I am the first to admit when I may be wrong (RT 1st Round)

[thewildrabbit]

If the Bills do not add anyone on the OL (which is highly unlikely) they will start a 2nd, 2 1sts, a 3rd and a 4th.

C'mon Kirby, a scrub who graded as the very worst player on the Rams last year. Who really cares where he was drafted or obtained ...if he sucks.

 

Like I stated above "So, while I may want to see this team draft an OT-OG with the first two picks. Its because I feel its the only way this ball club will find the talent necessary to get the job done properly."

 

In terms of the OL, I still think that they need 2 starters (RT & LG).

 

I am not at all sold on Chris Williams.

 

If Hairston is healthy (which I also am not confident in) than potentially they can wait to the mid rounds. They need a versatile interior lineman and at least a swing tackle (if Hairston is healthy). I would love something like Morgan Moses and Gabe Jackson but my guess is that we will see 1 OL picked in the 1st 3 rounds & 1 late. It will probably be a tackle in the 1st 3 and a guard later because they are certainly planning on starting Williams with that contract.

I wholeheartedly agree

 

Plus, I'm not thrilled with the depth for the O line on the roster either. Do any other positions have players right off the waiver wire as backups?

[thebandit27]

These are great points.

 

To those arguing the inherent wisdom in picking a T high in the 1st round ("hey, lots of teams do it, so it must be smart!"), no one would argue that it is not important to protect the QB. It's just that a QB protector can be found in later rounds and after the draft, it's likely impossible to tell apart the performance of O-lineman picked in the first round from those in rounds 2, 3... Look at last year's crop and tell me who is going to make a noticeable dent in the fortunes of his team's offense. Face it, it's a low impact position no matter how hard people yell about protecting the QB.

 

I feel like there's an important distinction here though WEO...it's not that a T in the top 10 is a bad investment per se, but rather than picking an OT for the sake of filling a need vs. drafting the best player you can get would be a mistake.

[C.Biscuit97]

I feel like there's an important distinction here though WEO...it's not that a T in the top 10 is a bad investment per se, but rather than picking an OT for the sake of filling a need vs. drafting the best player you can get would be a mistake.

 

If on on the Bills draft board, one of the tackles is listed higher just based on talent, then pick the OT. But IMO and I hope the Bills, if the players are equal, I'drather go with a WR (not as big of a need anymore) or TE over a RT.

[thebandit27]

If on on the Bills draft board, one of the tackles is listed higher just based on talent, then pick the OT. But IMO and I hope the Bills, if the players are equal, I'drather go with a WR (not as big of a need anymore) or TE over a RT.

 

That'll be a tough choice...although I don't see it happening. I think Matthews and Robinson will be gone by 9, as will Evans and Watkins. I don't think Lewan is worth the 9 pick, nor do I feel Ebron or Lee/Beckham/Benjamin/Cooks are...so my though is Aaron Donald, trade up for one of the elite guys, or (bleh) trade down.

[Kirby Jackson]

C'mon Kirby, a scrub who graded as the very worst player on the Rams last year. Who really cares where he was drafted or obtained ...if he sucks.

 

Like I stated above "So, while I may want to see this team draft an OT-OG with the first two picks. Its because I feel its the only way this ball club will find the talent necessary to get the job done properly."

 

I wholeheartedly agree

 

Plus, I'm not thrilled with the depth for the O line on the roster either. Do any other positions have players right off the waiver wire as backups?

On the 1st point, I agree that Chris Williams is not good but if we are going to point to Eric Fisher who was AWFUL last year as a 1st rounder than Williams would count as well. If we are saying get 1st rounders on the line, that's what they did with him.

 

The depth of the line is a problem. If they think that Hairston is healthy enough to play RT & Williams is the answer at LG they still need a guard and a swing tackle IMO. If they believe in both of those guys, I would be comfortable with Bitonio in the 3rd and Trai Turner in the 4th/5th or something like that.

[thewildrabbit]

I just think you are under the impression that there is only one way to build an oline. Some posters are simply saying that a lot of good olinemen are found later in the draft and it's harder to find playmakers.

 

and you're severely overrating how much difference o linemen make on a team's record. You can't have scrubs (Brown fit in that category) but you don't necessarily need to spend top picks or mega bucks on guys either. How are the Browns doing with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack? How about the dominant Bills with the great Jason Peters and Andy Levitre? How about Andy Levitre and their 1st round OG last year? The Broncos really missed Ryan Clady last year, huh?

I'm saying go back and look at whats been drafted by this team after the second round the last 10 years.

 

Two, or even three solid starters doesn't make a good O line, you need five. They don't all need to be first round picks either, as they could all be walk on's like Peters if they all had anyway near his talent level.

 

 

I admit the Bills were close in 2012 with Glenn, Levitre, Wood, all solid starters and only really needed two more solid players at RT, RG. A lot of fans might like Urbik at RG, and at times he plays well. But when a player grades in the red against the teams biggest rival...well then he is not conducive to building a winning team IMHO.

[thewildrabbit]

On the 1st point, I agree that Chris Williams is not good but if we are going to point to Eric Fisher who was AWFUL last year as a 1st rounder than Williams would count as well. If we are saying get 1st rounders on the line, that's what they did with him.

 

The depth of the line is a problem. If they think that Hairston is healthy enough to play RT & Williams is the answer at LG they still need a guard and a swing tackle IMO. If they believe in both of those guys, I would be comfortable with Bitonio in the 3rd and Trai Turner in the 4th/5th or something like that.

When I pointed to who was drafted, and where, I was merely stating that those teams tried to build the O line with very valuable early first round picks. The Bills also wasted an early first rounder on Aaron Maybin

 

While this draft class might be different, and a 3rd or 4th rounder might become a valued starter on the line. I just don't trust this FO to get it right. I mean c'mon, Colin Brown, Sam Young, Doug Legursky, Chris Williams. In my view its far easier to get it right with a Robinson, Matthews, Lewan then it is with 3rd or 4th round maybes.

[Kirby Jackson]

When I pointed to who was drafted, and where, I was merely stating that those teams tried to build the O line with very valuable early first round picks. The Bills also wasted an early first rounder on Aaron Maybin

 

While this draft class might be different, and a 3rd or 4th rounder might become a valued starter on the line. I just don't trust this FO to get it right. I mean c'mon, Colin Brown, Sam Young, Doug Legursky, Chris Williams. In my view its far easier to get it right with a Robinson, Matthews, Lewan then it is with 3rd or 4th round maybes.

It always easier to get it right with 1st rounders than mid round guys regardless of position.

 

You know where I stand and I am on record as saying that I want 2 OL. I also am on record that I don't want 1 at #9. If they traded back with Cleveland for example I am all for taking OL there.

 

Also, Maybin could be the dumbest pick in franchise history but these guys didn't pick him. Bruce Smith was a great draft pick. It is totally irrelevant. We have a 1 year sample size to judge Whaley & co on. Personally, I am not an EJ fan but I liked the rest of the draft. If EJ proves me wrong their 1 draft was a home run.

[thewildrabbit]

In 1980 Chuck Knox drafted an OG with his first pick in the draft at #16 overall, and the guy didn't even start his first year. He played mostly special teams and backup. What a waste for a first round pick huh? After reading some of the posts in this thread some of this board would already label him a huge bust after his first year.

 

Let me tell you that OG played in the NFL for 16 years, and played for both Knox, and Levy. He went to the SB all four times, and was instrumental in protecting Jim Kelly, and helped build one of the very best road grading O lines in the league for Thurman Thomas.

 

Lets face some facts here, there are some fans who just don't comprehend the difference between what a "get by" player, and a top player can make on that O line. Teams can get by with 6'3'' 350 pound unmovable slugs at DT to clog the running, and passing lanes. Refrigerator Perry couldn't make a play outside a five yard radius, and yet was a successful DT. His counterpart on the other hand must be a top athlete to be able to properly protect the QB, pull, trap and drive his opponent off the ball. Then make plays down field blocking 5-10 yards.

 

In the late 80's, early 90's the Bills offense used to dictate to the opposing defense, and that defense was on their heels all game long. Trying in vein to catch their breath to cope with that fierce, fast paced passing / running attack of the Buffalo Bills, and when those defenders moved up a few yards to try and contain Thurman... well, then Jim Kelly would hit Reed or Lofton for a big play and crush their hopes of containing that offense.

 

 

 

Most of you just don't get the fact that this team hasn't even fielded a team with a winning record but once since 2000, and that was in 2004 at 9-7. 10 years man, 10 years. The last time they were in the playoffs was 1999. During all that time the one thing the Bills haven't had is a top O line with FIVE good players.

 

The Bills had a #1 overall pick at QB in Drew Bledsoe in 2004 to get that one winning year. The problem was the same old story in that they couldn't protect him very well, and rather then building a better O line. Instead they wanted him to change his style of play to get the ball out quicker. How did that work out?

 

Clearly so many, many Bills fans don't see things the same way that I see things, and that's OK. I'm just trying to explain my passion here.

 

 

New ownership should bring enough change so that the team hires some coaches who actually know how to win more then 6-7 games during an NFL season....hopefully.

[Prickly Pete]

Anthony Davis RT 49ers

So there is ONE?

And that is a guy of known value, not a guy that MIGHT end up being worthy of being picked 9th in an extremely deep draft. Great!

[maddenboy]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position, and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

Edited April 23, 2014 by maddenboy

[maryland-bills-fan]

In 1980 Chuck Knox drafted an OG with his first pick in the draft at #16 overall, and the guy didn't even start his first year. He played mostly special teams and backup. What a waste for a first round pick huh? After reading some of the posts in this thread some of this board would already label him a huge bust after his first year.

 

Let me tell you that OG played in the NFL for 16 years, and played for both Knox, and Levy. He went to the SB all four times, and was instrumental in protecting Jim Kelly, and helped build one of the very best road grading O lines in the league for Thurman Thomas.

 

Lets face some facts here, there are some fans who just don't comprehend the difference between what a "get by" player, and a top player can make on that O line. Teams can get by with 6'3'' 350 pound unmovable slugs at DT to clog the running, and passing lanes. Refrigerator Perry couldn't make a play outside a five yard radius, and yet was a successful DT. His counterpart on the other hand must be a top athlete to be able to properly protect the QB, pull, trap and drive his opponent off the ball. Then make plays down field blocking 5-10 yards.

 

In the late 80's, early 90's the Bills offense used to dictate to the opposing defense, and that defense was on their heels all game long. Trying in vein to catch their breath to cope with that fierce, fast paced passing / running attack of the Buffalo Bills, and when those defenders moved up a few yards to try and contain Thurman... well, then Jim Kelly would hit Reed or Lofton for a big play and crush their hopes of containing that offense.

Most of you just don't get the fact that this team hasn't even fielded a team with a winning record but once since 2000, and that was in 2004 at 9-7. 10 years man, 10 years. The last time they were in the playoffs was 1999. During all that time the one thing the Bills haven't had is a top O line with FIVE good players.

The Bills had a #1 overall pick at QB in Drew Bledsoe in 2004 to get that one winning year. The problem was the same old story in that they couldn't protect him very well, and rather then building a better O line. Instead they wanted him to change his style of play to get the ball out quicker. How did that work out?

Clearly so many, many Bills fans don't see things the same way that I see things, and that's OK. I'm just trying to explain my passion here.

New ownership should bring enough change so that the team hires some coaches who actually know how to win more then 6-7 games during an NFL season....hopefully.

 

Uh, just a few points. Richter was drafted as a CENTER not a guard and wasn't able to displace Will Grant, so Richter was moved to guard, where he did very well. That is why he didn't start for his entire first year with the Bills.

 

 

Another point is that there is a big difference between the #9 pick and where the great Bill's first round guards were drafted. Let's say we trade down from the #9 slot to where those 3 best Bills guards were taken- what could we get with the extra draft pick that we got. (Okay, I'm using the draft-trade-value chart, which is not exact but better than anything else out there and draft-tech's top 100 rating to show the extra player we could get with that extra pick)

 

 

 

Rueben Brown 1995 pick #14.....draft value points 1100......DELTA 4th pick in the 3rd round Ward, FS #100

Jim Richert 1980 pick #16......draft value points 1000......DELTA 23rd pick in the 2nd round Sefen-Jenkins TE #52

Delemielleure 1973 pick #20......draft value points 700.......DELTA 20th pick in the 1st round Gibert CB #19

 

My point is that the #9 pick has a lot of extra value and suggesting that it would be okay to spend it on a JUST a guard, (as per the historical 1st round guard draft pick examples, would not be a good deal because we would be wasting a lot of the value of the #9 pick. I would have absolutely NO PROBLEM if (by miracle) we could pull off some trade as above and use the traded down draft pick on a LEFT offensive tackle or offensive guard- as well as something like the highlighted extra player.

 

BPA is not the best strategy IF you have a lot of holes. BPA as a strategy is severely weakened by the fact that the draft is a crap shoot because everybody is way off in predicting the NFL ability of college players.

Edited April 23, 2014 by maryland-bills-fan

[maddenboy]

I kinda think that BPA is the best strategy if you have a lot of holes.

 

If you have a lotta holes, then no one player is gonna bring a championship this year. If you have a lotta holes then you lack enuf good players. If you have a lotta holes you are a few years away.

 

Look at the Niners. They drafted OL and TE and DEs when they sucked. Those positions dont move the needle much in the short-term. Now those guys are solid nucleus players. And when you have solid nucleus guys, THEN you build around them.

 

If we were 1-2 players away from a championship, then I say draft for need. But when you are 8-10 players away, take the best player on your board.

Edited April 23, 2014 by maddenboy

[maryland-bills-fan]

_{..take the best player on your board,,,,,,,unless you already have that position filled. For purpose of argument, lets say that we have two top 10 offensive tackles and a top 20 guy as the backup. Then what if the BPA at our pick is a (possible) top 5 offensive tackle? I guess you would draft him. I think it would be better to trade that pick at a premium to somebody who needs that guy, and use the extra pick to upgrade another position- maybe offensive guard. To each his own.}

Edited April 23, 2014 by maryland-bills-fan

[Thurman#1]

You took two of my posts, in succession, and claimed I was advocating (a) that any old pylon could play RT, and (b) that I said teams do not value OLmen. Since I said neither, those would be straw men arguments--book definition actually.

 

As for Fear, yes, he's an OL or bust guy...has been for the better part of 5 years as far as I can tell.

 

As I've said repeatedly, in this thread and others, if the best player available is an OLmen, then absolutely take him...no doubt whatsoever.

 

Lastly, regarding Wilson, Seattle's OL was terrible last year. He spent most of the season running for his life. So, in short, no, I'm not joking. Wilson managed to prove himself capable without good protection. More than a few sources corroborate this:

 

https://www.profootb...-line-rankings/

 

27. Seattle Seahawks (20th)

PB: 25th, RB: 23rd, PEN: 30th

Stud: With injuries depleting the ranks, it was left to Michael Bowie (+7.1) to lead the team with their highest grade. He may eventually end up at guard (as he was for their recent playoff victory over the Saints) with his run blocking particularly impressive.

Dud: The team has to hope they never, ever have to start Paul McQuistan (-24.8) at left tackle again. It went very badly and he wasn’t much better at guard.

Analysis: An interesting year. Losing Russell Okung hurt but when they did get him on the field his play was a level or three below it’s usual high standard. At center Max Unger had a down year as a variety of combinations on either side of him failed. Essentially, they did enough at times for Marshawn Lynch to make yardage, but this had the feel of an experimental group with the coaches trying to luck into the right combination.

 

http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/ol

 

Notice that Seattle finished dead last in the NFL in Adjusted Sack Rate (which gives sacks (plus intentional grounding penalties) per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent).

 

Now, I'm not the biggest fan of sites like PFF and Football Outsiders, as they leave a fair amount up to subjective analysis, but looking at the raw data confirms what I felt I saw with my own eyes, and what those two sites' stats depict:

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...false&Submit=Go

 

4.3 YPC, about 0.1 YPC better than Buffalo

44 sacks allowed to Buffalo's 48

94 QB hits to Buffalo's 108

Terrible Power Success in nearly every direction

 

 

Boy, I think you're really mis-characterizing what Football Outsiders said about Seattle's run game. FO says Seattle's line wasn't great at pass blocking (though Wilson sometimes held the ball far too long, IMHO), but were quite good at run blocking.

 

http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/ol

 

9th at Adjusted Line Yards Per Carry, Bad at Power Success (32nd). Above average at Stuffed Percentage Rank (15th). Above average at 2nd level yards (13th) while being fairly low at Open Field Rank (23rd).

 

And their carries behind RT were a good bit of the reason they did so well. 11th behind RT and 8th around right end.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Thurman#1

[thebandit27]

Boy, I think you're really mis-characterizing what Football Outsiders said about Seattle's run game. FO says Seattle's line wasn't great at pass blocking (though Wilson sometimes held the ball far too long, IMHO), but were quite good at run blocking.

 

http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/ol

 

9th at Adjusted Line Yards Per Carry, Bad at Power Success (32nd). Above average at Stuffed Percentage Rank (15th). Above average at 2nd level yards (13th) while being fairly low at Open Field Rank (23rd).

 

And their carries behind RT were a good bit of the reason they did so well. 11th behind RT and 8th around right end.

 

I wasn't mis-characterizing anything...the discussion was about Wilson succeeding behind an OL that had him running for his life.

 

Seattle's OL was definitely better in run blocking than pass blocking, but not altogether different than Buffalo's. In fact, with the exception of ALY, Buffalo out-paced them in every category. That's all I was trying to say.

 

As for runs around RT and RE being why they did so well, it's not really much different than runs around LE ant LT, in which they ranked 12th and 7th, respectively.

 

Also, I feel it's important to recognize this caveat that FO adds:

 

However, it is important to understand that these ratings only somewhat separate the offensive line from the running backs. A team with a very good running back will appear higher no matter how bad their line, and a team with a great line with appear lower if the running back is terrible.

 

Lynch made a LOT of his own yards last year, and understandably so, as Seattle started 3 different players at LT, 3 different LGs, 2 Cs, 2 RGs, and 3 RTs.

[Thurman#1]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position, and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

 

Agreed you shouldn't worry about worth if you think your guy won't be there later. You just grab him in that case.

 

But about that draft you say there are only 5 guys worth a damn ... which five out of Jake Long, Chris Long, Matt Ryan, Jerod Mayo, Leodis McKelvin, Ryan Clady, Branden Albert, Dustin Keller, Rodgers-Cromartie, Gosder Cherilus, Joe Flacco, Jeff Otah, and Duane Brown are you referring to?

[Thurman#1]

I wasn't mis-characterizing anything...the discussion was about Wilson succeeding behind an OL that had him running for his life.

 

Seattle's OL was definitely better in run blocking than pass blocking, but not altogether different than Buffalo's. In fact, with the exception of ALY, Buffalo out-paced them in every category. That's all I was trying to say.

 

As for runs around RT and RE being why they did so well, it's not really much different than runs around LE ant LT, in which they ranked 12th and 7th, respectively.

 

Also, I feel it's important to recognize this caveat that FO adds:

 

However, it is important to understand that these ratings only somewhat separate the offensive line from the running backs. A team with a very good running back will appear higher no matter how bad their line, and a team with a great line with appear lower if the running back is terrible.

 

Lynch made a LOT of his own yards last year, and understandably so, as Seattle started 3 different players at LT, 3 different LGs, 2 Cs, 2 RGs, and 3 RTs.

 

 

Yet another caveat they add, more specific than the one you're pointing out, "A team with a high ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a low ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its offensive line to make the running game work. A team with a low ranking in Adjusted Yards but a high ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its running back breaking long runs to make the running game work."

 

Exactly. Which makes the Seahawks one of those teams with higher ALY and lower Open Field Yards (9th and 23rd, respectively) that makes them highly dependent on the OL, and the Bills, with a lower ALY and higher Open Field Yards (16th and 6th, respectively) that makes them highly dependent on the RBs breaking long runs.

 

ALY is by far their most important single stat there, and Seattle is quite a bit better, 9th vs. 16th.

 

And you're also mis-characterizing what I personally said. I didn't say, "... runs around RT and RE being why they did so well," as you suggested I did. I said, " their carries behind RT were a good bit of the reason they did so well." Which they were.

 

Also worth remembering that Buffalo's OL had nobody out for much time last year. Whereas Seattle had two of their best players out for large portions of the year. That fine front office thought that their OL was worth spending a first round pick on OTs two years in a row. They figured OTs were worth putting a whole bunch of resources into. And that OL last year lost eight games from their best player, Okung, and seven games from their starting RT, Giacomini, while Buffalo was healthy and aren't going to get better just from getting guys back.

 

 

I do agree with you, though about picking the BPA at a position of need. I suspect that'll be a tackle this year, though I'm far from sure of it.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Thurman#1

[thebandit27]

Yet another caveat they add, more specific than the one you're pointing out, "A team with a high ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a low ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its offensive line to make the running game work. A team with a low ranking in Adjusted Yards but a high ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its running back breaking long runs to make the running game work."

 

Exactly. Which makes the Seahawks one of those teams with higher ALY and lower Open Field Yards (9th and 23rd, respectively) that makes them highly dependent on the OL, and the Bills, with a lower ALY and higher Open Field Yards (16th and 6th, respectively) that makes them highly dependent on the RBs breaking long runs.

 

ALY is by far their most important single stat there, and Seattle is quite a bit better, 9th vs. 16th.

 

And you're also mis-characterizing what I personally said. I didn't say, "... runs around RT and RE being why they did so well," as you suggested I did. I said, " their carries behind RT were a good bit of the reason they did so well." Which they were.

 

Also worth remembering that Buffalo's OL had nobody out for much time last year. Whereas Seattle had two of their best players out for large portions of the year. That fine front office thought that their OL was worth spending a first round pick on OTs two years in a row. They figured OTs were worth putting a whole bunch of resources into. And that OL last year lost eight games from their best player, Okung, and seven games from their starting RT, Giacomini, while Buffalo was healthy and aren't going to get better just from getting guys back.

 

 

I do agree with you, though about picking the BPA at a position of need. I suspect that'll be a tackle this year, though I'm far from sure of it.

 

No, I'm still not mis-characterizing. Whether runs around RT and RE were the de facto reason or part of the reason, it's altogether immaterial, since they're statistically no different in practicality to their runs around LT or LE.

 

And you're reading their qualifiers backwards...here's how it reads on their own site:

 

A team with a high ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a low ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its offensive line to make the running game work. A team with a low ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a high ranking in Open Field Yards is heavily dependent on its running back breaking long runs to make the running game work.

 

However, it is important to understand that these ratings only somewhat separate the offensive line from the running backs. A team with a very good running back will appear higher no matter how bad their line, and a team with a great line with appear lower if the running back is terrible.

 

The second paragraph is clearly a modifier for the first one...I suppose one could argue that claiming the opposite would be a mis-characterization of their statements...although I don't think that's how you meant it...just more of an honest mistake is my guess.

 

I realize Buffalo didn't lose many players due to injury last year, but again, it's altogether irrelevant to the point I made...the discussion was about Russell Wilson succeeding behind an OL that had him running for his life. For some reason, you seem to want to make it about something else.

 

In any event, I'm still happy to discuss the FO rating system and Seattle's OL, if you're willing to indulge in a bit of statistics to do so...

 

Let us suppose for a moment that ALY is the single most important stat here. You're using the team's rankings in ALY to claim that Seattle is "quite a bit better", as they ranked 7 spots higher...well, that's not exactly true.

 

Statistics would tell one to use average ALY and standard deviation to determine the difference and the statistical significance thereof...I took the liberty of calculating these out so that we can actually gauge the difference.

 

For the data set of ALY, the average is 3.86, and the Standard Deviation is 0.33. Using these numbers, I put together the following table that shows the statistical relevance of each team's ALY:

 

Team ALY SDs

1 NE 4.63 2.36

2 KC 4.33 1.44

3 SD 4.26 1.23

4 DAL 4.23 1.13

5 GB 4.11 0.77

6 HOU 4.1 0.74

7 NO 4.08 0.68

8 DEN 4.07 0.65

9 SEA 4.05 0.58

10 MIN 4.04 0.55

11 CIN 4.03 0.52

12 STL 3.95 0.28

13 DET 3.94 0.25

14 CAR 3.91 0.16

15 IND 3.89 0.10

16 BUF 3.85 -0.03

17 ARI 3.84 -0.06

18 CLE 3.83 -0.09

19 TEN 3.82 -0.12

20 CHI 3.8 -0.18

21 NYJ 3.79 -0.21

22 PIT 3.79 -0.21

23 WAS 3.75 -0.33

24 ATL 3.74 -0.36

25 PHI 3.71 -0.45

26 OAK 3.71 -0.45

27 TB 3.63 -0.70

28 MIA 3.62 -0.73

29 SF 3.57 -0.88

30 NYG 3.27 -1.80

31 JAC 3.13 -2.23

32 BAL 3.01 -2.59

 

 

In terms of statistical significance, bell-curve analysis would say that any data within 1 SD of the mean (average) comprise the "majority" and are on a comparable level, which would mean that every team from GB to SF are comparable. I don't necessarily agree with that, but it's worth noting that, while Buffalo is almost right at the mean, Seattle is slightly more than half a SD above the mean, which is not nearly the 22% higher than the ranking you quoted would indicate.

 

I won't bore you with another table, but if you look at Power Success, Buffalo is nearly identical to the mean once again, while Seattle falls almost 2 SDs below.

 

EDIT: I added one more calculation for "Stuffed", in which Buffalo is approximately 1/2 a SD above the mean, while Seattle is about 0.13 SD above.

 

Just some details and food for thought if you want to discuss further.

Edited April 23, 2014 by thebandit27

[Beerball]

How dead does this horse have to be before y'all move on?