The left tackle battle

[Orton's Arm]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writ...ies1/index.html

 

This is an article by Ross Tucker on how much difference there is between elite lineman and perceived scrubs. I remeber reading it a few years ago and I thought it would add a different perspective to the thread.

 

I don't think I agree with him as one or two plays a game does make a difference in wins and losses. A third down conversion at the right time can mean the ball game; it is a game of inches after all.

That was a good article, and well worth the read. Thanks for linking to it.

 

I remember reading a different article a while back, by Tim Graham I believe. He (or someone he'd referenced) had broken down film from the AFC East OL, to determine the percentage of the time each OL won his battles in the running game. Some Bills' OL won their battles less than 80% of the time; whereas one or two--such as Jason Peters--were above 90%. On plays where all five OL won their individual battles, the yards-per-carry was a good two yards or so higher (IIRC) than on plays when at least one OL lost his individual battle. On an OL where each lineman wins his battles 80% of the time, plays where all five linemen win their battles will occur 33% of the time. On an OL where each lineman wins his battles 90% of the time, plays where all five OL win their battles will occur 59% of the time. That's 26% of your running plays--though you have to upgrade all five OL spots to get those 26 percentage points.

 

As for pass protection--Mike Shanahan once said that you can get by with decent guards, but you have to be strong at center and at tackles. Ross Tucker's article focused on guards' role in pass protection; which is probably the one area where the difference between a decent OL and a premium OL is the smallest. I think that if one were to take a different look at the OL situation--for example, by comparing the amount of time Bills' QBs typically have to throw with the time the Jets' QBs had to throw, you'd see a substantial difference. That difference clearly impacts the passing game as a whole.

[spartacus]

That was a good article, and well worth the read. Thanks for linking to it.

 

I remember reading a different article a while back, by Tim Graham I believe. He (or someone he'd referenced) had broken down film from the AFC East OL, to determine the percentage of the time each OL won his battles in the running game. Some Bills' OL won their battles less than 80% of the time; whereas one or two--such as Jason Peters--were above 90%. On plays where all five OL won their individual battles, the yards-per-carry was a good two yards or so higher (IIRC) than on plays when at least one OL lost his individual battle. On an OL where each lineman wins his battles 80% of the time, plays where all five linemen win their battles will occur 33% of the time. On an OL where each lineman wins his battles 90% of the time, plays where all five OL win their battles will occur 59% of the time. That's 26% of your running plays--though you have to upgrade all five OL spots to get those 26 percentage points.

 

As for pass protection--Mike Shanahan once said that you can get by with decent guards, but you have to be strong at center and at tackles. Ross Tucker's article focused on guards' role in pass protection; which is probably the one area where the difference between a decent OL and a premium OL is the smallest. I think that if one were to take a different look at the OL situation--for example, by comparing the amount of time Bills' QBs typically have to throw with the time the Jets' QBs had to throw, you'd see a substantial difference. That difference clearly impacts the passing game as a whole.

 

This is true

 

 

Ross Tucker is bitter at the big money he never got.

 

what he glosses over is that weaker linemen have blocking schemes designed to cover up their shortcomings with help from other OL and backs and TEs.

 

Elite players do not get such help and are left on an island to perform their assignments so the help can go elsewhere.

 

As noted, mistakes by any lineman screw up the play  - which is why the Bills have been at the bottom of the league in 3rd down conversions. Blown execution when it counts.

[mpl6876]

This is true

 

 

Ross Tucker is bitter at the big money he never got.

 

what he glosses over is that weaker linemen have blocking schemes designed to cover up their shortcomings with help from other OL and backs and TEs.

 

Elite players do not get such help and are left on an island to perform their assignments so the help can go elsewhere.

 

As noted, mistakes by any lineman screw up the play  - which is why the Bills have been at the bottom of the league in 3rd down conversions. Blown execution when it counts.

 

Blown execution is correct but how bout lack of experience and talent which leads to blown execution...

[Thurman#1]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writ...ies1/index.html

 

This is an article by Ross Tucker on how much difference there is between elite lineman and perceived scrubs. I remeber reading it a few years ago and I thought it would add a different perspective to the thread.

 

I don't think I agree with him as one or two plays a game does make a difference in wins and losses. A third down conversion at the right time can mean the ball game; it is a game of inches after all.

 

 

 

That's a poor paraphrase. He wasn't talking about "perceived scrubs." He was comparing the difference between elite OLs and average OLs. The problem is that we have at bare minimum one, most likely two and possibly even three positions where we don't even have anyone who can claim to be close to average.

 

He's also commenting on INTERIOR linemen and saying they may not be worth the high contracts they're getting. He may be right. But he's not writing about the tackles. He doesn't argue that they are worth the money. And two of our biggest problems are at tackle. He says:

 

"The multi-million dollar contracts once reserved for skill-position players have slowly made their way into the trenches, with players like Alan Faneca, Steve Hutchinson, Eric Steinbach and others setting a new bar for the importance placed on the INTERIOR linemen in the NFL. My enthusiasm, however, is tempered by a painful reality that I cannot escape:

 

"I do not think they are worth that money."

 

I capitalized the word "interior" there to highlight it. The numbers he uses are typical of guards and centers, where the difference in sacks between a good and a bad LT can be quite large. Not to mention that if the tackle prevents the DE from sealing the edge on an end run, he makes the play virtually by himself.

[agardin]

That's a poor paraphrase. He wasn't talking about "perceived scrubs." He was comparing the difference between elite OLs and average OLs. The problem is that we have at bare minimum one, most likely two and possibly even three positions where we don't even have anyone who can claim to be close to average.

 

He's also commenting on INTERIOR linemen and saying they may not be worth the high contracts they're getting. He may be right. But he's not writing about the tackles. He doesn't argue that they are worth the money. And two of our biggest problems are at tackle. He says:

 

"The multi-million dollar contracts once reserved for skill-position players have slowly made their way into the trenches, with players like Alan Faneca, Steve Hutchinson, Eric Steinbach and others setting a new bar for the importance placed on the INTERIOR linemen in the NFL. My enthusiasm, however, is tempered by a painful reality that I cannot escape:

 

"I do not think they are worth that money."

 

I capitalized the word "interior" there to highlight it. The numbers he uses are typical of guards and centers, where the difference in sacks between a good and a bad LT can be quite large. Not to mention that if the tackle prevents the DE from sealing the edge on an end run, he makes the play virtually by himself.

 

You are correct.

 

I know that it was written in regards to the Faneca signing a few years back and not about OTs. I used the term perceived scrubs without giving it much thought but the article is in regards to average OL. ( I wonder if the fans of the team that signed the player he mentioned were doing cartwheels in getting an average OL)

 

We drafted a few interior lineman last year with fairly high picks that look to be pretty decent. In light of the article, was that a good move or would the Bills have been better off taking a prospective LT or RT with the Wood and Levitre picks? I am not sure, I think you need quality across the board and having a great OT next to a poor guard is not ideal. I suppose we could ask Adrian Peterson if he thought Hutchinson was a good pick up.

 

In any event, it was an article that I happened to remember reading from a few years back and thought it would add to the discussion.

[Doc]

Right back at you. Post your scouting reports here so anyone can nitpick them with hindsight. That should be a good time for you.

 

Of course, that is really not the question and not the point of my posts whatsoever. You missed the point again. What I wrote about Jamon Meredith were statements made in publicly available scouting reports. No, I didn't scout him. My post was in contrast to those posts that took some 1st round predictions on some websites and have run amok with optimistic fantasy to build some illusion that the Bills have really already addressed their offensive line problems because they got multiple nearly almost virtual 1st round OL picks last year.

 

If it helps one sleep through the night to believe Meredith, Wood, Levitre, and Bell are just as inexperienced as any other young lineman and therefore just as talented, roll with it.

I know the point behind your posts, SB. It's not hard to figure out. The opinions of draft sites, fans, former teams, etc. don't matter. Meredith has the physical attributes teams look for in a LT. Whether he realizes his potential (and he doesn't have to be a top-5 LT) remains to be seen.

[JohnC]

That's a poor paraphrase. He wasn't talking about "perceived scrubs." He was comparing the difference between elite OLs and average OLs. The problem is that we have at bare minimum one, most likely two and possibly even three positions where we don't even have anyone who can claim to be close to average.

 

He's also commenting on INTERIOR linemen and saying they may not be worth the high contracts they're getting. He may be right. But he's not writing about the tackles. He doesn't argue that they are worth the money. And two of our biggest problems are at tackle. He says:

 

"The multi-million dollar contracts once reserved for skill-position players have slowly made their way into the trenches, with players like Alan Faneca, Steve Hutchinson, Eric Steinbach and others setting a new bar for the importance placed on the INTERIOR linemen in the NFL. My enthusiasm, however, is tempered by a painful reality that I cannot escape:

 

"I do not think they are worth that money."

 

I capitalized the word "interior" there to highlight it. The numbers he uses are typical of guards and centers, where the difference in sacks between a good and a bad LT can be quite large. Not to mention that if the tackle prevents the DE from sealing the edge on an end run, he makes the play virtually by himself.

 

Excellent commentary about the difference in importance between the positions: interior vs OTs. If you follow your well thought out logic the Bills shouldn't have used their two top picks last year, first round and second round, for interior linemen when they could have used it for a more difficult position to staff, tackles.

 

The Bills traded away a quality LT in Peters and picked up Wood, a guard, in the trade. We gave up a more highly coveted and more difficult postion to staff for a position more easily replaced, usually in a lower round. This lame-brain organization did the opposite.

 

No one is arguing that Woods isn't a good player or capable of being a good player. However, when making value judgments on positions and players our lagging organization doesn't have a clue. What do you expect when a goofball owner selects a marketing guru to head the football operations.