Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Ravens)

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Bucket

You can't label someone something because of one incident, that's totally ludicrous. Hall tackles well for a cornerback and he is what he is. He'll give up plays trying to make big ones, but most of the time he makes more plays then he gives up. He was 3rd ont he team in tackles last year with almost 100 tackles.

On Hall's tackling, as others have mentioned, this is just an example, if you really watch the games closely or look at a DVR'd game....well let's just say the "eye in the sky don't lie".

Here is my problem with Hall and fans that support his play. Hall gives up far more plays than he makes, but the ones he makes are INTs and are what people remember from the game.
They don't remember:
- the 14 yds easy completion to Evans where hall wasn't within 2 yds of him
- or the 3 & 4 slant where Hall was abused, but fortunately the WR dropped
- or the whip route that Boldin abused Hall on for a first
- or the weak tackle effort from Hall on Boldin on the Otagwe blown coverage
- or the TD where Evans just blew by our #1 "speed" corner who couldn't recover and made no play on the ball
....and that was in 1 half without me really looking a Hall's tackling (I know he missed at least one other tackle)

Yes the INT for TD was a good play, but is it worth 2 first downs (a 3rd was dropped) to keep drives alive, plus a TD....I don't think so. Trust me on this, no OC fears Hall. On the contrary, OCs look to take advantage of Hall and for the most part they are successful.

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

On Hall's tackling, as others have mentioned, this is just an example, if you really watch the games closely or look at a DVR'd game....well let's just say the "eye in the sky don't lie".

Here is my problem with Hall and fans that support his play. Hall gives up far more plays than he makes, but the ones he makes are INTs and are what people remember from the game.
They don't remember:
- the 14 yds easy completion to Evans where hall wasn't within 2 yds of him
- or the 3 & 4 slant where Hall was abused, but fortunately the WR dropped
- or the whip route that Boldin abused Hall on for a first
- or the weak tackle effort from Hall on Boldin on the Otagwe blown coverage
- or the TD where Evans just blew by our #1 "speed" corner who couldn't recover and made no play on the ball
....and that was in 1 half without me really looking a Hall's tackling (I know he missed at least one other tackle)

Yes the INT for TD was a good play, but is it worth 2 first downs (a 3rd was dropped) to keep drives alive, plus a TD....I don't think so. Trust me on this, no OC fears Hall. On the contrary, OCs look to take advantage of Hall and for the most part they are successful.

You're just picking on the guy lol.. The Evans play was a good throw and play by the offense in which Hall still almost pulled the ball out to make a play.

The 3 yard slant? Really? Come on man.. He was tight on that coverage too, and if the WR makes the catch it's a 4 yard gain.

You're just being finicky with Hall, and it's the other side of the field we have to worry about more then Hall. Hall can't make all the plays,and he's not the guy who is going to lock down every play and every WR in the game today, but he's a good corner and I support him.

Our opinions wont change, so i'm going to agree to disagree. The guy won 2 games for us last year, and i'm glad he's a Redskin

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Bucket

You're just picking on the guy lol.. The Evans play was a good throw and play by the offense in which Hall still almost pulled the ball out to make a play.

The 3 yard slant? Really? Come on man.. He was tight on that coverage too, and if the WR makes the catch it's a 4 yard gain.

You're just being finicky with Hall, and it's the other side of the field we have to worry about more then Hall. Hall can't make all the plays,and he's not the guy who is going to lock down every play and every WR in the game today, but he's a good corner and I support him.

Our opinions wont change, so i'm going to agree to disagree. The guy won 2 games for us last year, and i'm glad he's a Redskin

The quick slant is one of the most important routes in football. A perfectly thrown quick slant will likely get a favorable down and distance at the very least, and it can easily be a 10 yard gain or more. I've seen how Brett Favre raped D's with that pass; it's not something to brush off lightly.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Bucket

You're just picking on the guy lol.. The Evans play was a good throw and play by the offense in which Hall still almost pulled the ball out to make a play.

The 3 yard slant? Really? Come on man.. He was tight on that coverage too, and if the WR makes the catch it's a 4 yard gain.

You're just being finicky with Hall, and it's the other side of the field we have to worry about more then Hall. Hall can't make all the plays,and he's not the guy who is going to lock down every play and every WR in the game today, but he's a good corner and I support him.

Our opinions wont change, so i'm going to agree to disagree. The guy won 2 games for us last year, and i'm glad he's a Redskin

The Hall bashing is really humorous on this board. Truth is, we see the other corners play a fraction of the time we see our guys week in and week out. So it's quite easy to take a handful of plays from the highlight reel or during the playoffs, when we see the other corners play nationally, and conclude they are head and shoulders above what we have. All corners give up big plays and miss tackles.

I'm not taking anything from from the other so called elite corners, but it seems we're nit-picking here. D.Hall had 95 tackles, 2 forced fumbles and six picks last year, and 16 defended passes. There are a lot of ways we could parse those stats and come to different conclusions, but given the front seven Hall playing in front of him last season and the plays he made, I'd still take him over the majority of cornerbacks in this league.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

The Hall bashing is really humorous on this board. Truth is, we see the other corners play a fraction of the time we see our guys week in and week out. So it's quite easy to take a handful of plays from the highlight reel or during the playoffs, when we see the other corners play nationally, and conclude they are heads and shoulders above what we have. All corners give up big plays and miss tackles.

I'm not taking anything from from the other so called elite corners, but it seems we're nit-picking here. D.Hall had 95 tackles, 2 forced fumbles and six picks last year, and 16 defended passes. There are a lot of ways we could parse those stats and come to different conclusions, but given the front seven Hall playing in front of him last season and the plays he made, I'd still take him over the majority of cornerbacks in this league.

Cornerback is one of the positions where stats are absolutely terrible at describing performance. Good coverage usually results in no stats being accrued.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Cornerback is one of the positions where stats are absolutely terrible at describing performance. Good coverage usually results in no stats being accrued.

Like I said we can parse the stats and come to different conclusions. Hall had twice as many tackles as Champ Baily. That probably says more about who Champ Baily had playing in front of him and the scheme than it does about Hall's tackling ability or lack thereof if you believe everything being said here. That said, you still don't make 95 arm tackles, at some point you have to conclude the guy stuck his helmet and pads in somebody's chest.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Like I said we can parse the stats and come to different conclusions. Hall had twice as many tackles as Champ Baily. That probably says more about who Champ Baily had playing in front of him and the scheme than it does about Hall's tackling ability or lack thereof if you believe everything being said here. That said, you still don't make 95 arm tackles, at some point you have to conclude the guy stuck his helmet and pads in somebody's chest.

Good corners do not make 95 tackles because such a high number of tackles means that corner is giving up away too many completions and thus is not feared by QBs.

Asomugha and Revis both have a far lower amount of tackles and NOBODY would argue that they're even on par with Hall; both are better. The reason why? Testing them usually results in a play that gains 0 yards(incompletions) or worse.
They do not sacrifice coverage for a small marginal gain in INTs. Breaking 10 picks in a season is a difficult task, and converting picks into points is hardly a guaranteed matter. The point differential between a successful INT by Hall and failed attempt by Hall must be a positive value, otherwise, he's likely hurting the team. Yes, you want guys who can grab picks when the situation DOES present itself(which Stonehands could not do), at the same time, you don't want them to take too much risk and then give up points.

Hell, Hall has never had more than 6 picks in a season. Thus, AT MOST, he would fetch 42 points based on "successful" picks. Since not every pick results in points, that number is far lower. But his number of UNSUCCESSFUL picks gives the opponent points. Since he is such a habitual gambler, I believe assuming he attempts at least 16 times a season to grab those picks is not out of the question. Heck, if his failed gambles led to a field goal every time, the points he snatch for the team and the points he helped cough up would be equal.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Good corners do not make 95 tackles because such a high number of tackles means that corner is giving up away too many completions and thus is not feared by QBs.

Asomugha and Revis both have a far lower amount of tackles and NOBODY would argue that they're even on par with Hall; both are better. The reason why? Testing them usually results in a play that gains 0 yards(incompletions) or worse.
They do not sacrifice coverage for a small marginal gain in INTs. Breaking 10 picks in a season is a difficult task, and converting picks into points is hardly a guaranteed matter. The point differential between a successful INT by Hall and failed attempt by Hall must be a positive value, otherwise, he's likely hurting the team. Yes, you want guys who can grab picks when the situation DOES present itself(which Stonehands could not do), at the same time, you don't want them to take too much risk and then give up points.

Hell, Hall has never had more than 6 picks in a season. Thus, AT MOST, he would fetch 42 points based on "successful" picks. Since not every pick results in points, that number is far lower. But his number of UNSUCCESSFUL picks gives the opponent points. Since he is such a habitual gambler, I believe assuming he attempts at least 16 times a season to grab those picks is not out of the question. Heck, if his failed gambles led to a field goal every time, the points he snatch for the team and the points he helped cough up would be equal.

I think you're missing the point or I'm not be entirely clear. I never put Hall in Asomugha and Revis' class, I'm not crazy. I also pointed out there are a couple of ways you could read Hall having 95 tackles. I suppose you could also reason away his ints and 16 defended passes. What's not really up for debate is that Hall is one helluva playmaker. And given the talent he's been playing with for the past three seasons and changing systems, I'm pretty satisfied with his production as a Redskin. Actually I'm very satisfied with his play as a Redskin.

As far as the aforementioned corners, frankly I don't see them play every week. So I don't know how many tackles they miss, how many coverages they blow, and how many ints they drop. By the way, of the top corners in the league Charles Woodson happens to be my favorite.

[Swarley]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Good corners do not make 95 tackles because such a high number of tackles means that corner is giving up away too many completions and thus is not feared by QBs.

Asomugha and Revis both have a far lower amount of tackles and NOBODY would argue that they're even on par with Hall; both are better. The reason why? Testing them usually results in a play that gains 0 yards(incompletions) or worse.
They do not sacrifice coverage for a small marginal gain in INTs. Breaking 10 picks in a season is a difficult task, and converting picks into points is hardly a guaranteed matter. The point differential between a successful INT by Hall and failed attempt by Hall must be a positive value, otherwise, he's likely hurting the team. Yes, you want guys who can grab picks when the situation DOES present itself(which Stonehands could not do), at the same time, you don't want them to take too much risk and then give up points.

Hell, Hall has never had more than 6 picks in a season. Thus, AT MOST, he would fetch 42 points based on "successful" picks. Since not every pick results in points, that number is far lower. But his number of UNSUCCESSFUL picks gives the opponent points. Since he is such a habitual gambler, I believe assuming he attempts at least 16 times a season to grab those picks is not out of the question. Heck, if his failed gambles led to a field goal every time, the points he snatch for the team and the points he helped cough up would be equal.

Are wide receivers the only players on the field that get tackled? Is Hall supposed to cover every receiver on the field as well as disrupt handoffs so a rb can't run the ball?

First it was he can't tackle now it's he's giving up so many completions that he has more chances to tackle than anyone else.

D-Hall is a playmaking corner that gives up a few more than we would like to see but let's give credit where it's due. He did well when it came to tackling last year and that was one point of his game he really worked on.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

On Hall's tackling, as others have mentioned, this is just an example, if you really watch the games closely or look at a DVR'd game....well let's just say the "eye in the sky don't lie".

Here is my problem with Hall and fans that support his play. Hall gives up far more plays than he makes, but the ones he makes are INTs and are what people remember from the game.
They don't remember:
- the 14 yds easy completion to Evans where hall wasn't within 2 yds of him
- or the 3 & 4 slant where Hall was abused, but fortunately the WR dropped
- or the whip route that Boldin abused Hall on for a first
- or the weak tackle effort from Hall on Boldin on the Otagwe blown coverage
- or the TD where Evans just blew by our #1 "speed" corner who couldn't recover and made no play on the ball
....and that was in 1 half without me really looking a Hall's tackling (I know he missed at least one other tackle)

Yes the INT for TD was a good play, but is it worth 2 first downs (a 3rd was dropped) to keep drives alive, plus a TD....I don't think so. Trust me on this, no OC fears Hall. On the contrary, OCs look to take advantage of Hall and for the most part they are successful.

Wow interesting break down. All the players make mistakes so why are we bashing Hall? Does he take chances? yes and apparently thats why MS and Haslett like him otherwise he would be gone. Did he screw up on the TD pass and not turn around and either intercept or atleast bat the ball away.... yes he screwed up. I'm sure after watching film he will correct the problem. and yes he was giving players a cushion. why? I don't know... maybe it's by design of the scheme in order to take away something the offense was wanting to do and force them to go shorter to an underneith route? I don't know.

But if we are going to bash Hall then you might as well start bashing all the DL who let the Ravens RB's get 1st downs. So now we need not only a better CB but better DL. I'm also sure some LB's could be replaced as well who were out of position or failed to tackle also.

How soon we forget the tackle he made on a RB alot bigger then him in the Steelers game to keep them from getting a 1st down.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Wow interesting break down. All the players make mistakes so why are we bashing Hall? Does he take chances? yes and apparently thats why MS and Haslett like him otherwise he would be gone. Did he screw up on the TD pass and not turn around and either intercept or atleast bat the ball away.... yes he screwed up. I'm sure after watching film he will correct the problem. and yes he was giving players a cushion. why? I don't know... maybe it's by design of the scheme in order to take away something the offense was wanting to do and force them to go shorter to an underneith route? I don't know.

But if we are going to bash Hall then you might as well start bashing all the DL who let the Ravens RB's get 1st downs. So now we need not only a better CB but better DL. I'm also sure some LB's could be replaced as well who were out of position or failed to tackle also.

How soon we forget the tackle he made on a RB alot bigger then him in the Steelers game to keep them from getting a 1st down.

The ultimate goal of the D is to prevent the opponent from scoring touchdowns. The D is going to force more punts and FGs than pick 6s. Hence, the need for Hall to bring more balance into his play. Hall's like a offensive Dman in hockey, always going for the sexy play will result in some embarassing moments where the opponent scores.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The ultimate goal of the D is to prevent the opponent from scoring touchdowns. The D is going to force more punts and FGs than pick 6s. Hence, the need for Hall to bring more balance into his play. Hall's like a offensive Dman in hockey, always going for the sexy play will result in some embarassing moments where the opponent scores.

Ok, I see your point. This whole defense centers around Hall. Forget the whole other side of the field. If there is a TD then it's all Halls fault. Come on man..... in the first game it was the Safeties who were screwing up but not a word. Hall screws up and we need to replace him because he sucks.

I'm sorry he gets a pass from me. It doesn't matter when it came during the game to me yes he gave up a TD but he redeemed himself by getting a TD also. It's a wash for me. Lets get over it and move on.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Ok, I see your point. This whole defense centers around Hall. Forget the whole other side of the field. If there is a TD then it's all Halls fault. Come on man..... in the first game it was the Safeties who were screwing up but not a word. Hall screws up and we need to replace him because he sucks.

I'm sorry he gets a pass from me. It doesn't matter when it came during the game to me yes he gave up a TD but he redeemed himself by getting a TD also. It's a wash for me. Lets get over it and move on.

Oh, I'm sorry, but there's a better corner who has donned the Redskins uniform and has some rings to boot as well. Forgive me for having high standards. Any rudimentary cost-benefit analysis would show that Hall is a complete idiot for trying so hard to get that one extra pick precisely because picks are extremely low probability events. You let the picks "come to you" and catch those picks(Stonehands could not, nor was his coverage that good). You don't chase them at the expense of coverage because there's going to be MANY, MANY more "no attempts" or incompletions if you cover well.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Oh, I'm sorry, but there's a better corner who has donned the Redskins uniform and has some rings to boot as well. Forgive me for having high standards. Any rudimentary cost-benefit analysis would show that Hall is a complete idiot for trying so hard to get that one extra pick precisely because picks are extremely low probability events. You let the picks "come to you" and catch those picks(Stonehands could not, nor was his coverage that good). You don't chase them at the expense of coverage because there's going to be MANY, MANY more "no attempts" or incompletions if you cover well.

Wait, what? Cornerbacks shouldn't take gambles on picks because of cost-benefit analysis and the low probability of yielding results? Seriously?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wait, what? Cornerbacks shouldn't take gambles on picks because of cost-benefit analysis and the low probability of yielding results? Seriously?

Yeah I don't get this.