I keep hearing on this board that Tremaine Edmunds only makes tackles 5+ yards past the L.O.S..🤔

[BADOLBILZ]

20 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

I think the people who hate him are the ones who expected him to be Luke Kuechly because McDermott + linebacker = Luke Kuechly.

 

 

When you play a De-VALUED position and the team trades into the middle of round one to select you........you are going to be held to a similar standard as a VALUED position player who is selected at the very top of the draft would be.

 

Fair or not.

 

I loved the pick/player but not as a MLB.    

 

The Kuechly thing was more of an after-the-fact comparison...........I think people expected him to be BETTER than Kuechly because he's more of a specimen than Kuechly was.........the comp for Edmunds was Brian Urlacher.

 

Urlacher had 18.5 sacks and 44 TFL in his first 3 seasons.........and he had been a safety in college not a MLB.

 

The strength of Edmunds game has just been playing most of the games.........that's it.........he's accumulated tackle stats like his predecessor Preston Brown(well, almost.  Preston lead the NFL in tackles in 2017)..

 

But like Preston he has been rather pedestrian other than those bulk tackle numbers.

 

 

 

Edited June 29, 2021 by BADOLBILZ

[unbillievable]

 

[Patrick Duffy]

32 minutes ago, billybrew1 said:

IDK? I'm pretty surprised by this. It goes against what my eyes are telling me.....I mean, I really watch.

Im also a Tremaine fan, but I hope he gets better.... a lot better.... I have seen Tremaine wait for the RB to cross the LOS before engaging. Like he was coached to do that. He makes so many tackles downfield it's crazy.

I call shenanigans on this stat.

 

Yeah he has been a little disappointing last couple years. Not sure how much the injury had an impact as far as last season goes, I'm sure it did to some degree. Anyways, he still is a very young player and will continue to learn. With that said, I think this upcoming season will tell a lot of the story with him. Imo if he is going to have that "break out" season, or just shows good improvement and makes a bigger impact, then this upcoming season is the time it should happen.

 

So hope to see him become a better LB all around, decision making etc. I still have hope for him myself with all those things considered.

Edited June 29, 2021 by Patrick_Duffy

[LABILLBACKER]

25 minutes ago, billybrew1 said:

IDK? I'm pretty surprised by this. It goes against what my eyes are telling me.....I mean, I really watch.

Im also a Tremaine fan, but I hope he gets better.... a lot better.... I have seen Tremaine wait for the RB to cross the LOS before engaging. Like he was coached to do that. He makes so many tackles downfield it's crazy.

I call shenanigans on this stat.

 

I do too. I don't buy these stats for a second. It's staggering why it's taking McD so long to slide TE outside. 

[DCofNC]

3 hours ago, BuffaloMatt said:

That's when he makes the tackle. What is the stat on shooting the wrong gap?

Or being looked off by the QB to give up huge gains over the middle.  Stats don’t tell crap.  Poz was a backeling machine too and Jacksonville got to enjoy that mess while paying him way too much.  I hope the Bills are wise enough to judge him fairly, not just sign him bc they drafted him and don’t want to admit a mistake, but the 5th year option pick up already shows they are attached.  

[unbillievable]

Reminds me a lot of Leodis Mckelvin.

All the physical tools, with very little instinct. Too many plays being made in his area.

[Patrick Duffy]

2 minutes ago, unbillievable said:

Reminds me a lot of Leodis Mckelvin.

All the physical tools, with very little instinct. Too many plays being made in his area.

Lol, I'm willing to give him a little more time before I'd consider him as much of a disappointment as McKelvin was......

[HardyBoy]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

So the Bills DL has been the second best in the NFL at keeping their MLB clean the past 3 years?   Awesome! 😉

 

Statistically, the most likely place for a RB to be tackled on any given play is at the LOS.

 

If you are a volume tackler who is on the field every week for 3 straight seasons that number is going to be high.

 

But comparable off-ball LB's Roquan Smith and Devin White had 18 TFL last year.

 

Tremaine Edmunds had just 4.....which is VERY unimpressive.........over 200 defenders had more.

 

And he only has 19 total TFL in his three year career.

 

TFL + TFNG is just adding a small figure that represents big impact to a BIG number that represents participation.......and then pretending that it's all high impact.

 

The low TFL number is just one of MANY numbers that reflect Edmunds' lack of instinctiveness as an off-ball LB.

 

 

 

I think you would then need to see who is leading the bills in tfl, because that could very well be a scheme thing too ( no idea just something that would be fair to rule out).

 

Also, I think I remember Edmunds has been seeing a lot of play action, which in the nfl is magnitudes of degrees more sneaky than in college. I'd almost argue that he is overly instinctual and is more easily tricked by PA as a result.

 

This might be something similar to looking at burnt toast and saying well at least you know the toaster works, but...being able to get so many tackles at the line of scrimmage, when at least the prevailing sentiment is he can be wrong footed by play design, means he has elite recovery skills? 

 

Anyway, we're not talking about the third quarter of the season Edmunds from last year right? Just want to make sure because definitely looked like something clicked for him at the end of the season last year.

[TBBills]

He is the anti Kiko Alonso. With Kiko people tried to find ways he was awesome, with Edmunds they try to find a way he sucks.

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

4 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

Enough Said. 👇

 

 

Stats I'd like to see for this 3 year span that would give this more context 

 

1) Total games played

2) Total tackles made

3) Total tackles for loss or no gain

4) Total yardage lost on those tackles

 

While I do agree with your premise that Tremaine Edmunds is dumped on unfairly by this board I don't think there's a single person that would argue he's the 2nd best OLB in the league.  I don't know how many people would argue he's even in the top 10. The potential is there, but his actual play has been pretty average. 

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I don't know the answer but the only problem going by that metric is Edmunds wouldn't be as "fresh" as the players finishing ahead of him giving them the advantage.

Well, sure, but if he were so tired that he couldn't be effective the Bills would take him off the field.  He is able, for sure, when he's on the field, and extra snaps certainly pads his stats.  

7 minutes ago, TBBills said:

He is the anti Kiko Alonso. With Kiko people tried to find ways he was awesome, with Edmunds they try to find a way he sucks.

Great point!

[HardyBoy]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

So the Bills DL has been the second best in the NFL at keeping their MLB clean the past 3 years?   Awesome! 😉

 

Statistically, the most likely place for a RB to be tackled on any given play is at the LOS.

 

If you are a volume tackler who is on the field every week for 3 straight seasons that number is going to be high.

 

But comparable off-ball LB's Roquan Smith and Devin White had 18 TFL last year.

 

Tremaine Edmunds had just 4.....which is VERY unimpressive.........over 200 defenders had more.

 

And he only has 19 total TFL in his three year career.

 

TFL + TFNG is just adding a small figure that represents big impact to a BIG number that represents participation.......and then pretending that it's all high impact.

 

The low TFL number is just one of MANY numbers that reflect Edmunds' lack of instinctiveness as an off-ball LB.

 

 

 

Wait, I'm having a hard time with the statistically the most likely place for a rb to be tackled is the los?! Doesn't the avg nfl running back avg like 3 yards a carry? I mean it's possible that the median is los, and crazy long runs bump that avg up for rbs compared to their median, but that doesn't seem right either.

 

Also, you're completely undervaluing a run for no gain...it seemed like just about every time the bills d got the other team behind the chains on first down they would have a significantly higher chance to get teams off the field...I mean no duh, that's true for all teams I'm sure...but the Bills strength is their nickle d...if they could get a team behind the chains, edmunds could sell out pass more on play action etc.

 

Long way to say a tackle for no gain last year was super important to this defense and they felt really rare until the second half of the season when Edmunds started coming on strong and the entire d started clicking.

[GoBills808]

The amount of people who think they know more about linebackers than Sean McDermott is absolutely breathtaking

[berg1029]

3 hours ago, Kwai San said:

For the life of me I will never understand the hate this guy gets from the board.......never.

Whether fair or not, expectations are higher than JAG status when the team trades up in the first round to select you. 

[finn]

5 hours ago, BillsfaninSB said:

I get his point but would like to see where he stood for the 2020 season.  I bet not top 2. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I’m an Edmunds fan but hoping for a rebound. 

Yeah, but that means he might have been number 1 in the league the previous two years. 

[Kwai San]

37 minutes ago, berg1029 said:

Whether fair or not, expectations are higher than JAG status when the team trades up in the first round to select you. 

 

Sorry man but Edmunds is MUCH more than JAG......you are one of the haters - I get it - but good gawd man the kid is WAY more than JAG......way way more

[Billy Claude]

10 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

He got it from PFF who has Edmunds as the 24th best LB entering 2021 (Milano was 11th).  https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-linebacker-rankings-entering-2021-nfl-season

 

He got those numbers from PFF.

 

If BruceExclusive got those numbers from PFF, his quote was extremely selective since he left out the 57 missed tackles and 9 touchdowns surrendered and and the fact there were 4 other linebackers in Edmunds' draft year that PFF ranked higher (including three drafted after him).

 

The TFL numbers 5, 10 and 4 are consistent with how he played over all:

 

Year 1 -- meh: the excuse is he was a rookie -- however, there were several rookie LBs that played better than Edmunds

Year 2 -- very promising:  He looked very good, especially towards the end of the season.  I was really looking forward to year 3.

Year 3 -- meh but hopefully it was due to his injury (unknown how bad it was -- maybe it was the reason for all the missed tackles) and missing Star (whole season) and Milano (substantial part of season) .  He did look better toward the end of the year with Milano back.

Year 4 -- hopefully year 3 was just a hiccup in the progression, however, I don't see how there is at least a bit of concern about how he played last year.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Billy Claude

[BADOLBILZ]

41 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

Wait, I'm having a hard time with the statistically the most likely place for a rb to be tackled is the los?! Doesn't the avg nfl running back avg like 3 yards a carry? I mean it's possible that the median is los, and crazy long runs bump that avg up for rbs compared to their median, but that doesn't seem right either.

 

Also, you're completely undervaluing a run for no gain...it seemed like just about every time the bills d got the other team behind the chains on first down they would have a significantly higher chance to get teams off the field...I mean no duh, that's true for all teams I'm sure...but the Bills strength is their nickle d...if they could get a team behind the chains, edmunds could sell out pass more on play action etc.

 

Long way to say a tackle for no gain last year was super important to this defense and they felt really rare until the second half of the season when Edmunds started coming on strong and the entire d started clicking.

 

 

Look at the probability issue this way:   

 

1) A tackle for no gain focuses ONLY on one specific yard of the field.   It's a much more specific stat than a TFL.   Not going to argue over "zero" so let's just say there approximately 100 individual potential yardage outcomes on a handoff.   A run for -11 and a run for +72 yards are both on the rare end of that range......but just like a TFNG each of those are 1 specific possible yardage outcome of a handoff from the middle of your own end of the field.  

 

2) You can only be tackled where there are tacklers.   The only area of the field where there are always a lot of tacklers for the RB to evade is right at the LOS.     So while you may have a wide assortment of yardage outcomes on 25 handoffs in a game.......and the vast majority of them will be for a gain......the MOST LIKELY of all possible specific yardage gained results on run plays in general is going to be zero.

 

You can say I am de-valuing a tackle for no gain.........but I don't think so........they are going to happen FREQUENTLY regardless.    And not even so much on first down like you are talking about.......a lot of times on 2nd and short, 3rd and short.......goal line.....teams practically run themselves into no-gain outcomes all the time.

 

And those don't necessarily prove a lot about the individual talent on either side of the ball.  And one of the reasons statisticians don't value a net zero play as much as a negative play is because tackles at the LOS often don't require a great deal of individual skill.   If the DL ties up their gaps and just leaves a narrow space to run or forces a runner horizontal for the free flowing LB SHOULD make the tackle every time.   An open field tackle is often a much higher degree of difficulty.

 

As such.......negative plays begin with run TFL's and escalate in importance into sacks and turnovers.

 

We isolate them because we know the statistical importance of forced negative plays in the outcome of games.   

  

 

[Stank_Nasty]

Seems a bit high to me but worth a post considering the discussion. Don’t think I’ve seen it posted anywhere else. The writer admits the ranking isn’t based strictly on 2020’s play. 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/ranking-nfls-top-linebackers-entering-2021-bobby-wagner-retains-top-spot-buccaneers-boast-two-in-top-10/

 

 

10. Tremaine Edmunds 

Edmunds injured his shoulder in the season opener last year, but rebounded to finish with another impressive campaign. His 119 combined tackles were tied for No. 8 among inside linebackers, and he tied his career high with two sacks. Edmunds, while incredibly athletic, didn't dominate in coverage, but finished with an Approximate Value (AV) of 9 -- which ranked No. 7 among inside linebackers. If we were ranking linebackers just off of last year's stats, Edmunds probably wouldn't make our top 10. However, we expect him to take a step forward in 2021. 

Mark Gaughan of The Buffalo News noted that Edmunds stood out on the final day of minicamp because of his coverage skills. He reportedly used his 83-inch wingspan to stop Josh Allen from hooking up with Emmanuel Sanders deep down the field, which is something Buffalo Bills fans certainly want to hear. Edmunds is athletic enough to be one of the most well-rounded linebackers in the NFL, and he's entering his fourth season at just 23 years old! The Bills are a team on the rise, and Edmunds is a player that is doing the same. With the Bills drafting two pass rushers with their first two picks this offseason, I'm excited to see what Edmunds can do moving forward.  

 

 

[Shaw66]

51 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Look at the probability issue this way:   

 

1) A tackle for no gain focuses ONLY on one specific yard of the field.   It's a much more specific stat than a TFL.   Not going to argue over "zero" so let's just say there approximately 100 individual potential yardage outcomes on a handoff.   A run for -11 and a run for +72 yards are both on the rare end of that range......but just like a TFNG each of those are 1 specific possible yardage outcome of a handoff from the middle of your own end of the field.  

 

2) You can only be tackled where there are tacklers.   The only area of the field where there are always a lot of tacklers for the RB to evade is right at the LOS.     So while you may have a wide assortment of yardage outcomes on 25 handoffs in a game.......and the vast majority of them will be for a gain......the MOST LIKELY of all possible specific yardage gained results on run plays in general is going to be zero.

 

You can say I am de-valuing a tackle for no gain.........but I don't think so........they are going to happen FREQUENTLY regardless.    And not even so much on first down like you are talking about.......a lot of times on 2nd and short, 3rd and short.......goal line.....teams practically run themselves into no-gain outcomes all the time.

 

And those don't necessarily prove a lot about the individual talent on either side of the ball.  And one of the reasons statisticians don't value a net zero play as much as a negative play is because tackles at the LOS often don't require a great deal of individual skill.   If the DL ties up their gaps and just leaves a narrow space to run or forces a runner horizontal for the free flowing LB SHOULD make the tackle every time.   An open field tackle is often a much higher degree of difficulty.

 

As such.......negative plays begin with run TFL's and escalate in importance into sacks and turnovers.

 

We isolate them because we know the statistical importance of forced negative plays in the outcome of games.   

  

 

This is excellent.  Thanks.