Tour2ma Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Below are my mid-terms for game one, i.e., I've only gotten thru the first half of the Pittsburgh game. Second half and final grade should be available tomorrow. I'm fairly sure the grades will go up... I grade each OL for each play using: '+' if assignment was achieved; '0' if assignment was not critical to the play; or '-' if assignment was not achieved. If an assignment was key to the success or failure of a given play the above grade may be doubled. With that said... here are the Week 1 mid-terms... We ran 25 plays in our first half. Joe Thomas: +16 -2 for a +14 net Joe's one neg play was a dbl; lost DE on a boot his way. He had one dbl pos. Joel Bitonio: +10 -9 net +1 Joel started slow and had 3 dbl negs (2 pass, 1 run) in the half. His first (at 6:27 of Q1) killed our opening drive when he slid to an outside rusher giving Keisel a free inside run at Hoyer. Joel had one dbl pos. Joel also received the half's only '?'... a rare grade given when I can't even guess what the OL's assignment was. It was the play right after the above described sack. If you figure out his assignment, let me know. Alex Mack: +10 -2 net +8 Alex had no dbls. He was the most consistently effective OL in achieving 2nd level assignments. John Greco +11 -5 net +6 John had one dbl pos (see below), but no dbl negs, but came close for giving up a bubble screen immediately. LB across from him read him and held the gain to 9 yards. M. Schwartz +9 -6 net +3 Mitch had one dbl neg when Keisel while engaged with Greco shoved him to the ground with a one-arm push. At the time Mitch was drop stepping to protect an anticipated OLB outside rush. The OLB was looping inside Greco and pressured Hoyer. Greco saved Mitch from a 2nd dbl neg when he picked up (and put down) a rusher who had just beaten Mitch with a inside spin. Greco had passed his man to Mack just prior to the spin. One other note... our right side fires out noticeably higher than our left. Mack fires out the lowest of all, but he starts the lowest. Stay tuned for the finals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Good work. I know this takes forever, and I sure appreciate these grades. If it were me, I'd almost give a +/-3 if the play were "clutch," maybe on 3rd down, 4th down, or goal line... just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Thanks... Took a couple hours, but being a line play lover... I've done this most weeks for a couple years now. Sometimes less formally if time is a constraint. But regardless I almost always see/learn something I was unaware of at the time of the game. Until now I just had not posted my "grades". Thought I'd give it a shot. Also plan to compare mine with a site or two I came across today that also grade players. Game changing plays might deserve even more weight, but I haven't exactly had to face that choice the past couple years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Second Half Grades We ran 42 plays in 6 series in our second half. Joe Thomas: +14 -2 net +12 Not perfect, but damn close... Both negs came on run plays. Joe was perfect in pass protecting. Joel Bitonio: +19 -6 net +13 Obviously a much better half for Joel... Joel racked up a dbl + for a gorgeous trap block (the only O-line trap I can noted in the entire game) that sprung West for a 28 yd gain in our 5th series. He racked up one dbl neg for allowing penetration that resulted in a run loss. Joel also received his 2nd '?' for a mystery assignment in the 3rd series' last play. Alex Mack: +26 -2 net +24 Wow... +26! TG4AM... Thank God for Alex Mack... and the FO that locked up our hardest working lineman. Alex had no dbls +. He just had plus after plus after plus after... He received one dbl neg for the same penetration mentioned for Joel. He slid. He sealed. He cut off. He passed off. He received. He manhandled anyone who lined up across from him. He played his ass off... John Greco +18 -8 net +10 John's 2nd half included 2 dbl negs and one dbl +. Both dbl negs were for the same thing... failing to detect and stop run blitzes by Shazier. The 2nd one, a 5-yard loss in the 4th series, was more egregious as Shaz tipped it. John's dbl + for a driving, point-of-attack block, came in our 2nd series' first play... right before his 1st dbl neg. John was solid in his pass protection. M. Schwartz +15 -9 +6 Mitch had more positive plays, but also more negative... He got his only dbl neg of the half out of the way early in the half's 3rd play, a running play. He had two dbl +'s in the half. The first was on the same play as Greco's when Mitch released to the 2nd level and eliminated a LB. His 2nd dbl pos came on Crowell's 2nd TD run... Mitch chipped the inside D-line so Greco could seal him and then released to level 2 to seal in a LB... very pretty play. Mitch did not take an opportunity to blow up Shazier in series 5's 1st play... too nice of a guy? General observations for the half included some head scratching blocking assignments that seemed to involve our O-line chasing LBs they can never catch. Possibly they are being positioned for blocks if the runner cuts back, but it did not happen in this game. What did happen is inside pursuers that reasonably could have been blocked got in on tackles. Another observation is that our O-line can handle the pace of the hurry up... for an entire game if need be. Not because of our superior conditioning (although it looked damned good... especially in contrast to the gassed Steeler D). The reason is this... our line gets to take plays off during drives. The best examples of such plays are the naked, play-action boots we ran. In every instance the entire line jogged in the direction away from the boot influencing the front seven rather than engaging them. Final, Week 1 grades coming right up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Final GradesWe ran 67 plays in 12 series in Week One.Joe Thomas: +30 -4 net +26... Might be a B+ on the curve, but A- is as low as I'll go.Joel Bitonio: +29 -15 net +14. The rookie made a couple rookie mistakes, but that trap was the day's prettiest play ... CAlex Mack: +36 -4 net +32...... This week's curve buster gets an A+John Greco: +29 -13 net +16.. Solid job... solid grade... C+M. Schwartz: +24 -15 net +9... Mitchell elected to use his Pass/Fail option this week... P (would have been a D had he not)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suomi Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Excellent work - much appreciated. Really enjoy your insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 A film watcher on twitter certainly disagrees @Cianaf: McLendon destroyed Mack in this game. He did it in ways that makes me think he'd be a much better 3-4 DE for PIT. He can penetrate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Dogpound barking approval! PS-I won't harp on Schwartz anymore unless he continues this grade through the next several games. Thanks for taking the time to break this down for us Tour-I love line play too as the key to winning football, but I think you have me beat. PS #2-exactly where do you live in the piney woods Tour? I was born trekking those woods as a boy scout. Lived in Beaumont until age 12 and went to the jungle woods of Venezuela from there. I once got "detained" at the American Embassy in Caracas for having a hunting knife on my belt. Damn East Texas hick! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 At least they're all positive numbers. @Cianaf: McLendon destroyed Mack in this game. He did it in ways that makes me think he'd be a much better 3-4 DE for PIT. He can penetrate. McLendon? "Destroyed" Mack? I never saw that happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Awesome post . There should a whole lot more of this here and less focus on all the damn drama/name calling (counts for rivals and other browns fans). Great post. Very pft of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Love this post, and much respect for going through every single snap. Maybe others will be inspired to look in to other positions? Not me, I don't have the time or concentration levels! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Love this post, and much respect for going through every single snap. Maybe others will be inspired to look in to other positions? Not me, I don't have the time or concentration levels! I would, but no DVR or time really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 A film watcher on twitter certainly disagrees @Cianaf: McLendon destroyed Mack in this game. He did it in ways that makes me think he'd be a much better 3-4 DE for PIT. He can penetrate. McClendon was really pushing the pocket and I would much prefer he played defensive end as well. As of now it's what the steelers have at nose tackle. I like McClendon but I really miss Hampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Thanks all... even you, Vag... @Cianaf: McLendon destroyed Mack in this game. He did it in ways that makes me think he'd be a much better 3-4 DE for PIT. He can penetrate. I don't think Mr. Twitter knows much about football. Stats don't make a case , but they should support one and McLendon's don't support Mr. Twitter's. But it is also possible that he doesn't know Mack is our center. In fairness, I paid little attention to which Steeler a given OL was matched up against, so it could be the same in Mr. Twitter's case. The only time I can think of that came anywhere close to his description was the one time Mack actually had a chance to retreat to set up his pass protection. A Steeler big man (possibly McLendon) got up a head of steam and Mack struggled to stay out of Hoyer's lap... but he managed to... barely. I think it was the play when Hoyer nearly threw a pick to Allen in our 2nd to last series. FYI... I lay the blame for the near INT on Austin, the intended target. He rounded an out route off so badly... like by 4 yards... that Allen had plenty of room to undercut it and make a diving try at what looked to be an underthrown ball. I think a WR born without ACLs could have cut harder. Awesome post . There should a whole lot more of this here and less focus on all the damn drama/name calling (counts for rivals and other browns fans). Great post. Very pft of you. That cuts both ways... but I appreciate the complement... even if you are still wrong about the 2nd-hand smoke. As objective as I try to be, and I think I am as objective as anyone here (and more so than most), I'm still a Browns fan and therefore my Browns' opinions are subjective. In the end that impacts what I emphasize in forming an opinion and any subsequent debate... and I love a good debate. Some drama/ name-calling is fun. Some of it is warranted. However, going "there" automatically every single time in response to every single post is tiresome. I would, but no DVR or time really The DVR is a godsend... I used to use a VCR. Now it's not exactly like having a coach's clicker... but it's a helluva lot closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Final Grades We ran 67 plays in 12 series in Week One. Joe Thomas: +30 -4 net +26... Might be a B+ on the curve, but A- is as low as I'll go. Joel Bitonio: +29 -15 net +14. The rookie made a couple rookie mistakes, but that trap was the day's prettiest play ... C Alex Mack: +36 -4 net +32...... This week's curve buster gets an A+ John Greco: +29 -13 net +16.. Solid job... solid grade... C+ M. Schwartz: +24 -15 net +9... Mitchell elected to use his Pass/Fail option this week... P (would have been a D had he not)... Sounds more subjective to me than it claims to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Awesome post . There should a whole lot more of this here and less focus on all the damn drama/name calling (counts for rivals and other browns fans). Great post. Very pft of you. I don't call you names. I simply make accurate observations about you. When you are being frequently stupid I call you stupid. When you are being ignorant I call you ignorant. When you are correct on something I say you are correct. When you have a plausible argument I say you have a plausible argument. YOU control the reaction that is made toward you. Don't be stupid, don't be ignorant, and you won't get called those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Sounds more subjective to me than it claims to be. Claims? Where? What claims? The grading is subjective, but at a different level than the garden variety, "Fred played well, Bob played well, but Frank sucked," subjectivity. In grading plays there are sometimes close calls in assigning individual play grades, e.g., "missed the block, but did it effect the outcome?" The math is objective... because it's math... The final translation to a letter grade is subjective to a degree, but given the totals I'd maintain it is true of the lower end only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Gipper must not like how you graded Schwartz. LOL. It sure would be interesting to see how the Browns staff graded out the O-line in comparison with yours. I wonder if there is a way to obtain that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 No, to me, this sounds like it is based on observation....and observation is subjective, ergo, the statistic is subjective. Many statistics are just that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibleedbrown Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Claims? Where? What claims? The grading is subjective, but at a different level than the garden variety, "Fred played well, Bob played well, but Frank sucked," subjectivity. In grading plays there are sometimes close calls in assigning individual play grades, e.g., "missed the block, but did it effect the outcome?" The math is objective... because it's math... The final translation to a letter grade is subjective to a degree, but given the totals I'd maintain it is true of the lower end only. The letter grading could be consistent, like a test in school. Positive plays divided by total plays and you'd get a percentage. By that standard Mack would land a 90%, which is an A- using 10 point increments for letter grades. Not that it detracts as this is excellent work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 No, to me, this sounds like it is based on observation....and observation is subjective, ergo, the statistic is subjective. Many statistics are just that way. I've tried it with my eyes closed... doesn't work as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Statistics are NOT subjective in any way, that's the entire point. Besides, the appropriate question would be to ask precisely where the grade demarcations are: What has to happen to be a +, what's a 0, what's a -. Once the measurement methodology is defined, the analysis is sound... whether you like it or not. If the method is repeatable and reproducible, it's legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Besides, the appropriate question would be to ask precisely where the grade demarcations are: What has to happen to be a +, what's a 0, what's a -. I grade each OL for each play using: '+' if assignment was achieved; '0' if assignment was not critical to the play; or '-' if assignment was not achieved. If an assignment was key to the success or failure of a given play the above grade may be doubled. The above are the guidelines I use. I have to infer the assignment as well as judge its achievement and criticality. For the vast majority of the evaluations, all three aspects are obvious at first look. Some take two looks. Some take three. The more looks, the less objective the evaluation will end up being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieDawg Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Tour2ma, thanks for the work you have put in, really interesting stuff. Over the years I have shifted my attention more and more to the O-Line on snaps to try and educate myself as to why plays pan out the way they do. Not being born and raised in the US I have never been schooled, via participation, in the finer points of O-Line assignments and their success or failure. When I am born again I hope its in North East Ohio and I'm big boned. Howie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Tour2ma, thanks for the work you have put in, really interesting stuff. ..+1.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Yes, I would pay for reports like this, but since you are already doing it for free ... carry on. Alex Mack having an All Pro year ... Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Thanks again, all... Z, I'll let you buy me a beer someday... Just so long as my work does not appear under "you-know-who's" by-line in some on-line "article", I'm cool with free... Then again... maybe it could earn me a PFWA badge and I can become an even more insufferable prick... The letter grading could be consistent, like a test in school. Positive plays divided by total plays and you'd get a percentage. By that standard Mack would land a 90%, which is an A- using 10 point increments for letter grades. I hear you... I think having to deal with negative totals last year (think Oniel Cousins... if you dare...) has led me to think of a "net 0" score as the pass/ fail pivot point. Plus a "run in" with a curve-busting, German transfer student in a college Physics course has made me resist grading too harshly. If I follow you, then Alex would have been the week's only 'A'. Mack.. 36/40 = 90% ---> A Thomas 26/30 = 87% ---> B Greco. 16/29 = 55% ---> F Bito.. 14/29 = 48% ---> F- Shwrtz 09/24 = 38% ---> F-- Just seems way too harsh to me. It might be better to just drop the percentages and grades altogether and let folks interpret the data as they will... Or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.