Re: New Look Defense
 

Quote:
Zac Boyer
‏@ZacBoyer Phillip Thomas said Joe Barry told the defensive players that he's never had to work on players' tackling as much as he has this year.

They haven't even put on the pads yet. Joe Barry doesn't know the half of what he's in for with some of these players.

But fear not because Scot will just continue to get rid of players who can't or won't tackle and add players who can and will tackle. I trust that we're on the right track as far as tackling is concerned.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1114417]Here are some defensive stats from last year:
[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2014 DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY RATINGS[/url]

Football Outsiders Defensive Efficiency Stats:

Overall Defense: 30th

Pass Defense: 32nd Dead Dog Last

Rush Defense: 9th

I like the above FBO defensive stats because raw yards and even points doesn't completely isolate the defense from special teams and offense.

Other stats I like to judge the defense:
[url=http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2014&seasonType=REG&role=OPP&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&conference=ALL&defensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_SACKED]NFL Stats: by Team Category[/url]

QB rating against: 108.3 or Dead Dog Last

YPA against: 8.2 tied w/ ATL for Dead Dog Last

Total Interceptions: 7 tied for 4th least

Sacks: 36 tied for 21st[/quote]

Yeesh! We [U]really[/U] sucked last season. Well, ever onward! I'm looking forward to seeing some improvement this season.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1114442]Tackling wasn't a focus within the haslett scheme[/QUOTE]

Ummmm ... are you suggesting that there WAS a focus?

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

Re: New Look Defense
 

Taylor Mays back on the market.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1114446]Ummmm ... are you suggesting that there WAS a focus?

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk[/quote]

I think one focus was the ability to successfully chase the other team into the end zone. I think I remember a quote by haslett, and I might be paraphrasing here, but he said something along the lines of "when the game is over and our opponents leave the field I want them to be physically out of breath from being chased all day into the end zone. we are gonna chase harder than anyone else in the league."

I call that focus

Re: New Look Defense
 

Yes that is similar to the strategy of using your face to wear down your opponents fists in the manly arts......
It's good to have a strategy.

Re: New Look Defense
 

How the....Hell did we get Bill Callahan away from the boys?
Love this guy...

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Hog1;1114549]How the....Hell did we get Bill Callahan away from the boys?
Love this guy...[/quote]

He's buddies with Bruce Allen going back to the Raiders days.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Thanx for the post. I was thinking.....MAN this dude is gold
Is it not sweeter still to .....put it to the boys like that

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1114297]Last year:
[IMG]https://www.profootballfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2014-depth-update-WAS.png[/IMG][/quote]

The front 5 has taken a huge step forward; to the point where on paper they match-up well with any front 5 in the league.

ROLB-Gallette
RDE-Hatcher
NT-Knighton
LDE-Paea
LOLB-Kerrigan

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1115746]The front 5 has taken a huge step forward; to the point where on paper they match-up well with any front 5 in the league.

ROLB-Gallette
RDE-Hatcher
NT-Knighton
LDE-Paea
LOLB-Kerrigan[/quote]

I agree, with a couple of caveats. First, I think Hatcher needs to bounce back with a good season. Second, a lengthy suspension for Gallette would slow down our pass rush. Otherwise, the unit is looking good.

Re: New Look Defense
 

We have great defensive line depth now and we will be substituting a lot to keep the guys fresh. That is great. I still say we should not use Hatcher as a you would a starter. Especially in preseason and early in the season. He is very valuable but he is an older guy that has knee issues as most guys his age do. We need to use him like we used Jumpy Geathers back in the day. Pass rush and goalline specialist.

Re: New Look Defense
 

While Scot McC is my current man-crush, I just keep waiting for the other shoe to fall.

On paper, as it almost always does, things look good. I mean, on the DL, it looks like upgrades to talent and depth across the line. However, I have fallen for this one too many times. So Scotty got some reputably talented guys at market cheap deals (Knighton, Paea, Gallette) and some reasonable depth (Francois). They all have flaws and there were reasons they were not "highly prized" UFA's.

As much as In Scot I Trust, been there done that too many times, I will wait and see what they look like in Sept. before I let myself surrender to the call of the Kool-Aid.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[B]While Scot McC is my current man-crush, I just keep waiting for the other shoe to fall.[/B]

Keeps me awake at night...
I am trying desperately NOT to board the band wagon until it's more than on paper.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1115747]I agree, with a couple of caveats. First, I think Hatcher needs to bounce back with a good season.[/quote]*Shrugs* I think Hatcher is an example of perception not matching up with reality. Hatcher as 34 DE was getting after the passer at high rate despite Haslett's scheme. His PRP (pass rush productivity combo of sacks, hurries and QB hits) was [U][B][I]2nd[/I][/B][/U] only to [I]JJ Watt[/I] @ 9.6. He finished with 40 total pressures out of 333 rushes. Looking at the PRP suggests a flaw with the scheme/playing time because Hatch's 333 rushes is a low number compared to other top 34 DE/43 DTs: Watt 632, Heyward 501, Suh 530, Geno 459, Casey 487, Richardson 434.

Another good sign though? Paea also finished top 10. He was 9th with a PRP of [B][U]8.7[/U][/B] with 47 total pressures out of 418 rushes.


[url]https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/02/09/sig-stats-prp-defensive-interior/[/url]

[quote]Second, a lengthy suspension for Gallette would slow down our pass rush. Otherwise, the unit is looking good[/quote]I hear yah on the looming Gallette suspension. I think its a matter of how long a suspension because it sure seems like one is coming. But when he comes off suspension? Sick. It will be like have 2 Ryan Kerrigan's rushing the passer.

And even without Gallette I think Trent Murphy and Preston Smith will add something to the pass rush simply because they'll have easier match-ups then last year. Adding Paea next to Hatcher and Ryan is gonna make life easy for whomever the 4th rusher will be. And I really like Smith as movable chess piece. In college the dude played everywhere from stand up OLB to hand in the dirt DT lined up over a OG.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1114417]Here are some defensive stats from last year:
[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2014 DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY RATINGS[/url]

Football Outsiders Defensive Efficiency Stats:

Overall Defense: 30th

Pass Defense: 32nd Dead Dog Last

Rush Defense: 9th

I like the above FBO defensive stats because raw yards and even points doesn't completely isolate the defense from special teams and offense.

Other stats I like to judge the defense:
[url=http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2014&seasonType=REG&role=OPP&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&conference=ALL&defensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_SACKED]NFL Stats: by Team Category[/url]

QB rating against: 108.3 or Dead Dog Last

YPA against: 8.2 tied w/ ATL for Dead Dog Last

Total Interceptions: 7 tied for 4th least

Sacks: 36 tied for 21st[/quote]

Football Outsiders Defensive Efficiency Stats:

Overall Defense: 30th----->[COLOR="green"]21st(2016)[/COLOR]

Pass Defense: 32nd Dead Dog Last------>[COLOR="Green"]19th(2016)[/COLOR]

Rush Defense: 9th---------->[B][COLOR="Red"]22nd(2016)[/COLOR][/B]

NFL:

QB rating against: 108.3 or Dead Dog Last------------>[COLOR="green"]96.1[/COLOR]

YPA against: 8.2 tied w/ ATL for Dead Dog Last--------->[COLOR="green"]7.8[/COLOR]

Total Interceptions: 7 tied for 4th least------>[COLOR="green"]11 tied for 21st[/COLOR]

Sacks: 36 tied for 21st----------->[COLOR="green"]38 sacks 14th[/COLOR]

Re: New Look Defense
 

From Football Outsiders:
[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2015 DEFENSIVE LINES[/url]
Front 7:

[B][U]20th[/U][/B] in stuffed runs (runs stop for no gain or a loss) down from 13th

[B][U]30th[/U][/B] in 2nd level yards (RBs yards between 5-10 yards past LOS) down from 8th

Sack rate was [B][U]8th[/U][/B] at 7.3% up from [B][U]17th[/U][/B] 6.6%

Re: New Look Defense
 

[url]https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/01/08/pro-top-10-defensive-lines-of-2015/[/url]

9. Washington Redskins (7)

Starters: OLB Trent Murphy, DE Chris I. Baker, NT Terrence Knighton, DE Jason Hatcher, OLB Ryan Kerrigan

Rotation: DE Ricky Jean-Francois, DE Stephen Paea, DE Kedric Golston, OLB Preston Smith

Washington’s front is not the stoutest against the run, but they have a number of consistent pass rushers. Ryan Kerrigan and Trent Murphy were not outstanding by any means, but they combined for a +16.7 cumulative pass rush grade. Interior defensive lineman Chris Baker (82.7) and Jason Hatcher (74.6) also pushed the pocket on a consistent basis. The former also played the run well in 2015 (81.7 run defense grade), unlike his teammate, Hatcher (48.4 run defense grade), who’s been a specialist pass rusher for awhile. Jean-Francois and Knighton combined for a +13.8 cumulative run defense grade, giving Washington a pair of stout run defenders. Stephen Paea (75.8) also proved to be a useful free agent addition, despite getting on the field for just 221 snaps. Preston Smith gives Washington some depth on the edge, even if he ultimately ended up with a poor overall grade this season (68.8). He’s flashed serious potential as a pass rusher, finishing the year with eight sacks and 35 combined pressures

Re: New Look Defense
 

What do you attribute to the decline in stopping the run this year?

Is a 1 gap that much different than a 2 gap against the run? Does that mean our LBs dropped the ball?

Do others 1 gap teams play a true NT? Denver doesn't have a 350+ NT but they are kind of the exception.

What gives?

Re: New Look Defense
 

Just from a fan perspective, Compton seemed to be able to control and set the defense up for stopping the run a lot better than anyone else.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1138626]What do you attribute to the decline in stopping the run this year?[/quote]

o scheme change from 1-gap to 2-gap

o ILBs not used to/not adapting well to having to take on and shed more blocks

[quote]Is a 1 gap that much different than a 2 gap against the run? Does that mean our LBs dropped the ball?[/quote]From what I know about the difference between 1-gap and 2-gap, yes the scheme is that much different.
Up front the 2-gap DL are occupying blocks and keeping the 2nd level ILBs free to make the plays. 1-gap the DL is freed to penetrate and get up field and that causes the ILB to have to stack and shed instead of running and chasing.


[quote]Do others 1 gap teams play a true NT? Denver doesn't have a 350+ NT but they are kind of the exception.[/quote]I don't know how you define true NT; but you don't "need" a space eater NT in 1-gap.

Re: New Look Defense
 

I like FO:

[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2015 DEFENSIVE LINES[/url]

Not sure how much one can really make of these stats, but. . .

We ranked number 1 in short yardage and goal line situations. I think Chris Baker should get a large part of the credit for that ranking. He blew up so many short yardage plays this year.

We ranked 30th in "2nd level" but that doesn't mean it's all on the LBs if someone in front of them didn't take on a blocker or missed contain. It just means we were bad, the ranking doesn't clarify which unit broke down. Although, Perry Riley hasn't shed a block since he has been here.

What I thought was the most disappointing stat, was from the 2nd chart on the page that lists run direction.

We had our worst ranking containing the run right up the middle with a ranking of 26th. Can't base everything off of a ranking like this but I think it is representative of what was happening during the games and part of the reason why I don't think Knighton will be back next year.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Speed to the sidelines and in the second level was a big problem, along with bad angles and everything else.

Re: New Look Defense
 

^^ I agree. Out team speed on D strikes me as pretty mediocre.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1138639]Not sure how much one can really make of these stats, but[/quote]That's why in this thread, and in general, I like to look at [I][B]multiple[/B][/I] stats. Imho its the combination of stats in conjunction to watching the games closely that allows people to make the most accurate assessments.

[quote]We ranked number 1 in short yardage and goal line situations. I think Chris Baker should get a large part of the credit for that ranking. He blew up so many short yardage plays this year.[/quote]Being good in these situations imo clearly points to the DL playing stout. If they can stop the run when [I][B]every knows[/B][/I] its a run that's bodes well. Also, it seems arbitrary to give credit only to Baker.

[quote]We ranked 30th in "2nd level" but that doesn't mean it's all on the LBs if someone in front of them didn't take on a blocker or missed contain. It just means we were bad, the ranking doesn't clarify which unit broke down. Although, Perry Riley hasn't shed a block since he has been here.[/quote]No, it doesn't mean its all on the LBs.
We already looked at situations where its up to the DL to answer the call and in those instances they were very good.

This is where other stats come in. If you look at the individual DL grades for run defense Baker, Knighton and Ricky all grade well. But if you look at the ILBs grades only Mason rates well in run defense.

Sure we could speculate that the DL didn't take on a blocker which would absolve the ILBs of blame. But, I don't see any statistical support or even schematic support for that rationale because in this defense its not the DL role to take up blocks.

The stats and scheme suggest to me that the blame is distributed between the DL and ILBs and the scheme. However individually if its me, I'm looking at Hatcher, Riley, Compton and Keenan.

Delving deeper, I'm not all that mad at Hatcher because he makes up for it with pass rush. One could argue the play/production suggests that Hatcher and the defense would be better served with Hatch in a strictly situational pass rusher role and for Ricky to play more 'base' D.

[quote]What I thought was the most disappointing stat, was from the 2nd chart on the page that lists run direction.

We had our worst ranking containing the run right up the middle with a ranking of 26th. Can't base everything off of a ranking like this but I think it is representative of what was happening during the games and part of the reason why I don't think Knighton will be back next year.[/quote]I'm not sure why you would isolate Knighton for blame here?

FBO doesn't differentiate between any runs between the tackle and counts them all as 'middle'. Also, the ILBs play a key role in defending middle runs because each ILB is responsible for a gap on either side of Knighton and depending on the type of play they need to get downhill and bump faces with an OG. And again when you look at the individual grading and their histories, Knighton comes off looking far less culpable then Riley, Compton and Keenan.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2016/03/28/redskins-leaning-toward-further-de-emphasizing-the-nose-tackle/[/url]

Not sure if this is how they really feel or pre-draft misinformation.

I think this defense takes a step in the wrong direction without finding replacements or upgrades.

Re: New Look Defense
 

wrong image

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1141372][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2016/03/28/redskins-leaning-toward-further-de-emphasizing-the-nose-tackle/[/url]

Not sure if this is how they really feel or pre-draft misinformation.

I think this defense takes a step in the wrong direction without finding replacements or upgrades.[/quote]

we're not done with the draft or post draft FA yet. knighton wasn't a star, and as of now, is still available. if your thinking about the ditching of hatcher, chances are keeping him = lots of injury time off this season. old and bad knees, not a great mix. we'll definitely be able to see how it plays out though.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1141372][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2016/03/28/redskins-leaning-toward-further-de-emphasizing-the-nose-tackle/[/url]

Not sure if this is how they really feel or pre-draft misinformation.

I think this defense takes a step in the wrong direction without finding replacements or upgrades.[/quote]

I'm having a hard time believing they're going into next year relying on guys over 30 to man the middle of the line.

Re: New Look Defense
 

They are trying to get more picks in a super deep defensive line draft.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=That Guy;1141378]...if your thinking about the ditching of hatcher, chances are keeping him = lots of injury time off this season. old and bad knees, not a great mix. we'll definitely be able to see how it plays out though.[/quote]Maybe so but Hatcher was a productive player, one of our best interior rushers losing him created a hole we haven't yet filled.

I would like it better if our FA moves left us in position to take the BPA. But it seems like our FA moves are suggesting a DL selection at 21 in this draft it will probably work out that BPA is a DL.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Be still my heart....

[quote=John Keim]...They[Redskins] still have interest in end Jason Hatcher, running back Pierre Thomas and safety Dashon Goldson.[/quote]

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24383/page/nflfreeagency/redskins-dwindling-cap-space-still-allows-for-some-moves-draft-pick-signings]Redskins' dwindling cap space still allows for moves, signing picks - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]

[quote=JK]The Washington Redskins re-signed eight of their 16 unrestricted free agents -- and still might bring back one more.

They might not be done bringing back other players they cut, either, as a source says they remain interested in defensive end Jason Hatcher and safety Dashon Goldson, both of whom were released before free agency but who remain unsigned.[/quote]

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24367/redskins-remain-interested-in-re-signing-some-of-their-own-free-agents]Washington Redskins interested in some of their remaining free agents - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1141568]Be still my heart....



[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24383/page/nflfreeagency/redskins-dwindling-cap-space-still-allows-for-some-moves-draft-pick-signings]Redskins' dwindling cap space still allows for moves, signing picks - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]



[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24367/redskins-remain-interested-in-re-signing-some-of-their-own-free-agents]Washington Redskins interested in some of their remaining free agents - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url][/quote]

I look at Hatcher much like I looked at Pot Roast....not a priority BUT can still be productive player as a rotational piece within the defense. He is a pocket collapsing pass rusher...space-eating, double teaming type who could free up JG who would line up over top of him or beside him when Hatcher would kick inside. I would not mind Hatcher back on the squad.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Chico23231;1141569]I look at Hatcher much like I looked at Pot Roast....not a priority BUT can still be productive player as a rotational piece within the defense. He is a pocket collapsing pass rusher...space-eating, double teaming type who could free up JG who would line up over top of him or beside him when Hatcher would kick inside. I would not mind Hatcher back on the squad.[/quote]

I agree. The problem is Hatcher will not play unless he gets a substantial dollar amount. For a guy with bad knees and really should only be a pass rush situational player, that is a problem. Hopefully he prices the market and comes back to us at a fair price.

Re: New Look Defense
 

hatcher and goldson were released because of their contracts, if they're cheap enough, of course they'd want them back. it's just whether they can agree on a price point or not.

Re: New Look Defense
 

The most interesting nugget in this is that Murphy will be working with the DL and converting to end:

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24567/redskins-lb-ryan-kerrigan-says-players-hungrier-after-2015-success]Ryan Kerrigan says Washington Redskins hungrier after 2015 success - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1141912]The most interesting nugget in this is that Murphy will be working with the DL and converting to end:

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/24567/redskins-lb-ryan-kerrigan-says-players-hungrier-after-2015-success]Ryan Kerrigan says Washington Redskins hungrier after 2015 success - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url][/quote]

I'm looking forward to seeing what Murphy can do at DE. He's stout against the run and he has some pass rush ability, so I think he could help us as a DE if he can put on more weight and still be effective.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1141920]I'm looking forward to seeing what Murphy can do at DE. He's stout against the run and he has some pass rush ability, so I think he could help us as a DE if he can put on more weight and still be effective.[/quote]

It's his last chance, so he needs to deliver.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Do they mean he's attempting to move to a 5-tech DE as in 34 Base D? Or do they mean a DE in a 4 man line that we use upwards of 65% of the time?

Saying a 34 OLB is moving to DE is vague.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Chico23231;1141925]It's his last chance, so he needs to deliver.[/quote]

it's not like he was terrible last year, but he's not fast, and that was known pre-draft, so coverage was never going to be a strong point. DL seems like a better fit.