OLB vs ILB (1 Viewer)

[Darcimer]

Aside from Bulluck and maybe Brooking ( I always liked him), I noticed that ILB's will tend to far outscore the OLB's. My league forces you to start one outside and one inside LB. Consequently, Bulluck/Brooking are even more valuable than they already were.

So my observations are that Brooking and Bulluck play WLB. This leads me to beleive that WLB, all else being equal, will rack up huge points vs the strong side LB... Is this generally true? Also, what is the correlation of 3-4 vs 4-3 when it comes to selecting outside LB's? I was watching T Suggs last year lining up outside, but he was really playing DE. ( He can't be had at LB, since our league lists him as DE)

If so, who would you list as top tier OLB's that aren't already on the IDP top ten list. I am talking about guys that aren't on the average owner's radar. I guess you might call these guys sleepers, but I make a living off cherry picking unknown talent, or players in good situations. I'd like to know who you think has big potential at OLB this year. Crowell? Mcginest? Ernie Sims? AJ Hawk? Daryl Smith? Any Dolphins? Rosie Colvin? I am really liking Julian Peterson even though he is strong side. Those are a few I am eyeing so far, besides the two mentioned above ( I usually let the top tier guys go, as they almost always get drafted too early by some guy who had a sh#tty defense the year before.)

My problem here is that only one or two OLB's fall into the top tier of all LB's, so if you don't grab a great one early, you're almost always searching for gems..

Any thoughts?

 

[Jene Bramel]

It's hard to do a search for topics like this unfortunately since you can't do a three letter search but there has been a lot of good discussion about the 3-4 OLB (search tweener or similar terms). Many 3-4 OLB in the current hybrid schemes aren't all around players and don't carry much value in traditional scoring systems -- too few tackles or big plays depending on the player in question.

Essentially you're correct, the WLB should greatly outproduce the SLB on any given team/scheme becuase of their respective responsibilities. A three down SLB can put a wrench in that thinking so you may want to check out the thread on three down backers that's been on the front page for a couple of weeks.

Here's the list of OLB I'd consider capable of top 25 production in most standard leagues:

4-3 OLB: Adalius Thomas, Takeo Spikes, Angelo Crowell, Ian Gold, Cato June, Derrick Johnson, Thomas Howard, Keith Bulluck, Keith Brooking, Thomas Davis, Lance Briggs, Ernie Sims, AJ Hawk, EJ Henderson, Derrick Brooks, Julian Peterson, Marcus Washington.

3-4 OLB: Mike Vrabel (although he'll prob shift inside while Bruschi's out), Shawne Merriman, Bryan Thomas (although still listed at DE).

That's not an exhaustive list and obviously not all will finish in the top 25. But these guys and a few other OLB (Pino Tinoisamoa, Leroy Hill, Daryl Smith etal) are worthy of roster spots in any league and some (Demarcus Ware, Manny Lawson, Willie McGinest) are going to be scoring system dependent.

Almost all of these guys have been discussed in separate threads in the Forum. Many were broken down in point-counterpoint fashion in the staff face-offs during May and June. Also, I'm a shameless pimp for Norton's Breaking Down NFL Defenses article which was my first, second, and third stop when considering the role a given player's scheme would play in his production and is a must read for any serious IDPer.

HTH

 

[Darcimer]

It's hard to do a search for topics like this unfortunately since you can't do a three letter search but there has been a lot of good discussion about the 3-4 OLB (search tweener or similar terms). Many 3-4 OLB in the current hybrid schemes aren't all around players and don't carry much value in traditional scoring systems -- too few tackles or big plays depending on the player in question.

Ahhh... I was wondering what "tweener" meant. Thanks for the info... I'll be digesting the 3-Down back thread as well as the suggested reading.My experiences have been that the IDp projections are subject to a much higher margin of error. My league, for example has 5 pt sacks and 5 pt INTs. That's almost as much as a TD. But there isn't a huge drop-off, as a bunch of guys will generally be tiered together. But a couple sacks/ints off, and your moving a guy upor down 10-12 rank positions.Which brings me to the point, it looks like you have given me the short answer, as shown in your sample list of 4-3 OLB's. The group looks stronger than the 3-4 scheme, and as you noted, the hybrid guys are hard to project.Porter is always a solid option, forgot about him..Thanks for the advice..

 

[Jene Bramel]

It's hard to do a search for topics like this unfortunately since you can't do a three letter search but there has been a lot of good discussion about the 3-4 OLB (search tweener or similar terms). Many 3-4 OLB in the current hybrid schemes aren't all around players and don't carry much value in traditional scoring systems -- too few tackles or big plays depending on the player in question.

Ahhh... I was wondering what "tweener" meant. Thanks for the info... I'll be digesting the 3-Down back thread as well as the suggested reading.My experiences have been that the IDp projections are subject to a much higher margin of error. My league, for example has 5 pt sacks and 5 pt INTs. That's almost as much as a TD. But there isn't a huge drop-off, as a bunch of guys will generally be tiered together. But a couple sacks/ints off, and your moving a guy upor down 10-12 rank positions.

Which brings me to the point, it looks like you have given me the short answer, as shown in your sample list of 4-3 OLB's. The group looks stronger than the 3-4 scheme, and as you noted, the hybrid guys are hard to project.

Porter is always a solid option, forgot about him..

Thanks for the advice..

Looks like you've figured me out already when you know that a 5-6 paragraph post is "short" for me. I can get a bit long-winded at times.

I (and many others) will be happy to get a discussion going on some general defensive concepts for you if you wish. Just give us a gentle push with a couple of questions and we'll be off. I won't make any promises because I was hoping to get to it this year, but next season I'm hoping to put together an IDP FAQ of sorts with links to some of the better conceptual and strategic posts we've done about any and all things IDP.

In the meantime, there really isn't any such thing as a :honda: around here as we're notorious for shooting off on tangents all the time. So let loose with the questions if you have them.

 

[Darcimer]

I am slowly grasping the defensive side of the ball. Alot of us, even if we don't admit it, know squat about what's really going on down there. Any FF jock can grab Nortons cheatsheet and have a spectacular draft(Thanks, by the way!). But what's intriguing is when I sit down and talk to someone who is just flat out football brilliant. I work in a bar, so I get to talk to a ton of sports fans. The guys who really know what's going on don't always know alot about fantasy football. I come across guys who know great, if sometimes irrelevant, stuff. i.e. junior colleges, defensive schemes, coach tendencies, injury history, OC's and DC's, all stuff I have to go look up, it's amazing. Sometimes they are full of ####, but alot of the time they are right on. I consider myself a savvy fantasy player, but when it comes to the actual battle plan, I am not your guy.

That being said, it's crunch time for alot of drafters, so I don't want to make you guys lose valuable time. But as long as you like talking about it, ( I always find that I learn more than I teach more when I discuss something), fire away.

My first IDP experience was about 7 years ago. IDP wasn't really catching on yet, but I got into this league with 6 IDP ( DT, DE, ILB, OLB, S, CB). One day watching the games, my RB was getting wrecked and the guy I was playing was telling me that my RB would be a bust this year. I didn't understand it because he was a highly regarded RB, on a predominantly running team. Sounded perfect. WRONG! With no passing game, the D was stacking "8 in the box" ( new term for me then). Thats when I realized I had no clue what was going on the D side of the ball.

Anyway, I got the 4-3, 3-4, nickel and dime down ( God you ever try playing that Madden NFL!!? I guarantee you a 7 year old can kick your ###, LOL) But lets see if I got this right. As a Pats fan, it doesn't look like just anyone can run a 3-4. When the Pats got Ted Washington, it made sense to me. You need a 400 pound guy to just sit there in the middle and take up space. You can then get the extra LB, but I am not sure where he starts. I am guessing ILB, and the OLB's slide out or can slide up and play DE if he wants, like Terrel Suggs did last year. But you also need the other ILB to be physical and smart ( Bruschi?). Third, and probably most important, ( Ok, I am starting to wing it here) you need a Strong Safety that plays more like a LB. Am I close?

What I don't get is why this is better, if it is better, than a 4-3. I just make that assumption that it's better because the best defenses I have seen seem to use it. ( Bal, NE, Pitt, SD, CLE to name a few) Is it just because it's different and since alot of teams don't use it, it comes as a surprise to the offense? Or is just a big smokescreen and the DEF is throwing all kinds of movement and indecipherable looks, so that you never know where the pressure is coming from?

For fantasy uses, Ray Lewis could be a good example. He was a stud for years, then kinda slowed a bit. I have no idea why, but I read that they altered the DEF, and now they are going back to they way it was hen he was hot. Can you point out DEF changes as responsible for his dropoff in stats, or is it just the athlete getting older?

PS I wonder if the steroid scandal in baseball is going to spillover into the NFL. I mean, there are some superhuman specimens in the NFL.... Hard to imagine that the NFL is immune, but that's another topic..

 

[houndirish]

I'd add Channing Crowder and Bart Scott to the list of OLB's that Jene referenced.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Anyway, I got the 4-3, 3-4, nickel and dime down ( God you ever try playing that Madden NFL!!? I guarantee you a 7 year old can kick your ###, LOL) But lets see if I got this right. As a Pats fan, it doesn't look like just anyone can run a 3-4. When the Pats got Ted Washington, it made sense to me. You need a 400 pound guy to just sit there in the middle and take up space. You can then get the extra LB, but I am not sure where he starts. I am guessing ILB, and the OLB's slide out or can slide up and play DE if he wants, like Terrel Suggs did last year. But you also need the other ILB to be physical and smart ( Bruschi?). Third, and probably most important, ( Ok, I am starting to wing it here) you need a Strong Safety that plays more like a LB. Am I close?What I don't get is why this is better, if it is better, than a 4-3. I just make that assumption that it's better because the best defenses I have seen seem to use it. ( Bal, NE, Pitt, SD, CLE to name a few) Is it just because it's different and since alot of teams don't use it, it comes as a surprise to the offense? Or is just a big smokescreen and the DEF is throwing all kinds of movement and indecipherable looks, so that you never know where the pressure is coming from?

You're correct, you can't switch back and forth from the 4-3 to the 3-4 without the personnel to do it. While every team has their own personality, there are two major variations of the old 3-4 defense right now -- a base 3-4 with rush LBs (tweeners) run by SD, DAL, and PIT and a "hybrid" 3-4 that really a multiple front defense that Belichick fully installed with NE and will now be run by his former assistants by CLE and the NYJ.In today's NFL, running a base 3-4 front successfully requires IMO three essential parts. To stand up against the run in this defense, you have to have a solid NT to command a double team in front of the two ILB and keep them free of multiple interior lineman blowing them out of the middle of the field. That's your Ted Washington/Vince Wilfork/Casey Hampton/Jamal Williams. Secondly, but maybe more importantly, you need an OLB (or three) that can pressure the quarterback. It's extraordinarily rare for a 3-4 DE to have the size to play against double teams against the run and the speed, strength, pass rush skill to pressure the quarterback. There's been one in the past 20 years that could do it consistently for big numbers -- Bruce Smith. Those OLB are your 'tweener players and why you see them come off the draft boards higher and higher over the past two seasons. Third, you've got to have at least one ILB that can shed blocks and make plays on backs. Even the best three man line isn't going to be able to keep an ILB clean on every play. If your ILB are getting pushed into the secondary by an OG a high percentage of the time you're in trouble.Why do coaches like it? It's much easier (and cheaper) to find a 280-300lb plugger like Igor Olshansky or Kimo von Oehlhoffen to anchor the line than it is to find a 270lb two way pass rush/run stuffing end. It's also getting easier to find a 255lb "tweener" college DE who can run like a deer and be made into a rush OLB. IMO, this is why Marvin Lewis is continually lusting after a 3-4 playbook -- the Bengals haven't been in position to draft/sign a 4-3 rush end in years and Lewis in an ex-LB coach who's seen guys like Greg Lloyd, Kevin Greene, Levon Kirkland etal in action.Belichick's mulitple front defense is a sideways step in the process. It's not quite checkers to chess, but his wikipedia sized defensive playbook allows him to do pretty much whatever he wants whenever he wants. Again, you're correct, this defense doesn't work without the right personnel. You still need the VIPs above, but Belichick uses so many fronts that you need those OLB to be all-around players (able in coverage and run support) with the football IQ to play any role at any time. So instead of fast and flashy Demarcus Ware's you get solid but not sexy vets like Willie McGinest, Mike Vrabel, or Rosie Colvin. I'm interested to see how Kamerion Wimbley does in this defense as a full time player -- he's a little different than the standard. And the SS is nice when it's a do-it-all guy like Rodney Harrison, but the beauty of the deep playbook is that it can hide an injury to Bruschi or Harrison and to some extent hide the weakness of guys like Monty Beisel or Artrell Hawkins enough to still function well.