https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2019/07/01/darqueze-dennard-elite-against-run-2018/

CB Darqueze Dennard was the highest-graded defender for the #Bengals vs. the run last season.

His 2018 stats and position rank against the run:

-90.2 run-defense grade (6th)
-4.2 run stop percentage (6th)
-A total tackling efficiency of 17.8 (16th among 131 qualifying CBs)

Cincinnati Bengals cornerback Darqueze Dennard was quietly one of the team’s best players against the run in 2018.

Given the failed state of the linebacker unit and the eventuality of a coordinator getting fired, it isn’t necessarily a good thing that a corner like Dennard ended up as the team’s best run defender.

Even so, Dennard had some impressive ranks with the numbers above provided by Pro Football Focus.


I know you have all heard my rants about PFF rankings, but if you read closely what I have written I have always given PFF credit for producing some decent OBJECTIVE stats. I don't know how they calculate "run defense grade", but I assume that "run stop opercentage" and "tackling efficiency" are based on some formulas using fairly objective stats instead of their subjective "bonus points" ranking system.

Any Pff guys know how they come up with these stats?

(07-02-2019, 01:14 AM)fredtoast Wrote: https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2019/07/01/darqueze-dennard-elite-against-run-2018/

CB Darqueze Dennard was the highest-graded defender for the #Bengals vs. the run last season.

His 2018 stats and position rank against the run:

-90.2 run-defense grade (6th)
-4.2 run stop percentage (6th)
-A total tackling efficiency of 17.8 (16th among 131 qualifying CBs)

Cincinnati Bengals cornerback Darqueze Dennard was quietly one of the team’s best players against the run in 2018.

Given the failed state of the linebacker unit and the eventuality of a coordinator getting fired, it isn’t necessarily a good thing that a corner like Dennard ended up as the team’s best run defender.

Even so, Dennard had some impressive ranks with the numbers above provided by Pro Football Focus.


I know you have all heard my rants about PFF rankings, but if you read closely what I have written I have always given PFF credit for producing some decent OBJECTIVE stats. I don't know how they calculate "run defense grade", but I assume that "run stop opercentage" and "tackling efficiency" are based on some formulas using fairly objective stats instead of their subjective "bonus points" ranking system.

Any Pff guys know how they come up with these stats?

Fred, this guy is invaluable to Bengals. Slot is the latest trend in NFL and exploiting the inside with a WR, after the TE clears the LB, is the fad.

Teams are putting their top receivers in the slot more and more. Even AJ ran some routs out of the slot last year.

So the December 15th game will be the moneymaker or breaker for Denard.

Since Brady no longer has the arm for the out routes, this game will determine the tier where Denard belongs.

I'm waiting for the FB and I formation to come back in earnest...

Dennard isn’t afraid to mix it up and is a willing tackler which you need out of your corners if you play in the AFC north. There are a lot of good tough backs in this division, James Connor, Mark Ingram, Nick Chubb and Kareem Hunt. I was also impressed with Jessie Bates tacking this season. We all knew Bates had good ball skills coming out of College but the knock was his tackling ability. Bates lead the Bengals with 111 tackles.

Been saying for years that Dennard should have been asked to put on 10 pounds of muscle and played safety. Zero ball instincts but a good tackler/run defender? That's a box safety all day long.

Meanwhile 5 years/68 games into his career at CB, he has only 17 Pdef and 3 INT.

Could have possibly been a player of note if he was put in a position to succeed rather than being labeled "the best rookie corner I have ever seen" to mediocre-to-subpar results.

(07-02-2019, 12:05 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Been saying for years that Dennard should have been asked to put on 10 pounds of muscle and played safety. Zero ball instincts but a good tackler/run defender? That's a box safety all day long.

Meanwhile 5 years/68 games into his career at CB, he has only 17 Pdef and 3 INT.

Could have possibly been a player of note if he was put in a position to succeed rather than being labeled "the best rookie corner I have ever seen" to mediocre-to-subpar results.

Thank goodness we have much more advanced stats to rate CBs than PD and INT.  And people who look at these advanced metrics already consider Dennard a "player of note".  Fans who just look at INTs will think that Patrick Peterson is not a very good CB.

In 2017 PFF ranked him as the 32nd best CB overall and Bleacher Report had him as the #9 slot corner.

Last year Football Outsiders ranked Dennard 29th (out of 85 qualified CBs) in yards allowed per target.

Those are far from "mediocre to subpar results"

(07-02-2019, 01:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Thank goodness we have much more advanced stats to rate CBs than PD and INT.  And people who look at these advanced metrics already consider Dennard a "player of note".  Fans who just look at INTs will think that Patrick Peterson is not a very good CB.

In 2017 PFF ranked him as the 32nd best CB overall and Bleacher Report had him as the #9 slot corner.

Last year Football Outsiders ranked Dennard 29th (out of 85 qualified CBs) in yards allowed per target.

Those are far from "mediocre to subpar results"

Fred, choose if you're going to accept PFF rankings as a metric of worth or not. This whole flip-flopping is exhausting.

Not to mention...
If you allow 5 yards on 3rd and 4, that's not as good as allowing 8 yards on 3rd and 10. It's less yards, but not as good. Slot receivers will always have less yards per target than outside receivers. You're rarely on and island where you have 1 guy to beat in order to get a long TD.

32nd best OVERALL CB, as in including the run... and you just made this thread saying he's the 6th highest rated against the run last year. If you're really good in one thing, and they rate you 32nd overall, that means the other thing (passing) you probably aren't above average at.

Plus hurray using 2017 stats. Meanwhile he was 52nd overall in 2018, and 6th in the run. That means he had to of been absolutely awful against the pass to make any sense.


1 decent-to-good year + 4 mediocre-to-subpar years = mediocre-to-subpar results.


This is the same conversation of how Andre Smith was a bust. If you're only good for 1 year out of your career as a first round pick, you were a bust, regardless of the fact that you did have 1 year where you lived up to expectations. It gets averaged out and weighed down by all the bad and mediocrity.

Good thing teams have completely abandoned the passing game in the league.. 

(07-02-2019, 02:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This is the same conversation of how Andre Smith was a bust. If you're only good for 1 year out of your career as a first round pick, you were a bust, regardless of the fact that you did have 1 year where you lived up to expectations. It gets averaged out and weighed down by all the bad and mediocrity.

1.  Dre had more than 1 good year.

2.  This is just another example of you making up your own definition of "mediocre" and "subpar".  PFFs #52 ranking was "above average", but you just make up your own definition to fit your narrative.

(07-02-2019, 02:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Not to mention...
If you allow 5 yards on 3rd and 4, that's not as good as allowing 8 yards on 3rd and 10. It's less yards, but not as good. Slot receivers will always have less yards per target than outside receivers. 

This is not true at all.  It is yards per "target" not yards per "completion".  Slot receivers usually cover short passes that are more likely to be completed. 

Can he play linebacker? I kid, I kid....maybe.

He is a bust for where he was drafted. Not a Artie Burns bust but a bust for sure.

(07-02-2019, 03:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  Dre had more than 1 good year.

2.  This is just another example of you making up your own definition of "mediocre" and "subpar".  PFFs #52 ranking was "above average", but you just make up your own definition to fit your narrative.

If you are taken in the first round there is a lot more expectations than if you are taken in later rounds. Everyone tries to discount when they were drafted but a #52 ranking for a first round pick is a sure sign of a underperformer.

(07-02-2019, 06:02 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: He is a bust for where he was drafted. Not a Artie Burns bust but a bust for sure.

No he isn't.  He is a solid starter quality NFL CB.

(07-02-2019, 02:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Plus hurray using 2017 stats. Meanwhile he was 52nd overall in 2018, and 6th in the run. That means he had to of been absolutely awful against the pass to make any sense.

While he definitely hasn't lived up to his draft placement, 52nd out of what is essentially most likely 96ish starting cbs(since most teams seem to run 3cb sets most often) isnt too bad. Itd probably be better to see where he is ranked among slot CBs though, as that's where he seems to play most often. I dont have access to pff so I have no clue as to how he ranks among other slot CBs.

His willingness to play the run also leads me to think he could move to safety if shawn William's or bates gets injured. He could turn out to be better suited for that. I know demarious randall was a bad cb for the packers but is a pretty solid safety for the browns.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

(07-02-2019, 01:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Thank goodness we have much more advanced stats to rate CBs than PD and INT.  And people who look at these advanced metrics already consider Dennard a "player of note".  Fans who just look at INTs will think that Patrick Peterson is not a very good CB.

In 2017 PFF ranked him as the 32nd best CB overall and Bleacher Report had him as the #9 slot corner.

Last year Football Outsiders ranked Dennard 29th (out of 85 qualified CBs) in yards allowed per target.

Those are far from "mediocre to subpar results"

If he was so good why didn't the Bengals lose him in free agency? Maybe he is mediocre because top dbs come at a premium.

(07-02-2019, 06:18 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote:  Everyone tries to discount when they were drafted but a #52 ranking for a first round pick is a sure sign of a underperformer.

Not really.  That is a solid starting CB.  Over the last 10 years there have been 41 CBs taken in the first round and only 13 have made a Pro Bowl.  A majority of first round picks do not become big stars especially those taken 24 or later like Dennard.  So a solid starter is good for a first round pick.

(07-02-2019, 06:21 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: If he was so good why didn't the Bengals lose him in free agency? Maybe he is mediocre because top dbs come at a premium.

If he is so bad why is he the 44th highest paid CB in the league?

I am not claiming that he is a star, but with most teams playing 3 CBs in their base defense 44th in the league is pretty good.  Even if you only count 2 starters per team that makes him better than 20 other starters.

(07-02-2019, 03:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  Dre had more than 1 good year.

2.  This is just another example of you making up your own definition of "mediocre" and "subpar".  PFFs #52 ranking was "above average", but you just make up your own definition to fit your narrative.

1 Good year, 2 Mediocre years. Out of 9 years as a Bengal.

52nd ranking while being the 6th best run defender means he is atrocious against the pass.

(07-02-2019, 03:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is not true at all.  It is yards per "target" not yards per "completion".  Slot receivers usually cover short passes that are more likely to be completed. 

Wes Welker, arguably the greatest slot receiver of all time, playing with the best QB of all time: career 7.8 yards per target.
TJ Houshmandzadeh: 7.4 YPT

AJ Green: 8.7 YPT
Julio Jones: 9.8 YPT
Randy Moss: 8.8 YPT
Terrell Owens: 8.5 YPT
Calvin Johnson: 8.9 YPT
Chad Johnson: 8.1 YPT

The higher pass completion is vastly offset by a lack of 20+ and 40+ yard plays. It can't make up for it in the end when a player plays all or the majority of the snaps in the slot. There's too many tacklers around and you're being relied upon to secure first downs rather than explosive plays.

(07-02-2019, 06:21 PM)MasonDT70 Wrote: While he definitely hasn't lived up to his draft placement, 52nd out of what is essentially most likely 96ish starting cbs(since most teams seem to run 3cb sets most often) isnt too bad. Itd probably be better to see where he is ranked among slot CBs though, as that's where he seems to play most often. I dont have access to pff so I have no clue as to how he ranks among other slot CBs.

His willingness to play the run also leads me to think he could move to safety if shawn William's or bates gets injured. He could turn out to be better suited for that. I know demarious randall was a bad cb for the packers but is a pretty solid safety for the browns.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

52nd was overall, while Fred's thread was about him being 6th in run defense. If you're 52nd overall, but 6th in run defense, that means you were terrible in coverage. All the more lending to my point that he should have been a safety. 

(07-02-2019, 07:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If he is so bad why is he the 44th highest paid CB in the league?

I am not claiming that he is a star, but with most teams playing 3 CBs in their base defense 44th in the league is pretty good.  Even if you only count 2 starters per team that makes him better than 20 other starters.

"He's paid more than rookies, so he MUST be good. That's why Dennard is "better" William Jackson and 19 other starters, because he makes more." - Fred



This argument didn't work when Nate Livings got overpaid and quickly cut and out of the league. It didn't work when Dre Kirkpatrick got overpaid. It's not going to work now. I don't know why you keep falling back on this one... nobody has ever bought it.

(07-02-2019, 07:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If he is so bad why is he the 44th highest paid CB in the league?

I am not claiming that he is a star, but with most teams playing 3 CBs in their base defense 44th in the league is pretty good.  Even if you only count 2 starters per team that makes him better than 20 other starters.

He was a #21 draft pick. His salary has absolutely nothing to do with talent. If he was as good as you say teams would have been salivating to take him in free agency. Guess what? No other team offered him what he wanted so he came back with his tail between his legs. Any employee, any job will take less from another company before eating crow. All I hear is this players great. That Players great. but the bottom line is they haven't won a playoff game IN A QUARTER CENTURY

(07-02-2019, 01:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Thank goodness we have much more advanced stats to rate CBs than PD and INT.  And people who look at these advanced metrics already consider Dennard a "player of note".  Fans who just look at INTs will think that Patrick Peterson is not a very good CB.

In 2017 PFF ranked him as the 32nd best CB overall and Bleacher Report had him as the #9 slot corner.

Last year Football Outsiders ranked Dennard 29th (out of 85 qualified CBs) in yards allowed per target.

Those are far from "mediocre to subpar results"

I thought we learned not to use PFF rankings for cornerbacks?