only 1 team has lost more talent to injury on offense,
no team has lost less talent to injury on defense,
Amelia Probst
@ameliaprobst
WAR lost to injuries split between offense and defense - I'd like to build on this by looking at the WAR lost per week.
Note: This does not include QBs. |
imagine what miami could have been with ramsey. or what they would have done to denver with waddle.
finding charts on twitter doesn't describe or prescribe what ails this team or defense.
Glass half full - they can’t be this bad. The rookies will adjust and keep improving. Okereke will play up to expectations. KT will be more impactful. Sorry, McKinney has lost me so I’ve got nothing positive there. They need to step up because they’ve sucked bigtime to date. Trying to stay positive.
finding charts on twitter doesn't describe or prescribe what ails this team or defense.
interesting, you don't think fixing a defense allowing 28 pts+ every game so far is a prescription for winning more games?
last year they only allowed that many points 3x all season.
As a devout Russian Orthodox, old Fyodor was probably just mirroring what was already in his bible (Romans 818) about suffering and attaining future glory.
The D did a very good job in the first half against SF. With the score 10-3 they forced a turnover on downs on a huge sack by Williams, negated by a BS penalty. EVEN IF one feels it was a legitimate penalty by the rules (I don't), it's still a "shit happens" thing where a player made a textbook should have been hame changing big play.
Meanwhile the O is doing shit (with an injury excuse). contributing no scoring, no TOP; the only a bit of field position thanks to STs.
After the O finally scores, the D holds them to a FG with SF aided by a BS contact call.
By that time, travel, -TOP, and demoralizing lack of O and breaks gasses the D.
Totally explainable. Excusable even.
Fair point, that never works. But I don’t see the 2009 CC Brown Sheridan defense at the moment. I see a team that is losing the TOP by a historic margin, and not scoring points, not making significant plays, and a negative turnover ratio. It’s not as simple as point a finger at Wink or KT or LW as many have recently have concluded.
Also, you’re like the 3rd post today which included a graph from Twitter. So, forgive me for being grumpy about graphs that tell no portion of the story and are extrapolated into grand reasons why this team is broken. I don’t blame you at all for looking for an answer. We won’t know anytime soon what is actually wrong with this team.
Or his defensive philosophies don't work anymore (possibly why the Ravens let him go?).
They haven't just been bad, they've been horrendous.
There's a good chance Miami, at home, will hand 70 on this defense. Then they play the Bills (on the road), a team capable of burning this defense also.
There hadn't been a 70 spot rung up in nearly 60 years until this past week, but we're going to see a second one this year by the same team?
Do you offer a newsletter that I can subscribe to?
Not understanding teams below 0.
What does it say? Shit like that happens everywhere all the time. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. In Simmons case his draft profiles -- where he was an all-pro rated prospect -- said he needed the right system to excel. He's been as advertised. If Wink's is it, as he thinks, score.
When other GMs pull moves like grabbing Simmons for next to noting I bet that's genius to you.
Quote:
by trading late draft picks for 2 players who were gonna get cut by their respective teams, says a lot.
It suggests (to me) that maybe they were very concerned about the talent on the D and that maybe they traded for him more out of desparation (kinda like Billy Price) rather than seeing something special in him. Simmons is not suddenly going to transform to an elite player; his draft pedigree is meaningless. If they only had to give up a 7th to get him, it tells me there wasn't a lot of competition to get him. Same for Basham.
Neither has shown much on the field. I'm not surprised. I hope I'm wrong and either one of them ends up being a significant improvement from what they already had.
What does it say? Shit like that happens everywhere all the time. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. In Simmons case his draft profiles -- where he was an all-pro rated prospect -- said he needed the right system to excel. He's been as advertised. If Wink's is it, as he thinks, score.
When other GMs pull moves like grabbing Simmons for next to noting I bet that's genius to you.
Quote:
by trading late draft picks for 2 players who were gonna get cut by their respective teams, says a lot.
What does it say? Shit like that happens everywhere all the time. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. In Simmons case his draft profiles -- where he was an all-pro rated prospect -- said he needed the right system to excel. He's been as advertised. If Wink's is it, as he thinks, score.
When other GMs pull moves like grabbing Simmons for next to noting I bet that's genius to you.
Sorry, messed up my first reply.
It suggests (to me) that maybe they were very concerned about the talent on the D and that maybe they traded for him more out of desparation (kinda like Billy Price) rather than seeing something special in him. Simmons is not suddenly going to transform to an elite player; his draft pedigree is meaningless. If they only had to give up a 7th to get him, it tells me there wasn't a lot of competition to get him. Same for Basham.
Neither has shown much on the field. I'm not surprised. I hope I'm wrong and either one of them ends up being a significant improvement from what they already had.