Bengals PFF Roster Grades

[SunsetBengal]

(03-19-2017, 01:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'm glad to see PFF give Bodine the rating he deserves. The following charts show just how valuable he is in the run game:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

When we run up the middle we ate the 6th best in the league.The problem is when we run away from the middle. Folks have got it in their heads that Bodine is terrible and no amount of good play is going to change it.

One thing that I learned from that data that I was not aware of, is just how bad our RBs were in 2nd level and open field yardage.  They stunk.  Those numbers likely would have been even uglier, had Burkhead not come on so strong at the end of the year.

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2017, 10:59 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Acknowledge what they're saying. How many of these "64 DE's" are 3-4 DE's?

Where does MJ rank strictly among 4-3 DE's?

(03-19-2017, 12:15 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Hello Kettle, you're black!

You might not have made up the rankings, but you infer it is among "all DEs" which have vastly different responsibilities.  If you think MJ is one of the better 4-3 DEs, you do the rankings to prove it.  Because virtually everyone else sees him as well below average.  

Again, nice guy, not an impact player at a key position on the defense.  

(03-19-2017, 12:17 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: How many play in 4-3s and how many play in 3-4s?  Vastly different positions, resposibilities, etc.  What is your ranking based on?  Do you know?  If it is among all DEs from both types of defenses, then it is useless.  

(03-19-2017, 12:19 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Pot still calling kettle a racist term.  And I am glad no one cares...including you that seems to read every post and retort with some flimsy argument where you can't even cite the position groups you are ranking.  

Lots of squealing.

Not one post with a single stat in it.

Why don't I just claim that MJ is nactually ranked higher among 4-3 DEs if you remove all of the 3-4 DEs?  That is what all of you are doing.  just making stuff up and claiming iot is true without anything at all to back it up.

I do my research with the tools I have.  4-3 DEs and 3-4 DEs are all listed as DEs.  If you are going to claim it makes a difference how MJ is ranked then show me the numbers that prove it.  

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2017, 12:15 PM)SHRacerX Wrote:  Because virtually everyone else sees him as well below average.  

And last year at this time every tried to say Kirkpatrick was one of the worst CBs in the entire league in '15.  All of those people were wrong about Kirkpatrick and all of them are now wrong about MJ.

It all comes back to the people who do not realize how rare starting quality players are in the NFL.  Being an average starter means being better than some other players who are starting in the league.  And those other lesser players are staring because there are not piles and piles of quality starters lying around unemployed.  In fact they are hard to find.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-19-2017, 09:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And last year at this time every tried to say Kirkpatrick was one of the worst CBs in the entire league in '15.  All of those people were wrong about Kirkpatrick and all of them are now wrong about MJ.

It all comes back to the people who do not realize how rare starting quality players are in the NFL.  Being an average starter means being better than some other players who are starting in the league.  And those other lesser players are staring because there are not piles and piles of quality starters lying around unemployed.  In fact they are hard to find.

Sorry, but comparing an inexperienced Kirkpatrick who had injury issues that greatly affected his playing time early to MJ screams of desperation.  Last year was following his first full year as a starter and he did have his struggles, but the intelligent individuals knew he was going to get all of 2016 to prove his worth and, although he started slowly, he did prove his worth by year's end. 

Horrible analogy.  Try again.  

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2017, 11:15 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Sorry, but comparing an inexperienced Kirkpatrick who had injury issues that greatly affected his playing time early to MJ screams of desperation.  Last year was following his first full year as a starter and he did have his struggles, but the intelligent individuals knew he was going to get all of 2016 to prove his worth and, although he started slowly, he did prove his worth by year's end. 

Horrible analogy.  Try again.  

No.  It is a perfect analogy.  Kirkpatrick was ranked in the top 30 in almost every objective stat I could find yet many people here were arguing that he was complete garbage.  You know how some fans here like to pick out a whipping boy and then get more excited about coming up with clever vways to insult him instead of saying anything about football?  Well that was Kirkpatrick after the '15 season when he had actually played very well.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-20-2017, 08:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  It is a perfect analogy.  Kirkpatrick was ranked in the top 30 in almost every objective stat I could find yet many people here were arguing that he was complete garbage.  You know how some fans here like to pick out a whipping boy and then get more excited about coming up with clever vways to insult him instead of saying anything about football?  Well that was Kirkpatrick after the '15 season when he had actually played very well.

No, it really isn't.  Kirkpatrick played poorly at the beginning of the 15 season and improved throughout it.  I don't think people like myself are trying to be clever and insult MJ by simply stating the obvious:  On a team that relies on its front four for pressure, he provides very litte from the RDE spot and an upgrade is needed.  

[Luvnit2]

(03-20-2017, 09:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: No, it really isn't.  Kirkpatrick played poorly at the beginning of the 15 season and improved throughout it.  I don't think people like myself are trying to be clever and insult MJ by simply stating the obvious:  On a team that relies on its front four for pressure, he provides very litte from the RDE spot and an upgrade is needed.  

Just a thought, if we need an upgrade (not saying we don't) at RDE, if MJ is as bad as you think, then why are we also holding on to Clarke. If you are correct, the coaches must think Clarke is really bad since he gets minimal backup snaps and can't overtake MJ. My point is maybe we need 2 DE's versus just one.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-20-2017, 09:50 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Just a thought, if we need an upgrade (not saying we don't) at RDE, if MJ is as bad as you think, then why are we also holding on to Clarke. If you are correct, the coaches must think Clarke is really bad since he gets minimal backup snaps and can't overtake MJ. My point is maybe we need 2 DE's versus just one.

Robert Geathers got numerous snaps over Dunlap.  John Thornton got snaps over Geno.  There are a lot of examples of players that were veterans getting snaps over younger, potentially better players.  It drives me nuts, but it happens.  

Clarke is younger, and much cheaper than MJ.  He had more sacks than MJ in less than 1/3rd the snaps.  And he is still on his rookie deal.  

Keeping Clarke as a backup, rotational guy is fine, but to make a difference we need a better first line option.

[Okeana]

(03-20-2017, 09:50 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Just a thought, if we need an upgrade (not saying we don't) at RDE, if MJ is as bad as you think, then why are we also holding on to Clarke. If you are correct, the coaches must think Clarke is really bad since he gets minimal backup snaps and can't overtake MJ. My point is maybe we need 2 DE's versus just one.

This is true which is why during the combine there was a lot of buzz about them getting two ends in the first 4 rounds.  

[fredtoast]

(03-20-2017, 10:05 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Robert Geathers got numerous snaps over Dunlap.  John Thornton got snaps over Geno.

Geathers was better than many fans gave him credit for, and Dunlap benefited from playing in a rotation.

Thornton retired two years before Geno was drafted.

[Joelist]

It was Pat Sims who Thornton told Marvin needed to play.

[fredtoast]

(03-20-2017, 09:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote:  Kirkpatrick played poorly at the beginning of the 15 season and improved throughout it.

He played well the entire season, yet this exact same time last year you were calling him garbage and hoping that he left when his contract was up.

(03-20-2017, 09:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't think people like myself are trying to be clever and insult MJ by simply stating the obvious

No.  But you were when you searched for colorful terms like "china doll" to insult Dre.

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Josh-Shaw-postgame-with-Lap?pid=261517&highlight=kirkpatrick#pid261517

post 25

He is MUCH more physical than the china doll Kirkpatrick.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-19-2017, 09:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote:
And last year at this time every tried to say Kirkpatrick was one of the worst CBs in the entire league in '15.  All of those people were wrong about Kirkpatrick and all of them are now wrong about MJ.

It all comes back to the people who do not realize how rare starting quality players are in the NFL.  Being an average starter means being better than some other players who are starting in the league.  And those other lesser players are staring because there are not piles and piles of quality starters lying around unemployed.  In fact they are hard to find.

The numbers said he was in 2015.....PFF graded him at around 38 or something?  He showed a lot of improvement in 2016, lets hope it wasn't just to get a big pay day.

[fredtoast]

(03-20-2017, 11:41 AM)Wyche Wrote: The numbers said he was in 2015.....PFF graded him at around 38 or something?  He showed a lot of improvement in 2016, lets hope it wasn't just to get a big pay day.

In 2015 PFF had Dre ranked as the 114th CB in the league behind a lot of scrubs who barely played.  this despite the fact that he ranked in the top 30 in almost every objective statistic i could find.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-20-2017, 11:45 AM)fredtoast Wrote: In 2015 PFF had Dre ranked as the 114th CB in the league behind a lot of scrubs who barely played.  this despite the fact that he ranked in the top 30 in almost every objective statistic i could find.

While I certainly wouldn't have put him at 114, he did grade poorly.  Seems he had a bunch of penalties in '15.  His strong suit was chasing down plays and preventing TDs from across the field, but he was coming up to speed on a lot of his game early on that year.  There's no denying he was a much improved player in 2016.

[Shake n Blake]

(03-19-2017, 09:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Lots of squealing.

Not one post with a single stat in it.

Why don't I just claim that MJ is nactually ranked higher among 4-3 DEs if you remove all of the 3-4 DEs?  That is what all of you are doing.  just making stuff up and claiming iot is true without anything at all to back it up.

I do my research with the tools I have.  4-3 DEs and 3-4 DEs are all listed as DEs.  If you are going to claim it makes a difference how MJ is ranked then show me the numbers that prove it.  

That's what I thought. 

[*bfine32*]

(03-20-2017, 11:45 AM)fredtoast Wrote: In 2015 PFF had Dre ranked as the 114th CB in the league behind a lot of scrubs who barely played.  this despite the fact that he ranked in the top 30 in almost every objective statistic i could find.

Didn't you also mention something about him not giving up any TDs until I showed videos of all the passing TDs we gave up that year? Many of them had something in common. 

Dre had a poor 2015 and had a solid 2016 and I think PFF rankings indicate that. 

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-20-2017, 10:53 AM)fredtoast Wrote: He played well the entire season, yet this exact same time last year you were calling him garbage and hoping that he left when his contract was up.





No.  But you were when you searched for colorful terms like "china doll" to insult Dre.

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Josh-Shaw-postgame-with-Lap?pid=261517&highlight=kirkpatrick#pid261517

post 25

He is MUCH more physical than the china doll Kirkpatrick.

Yep, and that post was 100% accurate.  Shaw has emerged as the slot CB and WJIII and Dennard taking the outside spots would have allowed them to not HAVE to sign Dre...obviously, they are both still unknowns and therefor necessitated that they keep Dre.  

This is fun.  What other facts are you going to dig up from me that will only make you look silly?

[Socal Bengals fan]

Can we just all agree michael Johnson is not very good at football

[Luvnit2]

(03-20-2017, 08:10 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Yep, and that post was 100% accurate.  Shaw has emerged as the slot CB and WJIII and Dennard taking the outside spots would have allowed them to not HAVE to sign Dre...obviously, they are both still unknowns and therefor necessitated that they keep Dre.  

This is fun.  What other facts are you going to dig up from me that will only make you look like a bigger pinhead?

Jackson is the biggest unknown and my hope shows why he was drafted in round 1.