This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Got my years backwards. Should have read 30/300/2 in 2008. 2007 was a little better with 46/468/8. But if people want to allocate more to the TE spot, then their going to have to take away from other spots, as there is only so much offense to go around . . .
I would add more overall numbers to Brady and I also think Faulk's receptions maybe closer to the 40 range as well. Last year was the first he had over 50 (he had 58) since 2001 (he was over 40 in 2007 and 2008) and I think having an inexperienced QB had a little something to do with that as did RB injuries. Yet, overall I think Brady's numbers will be a little higher than you have and I see them going to the TE (again, as long as Baker and/or Smith prove worthy).
How much time did Watson miss in '07?
Although I agree with you that this factor softens the Pats schedule by a degree or two, strength of schedule does not have the impact it did before the 2002 realignment to eight divisions. Now, teams in the same division have 14 common opponents. Only two games are different, and in this case, NE plays BALT and DEN instead of PITT and SD. The difference between the Steelers and Ravens could actually be a negative, as the Ravens were memorably far more challenging than the Steelers in 2007, although the venues may have also contributed to those games. But certainly Denver figures to be an easier defense than San Diego.You may be right, Christopher, but I would suggest the improvements of the Jets, Bills and Dolphins that affect six games will end up being of more significance than the two game difference in opponents, or the one game difference if PITT and BALT are considered to be a push.
How about you put up some individual and team projections and then we can talk on a more even keel . . .
Well, seeing as how you are very lazy, I'll go through the schedule --- never too early to go through the schedule.I'm going to save the division for last.
Still waiting on offensive projections from you . . .
dude....you see that bigass post right above your head^^....?I've been busy.Anyway, I do very few projections, although I knocked Witten out of the park last year, if I could take this chance to pat myself on the back.
It's pretty easy to sit on your high horse and knock other people's projections and opinions without having to go out on a limb by posting your own. Since you think you have it down and everything you think will happen, please enlighten us by putting the puzzle pieces and posting who will do what for the Pats offensively this year . . .
If prior season strength of schedule had any meaningful predictive power, your analysis might be interesting. But unfortunately, strength of schedule (prior year) regresses to the mean just like most things.
I may have not made my point clear. A 500 point season, ANY season would dictate that there is at least 1-2 elite players on that roster from a FF point of view. It really would not matter whether I was hoping the offense would score 900 points...if I grab the top 2-3 players from that team, early in my draft, and said NFL team ended with 500 points, chances are I would have drafted good value as no team could spread the ball around that much to diminish the top performers' value.As far as predicting which players on the Pats will end up with the most points (top 1-3), you yourself admitted Brady/Moss will be there and really, barring injury, Welker is pretty much a lock trailed by Maroney, I am guessing. If you had a crystal ball that could guarantee the Pats would finish with 500 points (as you are projecting by saying they should hit 85% of their 2007 numbers), you could go Moss, Brady and Welker (in the top 3 rounds) and probably end up with one of the best picks in each round (of course they are all not going to go in drafts in the top 3 rounds, so you would be silly to do this...but it would be safe to say it would work).
Hahaha...that might very well be true, but then how do you account for these predictions that the '09 schedule will be tougher than the '07 schedule?The closest data we have to judge '09 is '08, and while I'M not the one that's going to claim '09 = '08, you need to find some kind of measure if you want to make a claim about it.
I see where you're coming from, and I'm not suggesting owning multiple Patriots would be a bad thing. I find it difficult to project any team clearly to be more explosive than NE in 2009. My point was not anything ground-breaking in FF circles, just that every player has a given optimum draft position, and that it would be possible to overpay for Patriots, in particular if you EXPECT 2007 to repeat itself and draft according to that. People can and have disagreed on my reasons not to expect 2007 to repeat, but I'm throwing it out there as a possibility. Anyone thinking like me and expecting a still potent but not historically prolific offense should adjust their approach accordingly.You are emphasizing the idea of one team acquiring multiple Patriots round by round, and if one team can do that , then I agree that would be a very dangerous team. However, I was thinking both of another scenario, in which 4 or 5 Patriots are taken in the first 20-25 picks. For example, in leagues with QB-friendly scoring (6 pt TD, etc.), I can see both Brady and Moss being first-round or at least top 15 picks. If Welker is also gone before the third round, I'm not sure another Patriot would excite me until at least pick 50.It might be the most obvious thing ever, but I'm just suggesting people be mindful of not overspending to load up on the Patriots expecting 2007 to repeat itself.So if you expect 2007 will repeat and/or like to load up on one team, by all means go ahead and do that. I may end up with that roster in one of my leagues next year, but I won't overspend (as I see it) to get there.
This where I am a little bit stuck is how effective will the running game be?If I understand Anarcy correctly (who I really trust when it comes to the Pats as well as bostonfred) Maroney is 3rd string right now and Fred will start.I was looking at Freds stats and you see a big drop from 2007 to 2008. Was this age catching up with Fred or was it that JAX lost their 2 starting guards by week 1 IIRC?This is the key here is how many rushing attempts will the Patriots have. How often will they be willing to take 4ypc from Fred, Morris or Maroney when they could get 6 from Moss?NE has been going through transformation in their back 7 on defense also. Will this lead to giving up more big plays on defense?One nice thing about Moss. You are never out of the game. He can catch you up in a hurry. Poor defense leads to more shoot outs.Patriots have shown even before getting Welker and Moss that when they face a good run defense (like the Vikings) they will forego the running game altogether. Even in the 1st quarter and let Brady throw the ball 60 times.There are always a lot of things to consider. Thats why my projections are slooow.
I hadn't thought about that. Good point topher.(SOS is not something I give much consideration to)
Scroll through the thread. I haven't made a single claim comparing 2007, 2008 or 2009 strength of schedule. Why? Because it is basically a meaningless comparison. And why is it meaningless? Because it has no statistical predictive power.
Haha....you might notice that longass post I made is not in direct reply to anything you posted.I'm pretty sure I quoted the post I was replying to, although maybe I screwed that part up and confused the issue.Anyway, we apparently agree, so I'm not sure what you're arguing about.
Just stumbled across this Reiss speculation, if you're interested.How do you see the tight ends working out this year? We have three pretty good guys, and I know the Pats love looks with multiple tight ends. Do you see Ben Watson and Dave Thomas primarily as the pass catchers with Chris Baker as the blocker?
Interesting...looks like the Dave Thomas era could be over. Too bad, it looked like a great pick at the time. I still think that Baker will be the main receiving option when it's all said and done although Smith could take that role as well (I honestly haven't seen Smith play enough to really get a feel for him). As for Watson...he is what he is...a decent TE who doesn't have the hands to be counted on. He'll make a circus catch than drop an easy one in the open field. The other thing that drives me nuts about Watson is for all his athletic prowess he goes down on contact easier than he should.
I forgot to ask --- who is Anarcy?
I am Anarchy.
Great job on research.It was someone else who thought the 09 Pats wouldn't put up as many points as 07 Pats because the AFC East is a better division. My contention was that the 2009 schedule might be more favorable to putting up points than the 2007 schedule because its a 2nd place schedule vs a 1st place schedule. I believe you and I agree that the 2009 schedule is more favorable.
Yes.People will probably be tired of hearing me praise Randy Moss. But he does make the whole offense better. Including the running game. I think the improvement in the NE rushing attack from 2007 - 2008 was partly due to this. The rest was Cassel running about 70 times (quite a bit more than Brady).When I 1st was looking at Fred Taylor who is 33 years old right now I thought he lost 1ypc from 07-08 be must be done. Too old washed up.Until I remembered that those guards were hurt right away and that really hurt the whole JAX offense. Not just Fred Taylor.So how much does the old man have left? He has been a great player and really deserves more credit for what he has accomplished. He has ALWAYS been a poor GL RB however (I am not even sure why but look at the #'s) so I am not sure he will have that role.My initial thoughts were that Maroney is healthy. He should get one more shot in his contract year to proove he is worth keeping. Part of me still thinks he will somehow get a significant piece of the pie. Maybe due to an injury. Maybe by earning it?But everything else seems to suggest the opposite. Maroney 3rd or 4th string?I did start my passing projections but I am not solid on the RA yet so I am still going over this one and probably will be throughout the preseason.It is a very interesting situation for projections I think (why I am drawn to it) and there are a lot of side things going on in regards to probability due to the record breaking season just 2 years ago.Projections for Moss should be all over the place with little agreement I expect.
its different this time around.defenses in AFC East have gotten significantly better since 2007...Miami is up-n-coming,Jets have a new defensive-minded HC, Buffalo's defense has improved. they'll still score a lot of pts, but we'll see what happens without McDaniels calling the shots..do you have any data on QB's returning from knee injuries and how they do the following season?comparing pre-injury to post-injury stats?one thing to consider is whether or not the NE O-line is as good as it was in 2007.. I'm not a NE homer so I don't know..if not, Brady will get killed if they drop him back to pass as much as they did back then..even Indy pulled things back a bit after Manning set that TD record. a less-mobile Brady playing behind a lesser O-line might be trouble.
Yeah, I think I already thoroughly debunked that above.Which teams do you think are going to 'kill' Brady?I'd also be curious as to how much you think they'll be dropping Brady back.I'll throw a few stats out from '07, since you mentioned not being familiar with the team:week1 (NE 38 NYJ 14) - rushes 37 passes 28week2 (NE 38 NYJ 14) - ra 32 pa 31week3 (NE 38 Buf 07) - ra 38 pa 29I think right about here is where we lost Maroney.week4 (NE 34 Cin 13) - ra 34 pa 32week5 (NE 34 Cle 17) - ra 32 pa 38week6 is where we lose Morris for the season.Our RB at this point is Kyle Eckel, with FB Heath Evans getting some carries.Last year the first half of the season was a little bit of a trainwreck for the O-line --- they had some injuries, and in '07 we could have used Neal in the superbowl, so O-line can be an issue, just like everything can be an issue.But the flip side is they drafted a couple promising young guys who we didn't have in '07 and '08, who can maybe fill in if needed --- overall, I wouldn't say I'm particularly more worried about this than anything else, especially considering the schedule in '09.
I don't think division finish really matters as much as which AFC & NFC division they play in the rotation. Regardless of divisional finish, every team plays 4 games each against a 1st/2nd/3rd/4th place divisional team. Division finish only affects 2 games out of 16 whereas the divisional rotation affects 8 out of 16 games...This year NE is playing against the NFC South instead of the NFC East, and the AFC South instead of the AFC North. That should result in an easier time putting up points but could be compensated by their own division getting harder, so in the end maybe the schedule comparison is a wash.
Dude, come on.....Seriously.Are you trolling your own board?David Yudkin said:
I think their strength of schedule needs to be considered when looking at those stats. If you look here, at week 9 (which is the midpoint of their season), you'll see that NE's 1st half was much easier than their 2nd half.At QB, they go from 17.4 in the 1st half (likely top 5 easiest) to 15.3 in the 2nd half (3rd hardest), making them the most likely to regress at that position.
What are you doing? You're not supposed to actually offer insight or analysis based on facts, you're supposed to make smarty pants comments and opinion...Seriously, thanks for doing what the other poster was either unable or unwilling to do, which is to look into the reasons for the decline. Without a doubt the stronger defenses played a part, but I believe weather, pressure/scrutiny, and normal wear-and-tear of the NFL all contributed. The question concerning the overall status of how NFL defenses are adjusting/adapting to the spread offense, in particular the Patriots version, is still very much unanswered. Historically, defenses have always adjusted to the latest offensive trend over the course of a few seasons, if not sooner. But Hall of Fame talent still excels regardless of scheme.
