Another Vinny Special: Deangelo Hall

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

You may be in line for a coordinator and/or front office position with the Redskins.

I don't think there is a huge gap in coverage ability between Rogers and Hall. Where the difference is clear is when the ball is in the air. Rogers hands turn into skillets while Hall can catch. Taking the ball away is more valuable than knocking it down. Corners get beat, what do they do to offset them getting beat is what makes them who they are. Rogers dropped an INT on the first possession yesterday, AGAIN. Give me a corner who can catch over one that cannot all day every day.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I don't think there is a huge gap in coverage ability between Rogers and Hall. Where the difference is clear is when the ball is in the air. Rogers hands turn into skillets while Hall can catch. Taking the ball away is more valuable than knocking it down. Corners get beat, what do they do to offset them getting beat is what makes them who they are. Rogers dropped an INT on the first possession yesterday, AGAIN. Give me a corner who can catch over one that cannot all day every day.

No sir! Bat that ball down. I'd rather have a shut down guy than a guy who gets beat for TDs, but comes up with an occasional INT.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

No sir! Bat that ball down. I'd rather have a shut down guy than a guy who gets beat for TDs, but comes up with an occasional INT.

But Rogers is far from a shutdown corner. He's good, no doubt, but until last season he got toasted pretty consistently for big plays. His swagger always far exceeded his production.

He's got more excuses than interceptions. His latest: Cornerback DeAngelo Hall(notes) confessed to having a subpar outing, and Rogers—who couldn’t get a grip on one that could have changed the game’s tone on the Giants’ first possession.

“I thought I had a shot at it, but I was facing that sun and that glare,” Rogers said. So the sun was in your eyes but you got two hands on it and dropped it. Again. Interesting.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There's about 8 different numbers I could cite to suggest otherwise, but since we both have two eyes and understand football well, I'll just point out that over their respective careers, the average pass thrown against Rogers goes for just under two yards less than the average pass thrown at Hall (I think 6.2 for Rogers and 7.9 for Hall). How great is that difference? Probably more than a win/year.

There's obviously a limiting effect on Rogers due to the fact that he doesn't get a whole lot of balls thrown his way, and seems to drop 5 or so of the 8 catchable INTs he gets in position for, but I'm not sure I'd call Hall a playmaker either, at least not one that creates his own plays. I think he's more of the oppertunistic type.

I think we can agree that for most of their respective careers that Hall has been on #1 WR and Rogers has been on #2 WR so you'd think the 1's are more apt to have deeper routes so that would make sense to have a higher YPA against.

I don't how you call a CB with 23 INT in 6 years not a playmaker but make excuses for one with 6 INT in 5 years. Who cares if he's the opportunistic type if he takes advantage of the opportunities. Rogers clearly does not.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

But Rogers is far from a shutdown corner. He's good, no doubt, but until last season he got toasted pretty consistently for big plays. His swagger always far exceeded his production.

He's got more excuses than interceptions. His latest: Cornerback DeAngelo Hall(notes) confessed to having a subpar outing, and Rogers—who couldn’t get a grip on one that could have changed the game’s tone on the Giants’ first possession.

“I thought I had a shot at it, but I was facing that sun and that glare,” Rogers said. So the sun was in your eyes but you got two hands on it and dropped it. Again. Interesting.

I think we can agree that for most of their respective careers that Hall has been on #1 WR and Rogers has been on #2 WR so you'd think the 1's are more apt to have deeper routes so that would make sense to have a higher YPA against.

I don't how you call a CB with 23 INT in 6 years not a playmaker but make excuses for one with 6 INT in 5 years. Who cares if he's the opportunistic type if he takes advantage of the opportunities. Rogers clearly does not.

Well, like I said, there's really no debate between them. You asserted that Hall was just as good of a cover guy as Rogers, but obviously that's not the case. I just gave you one number to support that, but theres 5-7 more I could dig through my records to find. It's not necessary though, we both know who the Giants were avoiding yesterday.

Where there's a lot more gray area is: how valuable are Hall's interceptions, given the fact that he's the target of most gameplan's by opponents over the last three seasons. If teams are trying to live off passes at Hall's receiver, regardless of who he is covering, there should be a reasonable expectations for INTs regardless of how adept the player is at creating oppertunities. And you'd expect a player like Hall to intercept more passes than a player like Rogers, talent aside.

But ~4.5 INTs/season is a lot more than ~1.7 INTs/season. The question is, how much more valuable given the context? And I don't have a really great mathmatical answer for this, but I suspect, given all the extra throws at a player like Hall, probably not very much. I'm open to other interpretations though.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, like I said, there's really no debate between them. You asserted that Hall was just as good of a cover guy as Rogers, but obviously that's not the case. I just gave you one number to support that, but theres 5-7 more I could dig through my records to find. It's not necessary though, we both know who the Giants were avoiding yesterday.

Where there's a lot more gray area is: how valuable are Hall's interceptions, given the fact that he's the target of most gameplan's by opponents over the last three seasons. If teams are trying to live off passes at Hall's receiver, regardless of who he is covering, there should be a reasonable expectations for INTs regardless of how adept the player is at creating oppertunities. And you'd expect a player like Hall to intercept more passes than a player like Rogers, talent aside.

But ~4.5 INTs/season is a lot more than ~1.7 INTs/season. The question is, how much more valuable given the context? And I don't have a really great mathmatical answer for this, but I suspect, given all the extra throws at a player like Hall, probably not very much. I'm open to other interpretations though.

Maybe he's not "as good" (although I've never been a huge Rogers fan) I don't think the disparity is as wide as you portray in their coverage abilities. Opportunities are opportunities. Teams threw at Deion and Darrell Green until they gave them reasons not to in the way of interceptions. Ignoring the positive impact that interceptions can have is kinda silly. You're way smarter than that.

I don't have the statistical capabilities to show how many of Hall's INT led to points vs. the number of dropped Roger INT led to opponents points but obviously it would tilt towards Hall.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Maybe he's not "as good" (although I've never been a huge Rogers fan) I don't think the disparity is as wide as you portray in their coverage abilities. Opportunities are opportunities. Teams threw at Deion and Darrell Green until they gave them reasons not to in the way of interceptions. Ignoring the positive impact that interceptions can have is kinda silly. You're way smarter than that.

I don't have the statistical capabilities to show how many of Hall's INT led to points vs. the number of dropped Roger INT led to opponents points but obviously it would tilt towards Hall.

Well, I'm not ignoring the positive impact. I'm just suggesting that I have some reason to believe that it's a small impact.

I can make some quick assumptions based on expected points. But, while this is based on information from expected point studies, none of this is at all scientific.

It's generally believed that:

30 expected points = 1 win
average INT = 3 ex. points (more or less depending on field position)
20 yards of field position = 1 ex. point (this is not linear, every yard is worth more closer to either end zone)

Assuming the above, Hall's INTs are worth 8 points per year more than Rogers INTs. That's about 1/3 of a win. But we also have to determine what % of that difference is purely circumstantial. And I think that would be at least half, though, there's no way I could prove that since I'm guessing. If I'm right though, we're talking about 4 total points difference between Hall and a second Rogers.

In my opinion, when you compare that to the 30-35 expected points (90-100 plays compared to 3-5 interceptions) that Hall will allow on completions that Rogers won't in any given year, it just seems really, really insignificant. But I could be looking at this completely wrong, not to mention that my estimations are fuzzy.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I don't think there is a huge gap in coverage ability between Rogers and Hall. Where the difference is clear is when the ball is in the air. Rogers hands turn into skillets while Hall can catch. Taking the ball away is more valuable than knocking it down. Corners get beat, what do they do to offset them getting beat is what makes them who they are. Rogers dropped an INT on the first possession yesterday, AGAIN. Give me a corner who can catch over one that cannot all day every day.

There's about 8 different numbers I could cite to suggest otherwise, but since we both have two eyes and understand football well, I'll just point out that over their respective careers, the average pass thrown against Rogers goes for just under two yards less than the average pass thrown at Hall (I think 6.2 for Rogers and 7.9 for Hall). How great is that difference? Probably more than a win/year.

There's obviously a limiting effect on Rogers due to the fact that he doesn't get a whole lot of balls thrown his way, and seems to drop 5 or so of the 8 catchable INTs he gets in position for, but I'm not sure I'd call Hall a playmaker either, at least not one that creates his own plays. I think he's more of the oppertunistic type.