, Hasselbeck is below average. Apparently Carlson’s great season was a fluke, Jones and Duckett are "bad," etc, etc.”
I never said Carlson’s season was a fluke, only that he shouldn’t be an A. Hass is below average because of his back, if he stays healthy all year I think he’ll be fine. Jones and Duckett are bad, that is definitely true.
Fooch’s grades are inflated, no argument there. But so are John’s, as good as his analysis is.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 25, 2009 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't a bit trivial arguing about this then?
We grilled Fooch for really only the quarterback category because it was ridiculous. You know it’s ridiculous, even the people at NN know it’s ridiculous. It wasn’t just the grade Fooch gave, but the analysis that reeked of homerism.
But complaining that Seahawk’s QB/RB situation should be maybe a D instead of C is just meaningless.
I felt his analysis has been spot on. You already stated that his analysis is good, so can we move on from there? I think you’re putting too much emphasis on the grading portion of these roundtables.
by aerozeppelin on Jul 25, 2009 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you even watch the play
where Tatupu stood up Jason Witten and held him in place until the rest of the team came to help smash him? Tatupu reads plays very well and reacts to them. I think he reads plays better than Patrick Willis who gets alot of tackles through sheer athleticism.
Tatupu runs our defense. He put two running backs out of commision in 2007 and the hits didn’t even make the best hits shows even though those RBs didn’t come back in the game.
You should watch Lofa operate sometime rather than just against San Francisco. The man is lining people up and controlling the pieces on the field. The more talent he gets around him, the better our defense will operate.
I’d take a chess player over an athletic freak like Willis at the moment. Maybe Willis will become a chess player down the line or it will show more once he gets more pieces around him, but at the moment he seems raw. I’d take Lofa over him right now. I like having a true MLB that acts as the brain of the defense. Besides, we got a physical beast at SLB now in Aaron Curry. So now we got the brains with Tatupu and the freakish athleticism with Curry. I would say brawn, but Lofa showed how functionally strong he was whent he stood up a 250 lb tight end and held him in place. We all know Witten is one of the stronger, tougher TEs in the league, which makes the feat even more impressive. It was an act of sheer will and functional strength.
by ASeahawkfan on Jul 25, 2009 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow the one play you mention it one he doesn't even make the tackle?
Impressive. More impressive would be making the most tackles as a rookie with a cast for over half the year. Or holding A. Peterson to his career low in a game (13 yards).
by Mullester on Jul 26, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That play impressed me because of the situation
Playoff game in final minutes.
by ASeahawkfan on Jul 26, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, John.
How much do you think Tatupu is affected by the radio in his ear? We know he’s incredibly football-smart, enough so that he might actually play better without the coaches squawking in his ear pre-play.
Stacey Nelson throws flaming screwballs.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Jul 24, 2009 6:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Very good question
Hadn’t considered that that might be one reason why he wasn’t as good last year.
by jacobstevens on Jul 24, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to know.
I think it’s much more plausible his injuries caused his down season.
by John Morgan on Jul 24, 2009 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how much of it was John Marshall squawking in his ear?
The new DC might be able to communicate more (or less) effectively pre-snap.
by ninjasocks on Jul 24, 2009 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's to hoping.
You know, I lost my father. Ah, he'll turn up. Have you checked the dumpster out back? He used to like to take a nap in there."
-George Carlin
by Wayward Llama on Jul 25, 2009 6:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As in, give him any information he might not be able to see for himself
But don’t tell him how to play it. He plays best when he’s on the sniff.
by shams on Jul 25, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is a pretty good study on MLBs/ILBs
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=239185&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
granted it is from Tatupu’s most recent healthy season and Willis’ DROY season.
by puerto on Jul 25, 2009 12:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In 07, Tats didn't have the greatest run stopping defensive linemen in front of him either.
He just got that much better, mostly stronger.
by cashless on Jul 25, 2009 12:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just one point
I love me some Tatupu as much as anyone, have the jersey and everything, but is he missing downfield tackles because he’s not catching up to the play?
I’d still definitely take Lofa above Willis because his game knowledge. He manages a game like no other! He’s like the Peyton Manning of defense. Like Peyton, not the most gifted athlete, but GIFTED in smarts/ football knowledge.
by StonerHawk on Jul 25, 2009 5:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget, that study was just of RUNNING plays.
The way I remembered it, we stuffed a lot of plays, and then sometimes due to over-pursuit a huge cutback lane would be open(the fault of a safety, or an OLB like Peterson, or a DE). At that point it was off to the races. If Tatupu was Urlacher maybe he would have caught up to one or two of those, or maybe even more. But he isn’t the guy that’s gonna chase down a fast back from behind. Trufant is pretty fast, Grant catches up to guys, Peterson would chase down people sometimes.
It’s the type of problem that will both happen less with a more disciplined and stronger OLB, and a bigger stronger front four like we have right now. Since Brian Russell is still starting on our team, if he comes in the box I can see issues happening on his side, but we look a lot better at least on paper at stopping the run, and Tatupu doesn’t have to be a super-rocket and make up for others mistakes when he is so good at positioning them to cut down on those mistakes in the first place.
by cashless on Jul 25, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, I think I remember something
about the Seahawks picking up an LB who might be able to chase down some people. Can’t remember his name….
by thebyron on Jul 25, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was a nice study
The numbers don’t quite jib with the PFP numbers, but I guess that’s because of how they weight the numbers against strength of opponent.
I will say one thing, given what we know about Willis’ physical abilities, and his being more or less, a “sideline to sideline” (I hate that term) ILB — in his case, the 11+ yard tackles could speak to his abilities more than his deficiencies.
And he’s gotten better each year, more or less. But, Tats.
by jacobstevens on Jul 27, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tatupu is the man
He’s an underrated hitter too. I always hear Leroy Hill is the best tackler on the team, even when Tatupu was the one who sidelined two RBs during the 2007 season. Tatupu can lay some hits.
The man is tough, determined, and ambitious. He wants to be the best. He wants his team to be the best. I love having the guy on our team. I hope he’s back at full strength next year and ready to lead our defense on a crushing spree of the rest of the league. I just hope the talent around him steps it up.
by ASeahawkfan on Jul 25, 2009 12:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A+ for the hawks LB core?
Curry is a rookie. He hasn’t even played in a reg season game. He looked good in college and performed well in the combine but that doesn’t mean squat untill he suits up and plays on sunday. and untill then all you can do is speculate.
by PUO on Jul 25, 2009 4:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not true.
You can educated guesses.
by John Morgan on Jul 25, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My favorite quote from the article:
“Mike Singletary the player, that is.” I realize this has little to do with the theme of the piece, but it gives voice to something I’ve been thinking since last mid-season: Singletary was an exceptional linebacker but is a poor head coach. He has that over-the-top dictatorial, emotional approach that gets mediocre talent to produce at levels over their heads for one season, maybe two, but quickly fizzles and dies out because there’s little talent or fundamentals (or front office acumen, in this case) to back it up. I think Singletary is out after a 4-12 finish this season.
by Furious Blue on Jul 26, 2009 5:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow thanks Nastradamus.
What has Mora accomplished as a head coach again?
by Mullester on Jul 26, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
he did get the the NFC Championship in his first year with the Falcons.
He also was let go with the highest winning percentage of ANY FALCON COACH EVER.
Other than that, not much more than Singletary.
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Jul 26, 2009 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why does this become the argument?
Nothing in Furious Blue’s comment was about Mora, it was about Singletary. Even if Mora is awful and has accomplished nothing as a head coach thats not going to make Singletary great.
by MFAN on Jul 27, 2009 3:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet Jesus.
What the fuck happened here?
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Jul 27, 2009 7:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This thread is pretty much dead.
But I’d like to know if all these people who think Patrick Willis is the best ILB also thought Jonathan Vilma was the next big thing after gaudy tackle totals for a few seasons earlier with the Jets.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jul 28, 2009 9:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not a bad question, FF.
You might post it at Niners Nation and watch them get indignant.
by thebyron on Jul 29, 2009 6:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















