zombieslayer
12 years ago

Indy, Saints and Rams all had weak Ds but great passer rating differentials.

It doesn't matter if it comes from O or D, it matters just how great the difference is.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



Heh. I actually love these discussions.

Yes, it was either you or Nonstopdrivel (or possibly both) that showed that passer rating differential is actually a better stat than D ranking.


And yes, had we not had all those drops....
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

It's true Bishop didn't play as well last season, but he was outstanding in 2010. The below link summarizes his play fairly well. He'll need to rebound next year, but I didn't think his play dipped as much as Hawk's did. Since '10, Bishop's been the better overall player.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



I didn't see where they summarized both Hawk and Bishops performance from last year in any of those links. I think Bishop had a better game against NY in the passing game because they don't attack the LBs with TEs much. They also have a more mediocre QB. Phil Rivers tore Bishop a new one in the Chargers game.

Hawk was also outstanding in 2010. The only time I saw him mentioned was in the NO game last year, nothing for 2010 or for the rest of 2011. They didn't even list his numbers.

But since people don't like AJ, nobody wants to credit him for running a super bowl winning D. Or running a D that help the team go 19-0 for a stretch without surrendering the lead in the 4th quarter.

I don't have a problem with Bishop playing the run. I do have a major problem when the O lines a TE up on his side and he is forced to cover. In which he was much worse than Hawk.

Personally, I think because people have gotten a "bad feeling" about Hawk, they like to undersell him. And over sell Bishop for the same reason. A couple flashy plays and all the sudden he is the most complete LB in the league.

While I may agree that Hawk doesn't look like a top 5 overall pick, that alone doesn't make Bishop better. If Bishop were a top 5 overall pick, he would not be living up to those expectations in the passing game either.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

Heh. I actually love these discussions.

Yes, it was either you or Nonstopdrivel (or possibly both) that showed that passer rating differential is actually a better stat than D ranking.


And yes, had we not had all those drops....

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



I agree, this has been one of my favorite threads. Even better than bashing on Favre.[grin1]
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
porky88
12 years ago

I didn't see where they summarized both Hawk and Bishops performance from last year in any of those links. I think Bishop had a better game against NY in the passing game because they don't attack the LBs with TEs much. They also have a more mediocre QB. Phil Rivers tore Bishop a new one in the Chargers game.

Hawk was also outstanding in 2010. The only time I saw him mentioned was in the NO game last year, nothing for 2010 or for the rest of 2011. They didn't even list his numbers.

But since people don't like AJ, nobody wants to credit him for running a super bowl winning D. Or running a D that help the team go 19-0 for a stretch without surrendering the lead in the 4th quarter.

I don't have a problem with Bishop playing the run. I do have a major problem when the O lines a TE up on his side and he is forced to cover. In which he was much worse than Hawk.

Personally, I think because people have gotten a "bad feeling" about Hawk, they like to undersell him. And over sell Bishop for the same reason. A couple flashy plays and all the sudden he is the most complete LB in the league.

While I may agree that Hawk doesn't look like a top 5 overall pick, that alone doesn't make Bishop better. If Bishop were a top 5 overall pick, he would not be living up to those expectations in the passing game either.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



Bishop was rewarded with a new contract and a starting job in 2011. Exactly how good is he after just one year as a starter? Only he and James Farrior had ratings above +4.0 in each defensive category: run defense, pass rush, and pass coverage. His play has pushed Nick Barnett to the backup spot heading into 2011, despite Barnett being one of the league’s best inside linebackers in 2009.



That's from 2010. This makes sense, as Bishop was one of the best inside backers in the NFC from a statistical point of view in '10. He had a Pro Bowl caliber season that year. As pertaining to the last two seasons, well, Zero's link lens credence to the theory that Bishop's outperformed Hawk since assuming a starter’s role in 2010.

Head Coach Mike McCarthy has said Smith will have a chance to push for a starting role this season which could mean moving on without Hawk and his $4.4 million in salary cap money. With this year’s fifth-round draft pick Terrell Manning from NC State and the recent move of Brad Jones and Jamari Lattimore from OLB to ILB, the team appears to be in position to do so. However, the Packers have a history of questionable decisions when it comes to the #5 pick in the 2006 Draft. The Packers coaches kept Bishop languishing on the bench behind Hawk (a move that many, including Bishop himself, questioned publicly) for a good two years before an injury to Nick Barnett early in 2010 finally got him on the field. Bishop immediately went about the task of proving to Packer management how wrong they had been. Over the last two seasons Bishop has graded out at +46.3 to Hawk’s -3.8.



Hawk gave the Packers four years of good to average football. His expectations were overblown when the Packers took him. He's a victim in that regard. However, he's regressed since the move to a 3-4. It might be a scheme problem or it might be that his skills have simply maxed out. Still, you obviously can win many games with Hawk as your starting inside backer. The Packers have. However, he's simply not as valuable to this team as Des Bishop is. The Packers seem to be considering the idea that he's not as valuable as what D.J. Smith could be, too. We'll see about that last one, though.
http://www.row12.com/ 
UserPostedImage
Stevetarded
12 years ago

I didn't see where they summarized both Hawk and Bishops performance from last year in any of those links. I think Bishop had a better game against NY in the passing game because they don't attack the LBs with TEs much. They also have a more mediocre QB. Phil Rivers tore Bishop a new one in the Chargers game.

Hawk was also outstanding in 2010. The only time I saw him mentioned was in the NO game last year, nothing for 2010 or for the rest of 2011. They didn't even list his numbers.

But since people don't like AJ, nobody wants to credit him for running a super bowl winning D. Or running a D that help the team go 19-0 for a stretch without surrendering the lead in the 4th quarter.

I don't have a problem with Bishop playing the run. I do have a major problem when the O lines a TE up on his side and he is forced to cover. In which he was much worse than Hawk.

Personally, I think because people have gotten a "bad feeling" about Hawk, they like to undersell him. And over sell Bishop for the same reason. A couple flashy plays and all the sudden he is the most complete LB in the league.

While I may agree that Hawk doesn't look like a top 5 overall pick, that alone doesn't make Bishop better. If Bishop were a top 5 overall pick, he would not be living up to those expectations in the passing game either.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



The difference between the two in the passing game had to be what like 10 receptions and maybe a TD. Those numbers seem pretty insignificant over the course of an entire season. Especially when you consider everything Bishop does better. I'll take all of the times he pressures/sacks the QB or drops a runner a yard shy of the first down over those 10 or so receptions.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/06/12/secret-superstar-d-j-smith-lb-green-bay-packers/ 
Here's one that makes some comparisons
blank
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago
I looked on pro football reference and they have a stat called adjusted value.

Bisho was rated 8 in '10 and 7 in '11. With out starting he had a 2 rating in '09.
Hawk was rated an 8 in '09 a 10 in '10 and 6 in '11. In 6 years he has averaged about an 8.

But at least that site seem to say that Hawk is a touch better than Bishop.

Personally I think that is a bunch of crap. I wouldn't use it to prove anything except that opinions vary.

The stats I want to see are, where does Bishop rank in passer rating allowed across the league? Where does Hawk. How many yards do they give up. How many tackles do they miss.

The MJS online said Hawk missed 15 tackles and Bishop only missed 10. However (and this is huge) Bishop allowed 10 plays of 20 or more yards and Hawk only allowed 5.5. Bishop had 0 batted passes and Hawk had 2.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/the-rodgers-file-c63ua6p-138019428.html 

You can't really compare blitz numbers because Hawk is the lead on the cross dog blitz and his job is to free up Bishop. Which he was pretty effective at. He still managed 15 QB disruptions to Bishops 20.

On this site Raashan Saalami posted the passer rating of all the defenders through 12 games. Both Bishop and Hawk were injured for the next couple game so the total number should be fairly close. Bishop surrendered about a 123 passer rating and Hawk surrendered about an 85.

See, we can find the numbers. Lets add them up and figure this out. I want to see some head to head comparisons of full seasons. Not just that Bishop had a +7 in one game last year. I have no idea what that means or how good it is. He could have had a -15 in the Chargers game. He could have finished year with a plus 1.

Without real concrete numbers, all I see is looks, seems, appears, bigger impact etc. What that tells me is, you like Bishop more so your eye test is not accurate.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

The difference between the two in the passing game had to be what like 10 receptions and maybe a TD. Those numbers seem pretty insignificant over the course of an entire season. Especially when you consider everything Bishop does better. I'll take all of the times he pressures/sacks the QB or drops a runner a yard shy of the first down over those 10 or so receptions.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/06/12/secret-superstar-d-j-smith-lb-green-bay-packers/ 
Here's one that makes some comparisons

Originally Posted by: Stevetarded 



Those 9 more receptions all gave up 20 or more yards. If that was 9 more TDs, that is a big problem.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Stevetarded
12 years ago

The difference between the two in the passing game had to be what like 10 receptions and maybe a TD. Those numbers seem pretty insignificant over the course of an entire season. Especially when you consider everything Bishop does better. I'll take all of the times he pressures/sacks the QB or drops a runner a yard shy of the first down over those 10 or so receptions.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/06/12/secret-superstar-d-j-smith-lb-green-bay-packers/ 
Here's one that makes some comparisons

Originally Posted by: Stevetarded 



"Bishop immediately went about the task of proving to Packer management how wrong they had been. Over the last two seasons Bishop has graded out at +46.3 to Hawk’s -3.8."

blank
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

"Bishop immediately went about the task of proving to Packer management how wrong they had been. Over the last two seasons Bishop has graded out at +46.3 to Hawk’s -3.8."

Originally Posted by: Stevetarded 



How do they come up with that stat. Does it include giving up a 123 passer rating? Does it include giving up 10 plays of 20+ yards?
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

"Bishop immediately went about the task of proving to Packer management how wrong they had been. Over the last two seasons Bishop has graded out at +46.3 to Hawk’s -3.8."

Originally Posted by: Stevetarded 


Quoted from that link.

"It gives you an idea of which players are best at causing disruption when given the green light to pin their ears back and charge the quarterback. Bishop is among the league’s very best at ILB and Hawk is among the Top 20."

What I see is, Hawk is among the top 20 in disrupting the QB in spite of being the road grader for Bishop in the cross dog blitz. Hawk is taking on linemen leaving Bishop 1-1 on a running back.

I also saw nothing that graded the pass coverage. Which is usually about half of the LBs job.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (6m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
    Zero2Cool (1h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
    beast (1h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
    Zero2Cool (2h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
    packerfanoutwest (2h) : ok I stand corrected
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (2h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (2h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (2h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (2h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (2h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (2h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I literally just said it.
    packerfanoutwest (2h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
    packerfanoutwest (2h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : if bucs win out they win their division
    beast (3h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : falcons are already ahead of us
    beast (3h) : Packers will get in
    beast (3h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : they still are in the playoffs
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
    Zero2Cool (5h) : We can say it. We don't play.
    Mucky Tundra (6h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
    Mucky Tundra (6h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
    Mucky Tundra (6h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
    buckeyepackfan (7h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
    Mucky Tundra (16h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
    beast (16h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
    bboystyle (16h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
    Mucky Tundra (19h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
    Mucky Tundra (19h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
    Mucky Tundra (19h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
    buckeyepackfan (20h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
    Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak
    beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other
    beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)
    Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.
    beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs
    packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    29 - 34
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    16 - 10
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    30 - 14
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    29 - 31
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    24 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    34 - 13
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    24 - 22
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    30 - 27
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    14 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    20 - 19
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    38 - 10
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    30 - 17
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    31 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    30 - 13
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    59m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    1h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.