2020 Pats: QB Edition

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Wait, so you think this team, taking QB out of the equation is at least 4 games worse than last year's?
That's a ton of faith in Collins and Van Noy (and none at all in Andrews).

Classify it however you want but the defense isn't going to be nearly as good as they showed early in the year (they weren't that team by the end of the year and lost guys or they got a year older). I'm not really sure how to gauge a C for win total, but do I think he's winning games? No, I don't; he could be Dermontti Dawson, doesn't swing me much. Lost the kicker. Lost the QB. Prob shouldn't have won 12 games last year (Cowboys and Eagles games; second Bills game), but that's another debate and the rest of the division likely got better. I'd wager they split with the Jets and Dolphins and lose both to Buffalo. The rest of the schedule is harder. Etc etc. Yeah, if you want to argue about how many games I see them as 7-9 wins being realistic. Reasonable minds can differ, I just think people are being wildly optimistic. Outside of the defensive backfield or O line, I fail to see a unit that's even above average.

The Pat's over under line for wins is 9 or 9.5 in the top four articles I googled. .500 isn't that impressive.

And I don't expect them to be very impressive. Vegas lines aren't very valuable to me since there's other factors involved. But again, to each their own.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

What? Prime Newton had a near 100 rating and took his team to a 15-1 record and a SB berth. Prime Newton is a significantly better player than 2019 Brady. If Pats get prime Newton, they are absolutely a contender. The defense still figures to be good to very good next year.

The problem is that prime Newton is likely gone for good so the Pats are clearly weighing lesser Newton vs. seeing what they have in Stidham. And I don’t blame them for going with the latter.

Fair enough, I tend to discount that Panthers team because I never was very impressed by them but you’re correct, he was a stud that year.

 

[kelpapa]

Classify it however you want but the defense isn't going to be nearly as good as they showed early in the year (they weren't that team by the end of the year and lost guys or they got a year older). I'm not really sure how to gauge a C for win total, but do I think he's winning games? No, I don't; he could be Dermontti Dawson, doesn't swing me much. Lost the kicker. Lost the QB. Prob shouldn't have won 12 games last year (Cowboys and Eagles games; second Bills game), but that's another debate and the rest of the division likely got better. I'd wager they split with the Jets and Dolphins and lose both to Buffalo. The rest of the schedule is harder. Etc etc. Yeah, if you want to argue about how many games I see them as 7-9 wins being realistic. Reasonable minds can differ, I just think people are being wildly optimistic. Outside of the defensive backfield or O line, I fail to see a unit that's even above average.


And I don't expect them to be very impressive. Vegas lines aren't very valuable to me since there's other factors involved. But again, to each their own.

Your concerned about losing Nick folk?

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Your concerned about losing Nick folk?

Cobra Kai Forbath.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Fair enough, I tend to discount that Panthers team because I never was very impressed by them but you’re correct, he was a stud that year.

I don’t blame you. The last image of Newton that year is him deciding not to go after a critical fumble with a SB on the line. That was awful, even moreso because it handed a cheap ring to Peyton.

 

[DJnVa]

Fair enough, I tend to discount that Panthers team because I never was very impressed by them but you’re correct, he was a stud that year.

Isn't taking a non-impressive team to 15-1 and the Super Bowl more impressive than doing it with a stacked team?

 

[Cellar-Door]

Classify it however you want but the defense isn't going to be nearly as good as they showed early in the year (they weren't that team by the end of the year and lost guys or they got a year older). I'm not really sure how to gauge a C for win total, but do I think he's winning games? No, I don't; he could be Dermontti Dawson, doesn't swing me much. Lost the kicker. Lost the QB. Prob shouldn't have won 12 games last year (Cowboys and Eagles games; second Bills game), but that's another debate and the rest of the division likely got better. I'd wager they split with the Jets and Dolphins and lose both to Buffalo. The rest of the schedule is harder. Etc etc. Yeah, if you want to argue about how many games I see them as 7-9 wins being realistic. Reasonable minds can differ, I just think people are being wildly optimistic. Outside of the defensive backfield or O line, I fail to see a unit that's even above average.


And I don't expect them to be very impressive. Vegas lines aren't very valuable to me since there's other factors involved. But again, to each their own.

Ah, you missed my
point I think. (also we lost the kicker for most of last year) which was that sure .500 makes sense if there is a QB downgrade, but Prime Cam is better than current Brady, now will you get that... maybe not, but if you get close to that you are adding an elite QB to a 12-4 team and that more than offsets the defense being worse than "on an all-time pace".

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Isn't taking a non-impressive team to 15-1 and the Super Bowl more impressive than doing it with a stacked team?

Yes, I just thought overall they were paper tigers. I didn’t expect them to come anywhere close to competing in that Super Bowl. Intent wasn’t to knock Cam.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Ah, you missed my
point I think. (also we lost the kicker for most of last year) which was that sure .500 makes sense if there is a QB downgrade, but Prime Cam is better than current Brady, now will you get that... maybe not, but if you get close to that you are adding an elite QB to a 12-4 team and that more than offsets the defense being worse than "on an all-time pace".

I don’t think I missed your point as much as I just disagree with it. Again, I poorly expressed my opinion - it wasn’t about Cam it was about the Pats. I - personally and don’t expect a ton of people to agree - think they weren’t as good as their record was last year (at least in the conventional sense of a “12 win team” or previous such teams in their history); I don’t think their defense was as dominant as the numbers looked; and o don’t see where the improved. Add in normal NFL variance, if they win 9+ games, I’ll gladly eat crow. I just think there’s a lot of overly optimistic posts about various components of the team and it’s not as easy as to say “remove the B- QB, insert B+ QB, back to 12 wins”.

 

[Awesome Fossum]

Since I looked it up, their expected W-L based on point differential was 13-3.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/2019.htm

 

[nighthob]

I don’t think I missed your point as much as I just disagree with it. Again, I poorly expressed my opinion - it wasn’t about Cam it was about the Pats. I - personally and don’t expect a ton of people to agree - think they weren’t as good as their record was last year (at least in the conventional sense of a “12 win team” or previous such teams in their history); I don’t think their defense was as dominant as the numbers looked; and o don’t see where the improved. Add in normal NFL variance, if they win 9+ games, I’ll gladly eat crow. I just think there’s a lot of overly optimistic posts about various components of the team and it’s not as easy as to say “remove the B- QB, insert B+ QB, back to 12 wins”.

This is, more or less, where I’m at. Their D looked dominant against the easy portion of the schedule when they were playing with the lead and the opponents were throwing every down. But once that calculus changed in the second half they didn’t look quite so good. The ‘20 Patriots might be in for an ‘11 Colts style season, albeit with better results thanks to a better QB.

But even where Stidham’s concerned I think a lot of people are too optimistic about him short term. Let’s grant all the reasons people give for his lack of college dominance. Because ultimately I agree, I think that long term he’ll be fine. But expecting him to play better at the NFL level in his first year starting than he has to date is just way too big a leap for me.

Personally if they win seven games next year I’ll expect a return to form in ‘21 (i.e. 12 wins and a playoff run).

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I have no idea what to expect from Stidham but I’m not sure anyone does. I’m not a huge CFB guy so I didn’t see him play much but even if he’s above average they can build the team elsewhere. That being said I think they have massive overhauls at positions and others that expire by the time those kick in. Frankly - I’m cool with that. This team gave me 20 years of dominance, it ain’t gonna last forever.

 

[bsj]

Father's Day gift. Decided to go all in on the kid.

 

[Mugsy’s Walk-Off Bunt]

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/siriusxmnfl/status/1275196782507634689

 

[djbayko]

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/siriusxmnfl/status/1275196782507634689

Tweet gone.

 

[BaseballJones]

I have no idea what to expect from Stidham but I’m not sure anyone does. I’m not a huge CFB guy so I didn’t see him play much but even if he’s above average they can build the team elsewhere. That being said I think they have massive overhauls at positions and others that expire by the time those kick in. Frankly - I’m cool with that. This team gave me 20 years of dominance, it ain’t gonna last forever.

I think the most optimistic outlook moving forward for this organization, as long as BB is at the helm, is to be a 10-win team (ranging from 8-12) on a pretty regular basis, and every once in a while making a really nice run deep in the playoffs, and possibly winning another SB title along the way. I think the years of just utterly dominating the division year-in and year-out are gone (which doesn't preclude them from finding a way to win the division this year, for example), but I do think BB keeps them pretty competitive, unless Stidham just sucks.

Basically, we're now like every other franchise, hoping to be pretty good on a regular basis with a nice deep run every few years.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I think the most optimistic outlook moving forward for this organization, as long as BB is at the helm, is to be a 10-win team (ranging from 8-12) on a pretty regular basis, and every once in a while making a really nice run deep in the playoffs, and possibly winning another SB title along the way. I think the years of just utterly dominating the division year-in and year-out are gone (which doesn't preclude them from finding a way to win the division this year, for example), but I do think BB keeps them pretty competitive, unless Stidham just sucks.

Basically, we're now like every other franchise, hoping to be pretty good on a regular basis with a nice deep run every few years.

I'm not really talking about the long term future of the franchise, I'm taking purely about next season. I think people are kind of kidding themselves if they expect this team to be anything more than a wild card (and at that, with benefit from the additional team making it). They're not going to be the 3rd best team in the conference, they won't win the division, they won't sniff the conference championship --- again, these are simply my opinions and I don't expect anyone to agree with them; I just think our fanbase still sees them as only losing a mediocre, aging QB. I think that's a mirage. To each their own.

 

[Cotillion]

I'm not really talking about the long term future of the franchise, I'm taking purely about next season. I think people are kind of kidding themselves if they expect this team to be anything more than a wild card (and at that, with benefit from the additional team making it). They're not going to be the 3rd best team in the conference, they won't win the division, they won't sniff the conference championship --- again, these are simply my opinions and I don't expect anyone to agree with them; I just think our fanbase still sees them as only losing a mediocre, aging QB. I think that's a mirage. To each their own.

I would be ecstatic with a playoff game.

Just hoping to see development and building towards the new future. Anything beyond that is gravy.

 

[Mugsy’s Walk-Off Bunt]

I agree with P.P. I have plenty of faith in BB and the culture and some of the talent here and there. But in my view this 2020 Patriots squad, especially considering their schedule, is at the very best a 10-win team. To me this roster seems more like a 6-8 or 9 win team. Hope I'm wrong, I guess, but a re-set and one draft with high picks, to go along with a lot of cap space in the next off-season, isn't the worst-case scenario for BB & friends. Actually...9-10 wins in 2020 may be the worst-case, long-term-wise.

 

[BaseballJones]

I'm not really talking about the long term future of the franchise, I'm taking purely about next season. I think people are kind of kidding themselves if they expect this team to be anything more than a wild card (and at that, with benefit from the additional team making it). They're not going to be the 3rd best team in the conference, they won't win the division, they won't sniff the conference championship --- again, these are simply my opinions and I don't expect anyone to agree with them; I just think our fanbase still sees them as only losing a mediocre, aging QB. I think that's a mirage. To each their own.

Yeah I think it's a 9-win team. 10 if everything breaks right. 7 if Stidham stinks. Because I think the defense will be really good and of course Belichick is the best in the business. NE will be a pain in the ass for other teams to play, but unless Stidham turns out to be pretty good, they'll come up on the short end too often.

 

[nighthob]

If Stidham stinks they won’t get near seven wins. And the defense isn’t built to carry a team, it’s built to crush people with a lead. Something they won’t have very often next year. Now I support them keeping that approach, because they can always upgrade the offensive personnel via the draft and get back to having a team that gets early leads. It’s just not going to be next year.

 

[Mugsy’s Walk-Off Bunt]

If Stidham stinks, it could well be a 3-4 win team, which would be fine, in the sense that at least we will have answered that question and be in decent position to address QB in the draft as the rebuild continues.
edit: typos

 

[scottyno]

I'm not really talking about the long term future of the franchise, I'm taking purely about next season. I think people are kind of kidding themselves if they expect this team to be anything more than a wild card (and at that, with benefit from the additional team making it). They're not going to be the 3rd best team in the conference, they won't win the division, they won't sniff the conference championship --- again, these are simply my opinions and I don't expect anyone to agree with them; I just think our fanbase still sees them as only losing a mediocre, aging QB. I think that's a mirage. To each their own.

Ryan FItzpatrick Sam Darnold and Josh Allen are still the other 3 starting qbs in their division right? If Stidham is mediocre or better winning the division seems very doable.

 

[BaseballJones]

If Stidham stinks they won’t get near seven wins. And the defense isn’t built to carry a team, it’s built to crush people with a lead. Something they won’t have very often next year. Now I support them keeping that approach, because they can always upgrade the offensive personnel via the draft and get back to having a team that gets early leads. It’s just not going to be next year.

The D is good enough to keep other teams down even when the offense is struggling. It did that all second half except in the Ravens game and - unbelievably - the Dolphins game. And even in the Ravens game, the Patriots' D held them to fewer points and yards than they normally produced.

 

[nighthob]

Except that it really didn't. They were enormously vulnerable to the run all year long. But most teams couldn't afford to run the ball once the Patriots had that two TD lead. In the second half opposing offenses ran all over them. Next year opponents' offenses are going to have a lot more options when facing a team with a bottom 5 receiving corps and a virtual rookie QB than they did last year playing a team that was still starting one of the best QBs in the NFL.

New England's CBs are fantastic man coverage guys, which is really important when the opposing offense has to throw every down. Having three or four guys that can lock down a WR makes it a lot easier to hold on to those leads. But when those opponents are running the ball in order to hold on to their leads, those CBs are a lot less useful.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Ryan FItzpatrick Sam Darnold and Josh Allen are still the other 3 starting qbs in their division right? If Stidham is mediocre or better winning the division seems very doable.

Essentially the only unit the Pats can lay claim to being best in the division is DB. It is not "very" doable. Three QBs you're mocking here are all essentially locks to be mediocre or better; the one you're wish casting on is not; and the Bills/Dolphins easily rank in top 5 most improved teams this offseason.

 

[scottyno]

Essentially the only unit the Pats can lay claim to being best in the division is DB. It is not "very" doable. Three QBs you're mocking here are all essentially locks to be mediocre or better; the one you're wish casting on is not; and the Bills/Dolphins easily rank in top 5 most improved teams this offseason.

I'll take their head coach and special teams too

 

[nighthob]

Sure, but your special teams aren't the ones that have to stop the opposing run game.

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

I've seen this idea that the Pats could be routinely run over, but I'm not sure why. Henry ran all over them, true, but other than that who else? Ingram had a good game, but they were selling out to stop Lamar Jackson as I recall.

For all their inability to get Tennessee off the field at the end of the game, they gave up 14 points to an offense that averaged 32 points per game in the rest of their last 10 games. They would have won easily if the offense showed up at all.

 

[scottyno]

They were 14th in the league in yards per carry allowed, in comparison to the pass defense I guess that's bad, but overall they were decent

 

[BaseballJones]

Except that it really didn't. They were enormously vulnerable to the run all year long. But most teams couldn't afford to run the ball once the Patriots had that two TD lead. In the second half opposing offenses ran all over them. Next year opponents' offenses are going to have a lot more options when facing a team with a bottom 5 receiving corps and a virtual rookie QB than they did last year playing a team that was still starting one of the best QBs in the NFL.

New England's CBs are fantastic man coverage guys, which is really important when the opposing offense has to throw every down. Having three or four guys that can lock down a WR makes it a lot easier to hold on to those leads. But when those opponents are running the ball in order to hold on to their leads, those CBs are a lot less useful.

Last 8 games of the year (following the Ravens game)....

- Beat Philly, 17-10. Eagles were up 3-0, 10-0, 10-3, 10-6, 10-9, before a 3rd quarter touchdown gave NE a 17-10 lead. The Pats' D managed to keep Philly in check, allowing their offense to finally produce something. At that point, Philly didn't need to pass. They had, with 10:55 left in the third quarter, tons of time to run anything in their playbook. The Pats' D just held firm all game long, whether NE was behind or ahead by one score.

- Beat Dallas, 13-9. Pats were up 7-0, 10-0, 10-3, 10-6, 13-6, and 13-9. For all but a few minutes, Dallas (one of the best offenses in the league last year) was within a single score. Brady finished just 17-37 for 190 yards, and the Pats' offense couldn't get untracked, so this was all on the defense to hold the line and win the game.

- Lost to Houston, 28-22. Defense played poorly.

- Lost to KC, 23-16. Might have seemed like the D played poorly in this game, but they held KC well under their season norms (at least in games when Mahomes played) in points and yards. The offense couldn't do jack, and of course the Pats got robbed of the Harry TD. You'd happily take 23 points and 346 yards allowed to KC any day of the week. For the last 8:50 of the third quarter and all the fourth quarter, the Pats stonewalled the Chiefs, giving the offense chance after chance to come back. The D held up great despite being behind.

- Beat Cincy, 34-13. Game was well in hand for most of the second half.

- Beat Buffalo, 24-17. Close game all the way, with the lead switching hands early. But NE was behind 17-13 early in the fourth quarter. Once Buffalo got a 17-13 lead with 7:34 left in the third, the Pats' D stepped up and stoned them.

- Lost to Miami, 27-24. Just a disaster all the way around.

- Lost to Tennessee, 20-13. The last six came on Brady's pick-six at the end. But otherwise, NE held Ten to just 14 points and 272 yards. The offense didn't do jack squat. In 95% of playoff games in Foxboro, you'd happily take a defense that allowed 14 points and 272 yards. The Pats' offense only needed to be semi-decent and they win that game. But they sucked on offense all game long. Can't really put that one on the defense.

So numerous times in the last 8 games, in situations where the offense was sucking, or when the Pats were behind, or just ahead by one score, the defense played really well and kept them in the game, giving the offense chance after chance. Just twice all year - Houston and Miami - did the D truly just lay an egg. They didn't even lay an egg in the Ravens' game. In that game they held the Ravens to fewer points and yards than they normally accrued, and Baltimore was aided by an egregious non-called pick play on a crucial fourth down conversion. And they played well against KC. Against those two teams, you're gonna give up some points and yards, and the Pats' D did a much better than average job against both of those opponents.


In those games, here's the opponents' rushing:

- Philly: 21-81, 3.9 avg
- Dallas: 26-109, 4.2 avg
- Houston: 23-52, 2.3 avg
- KC: 29-75, 2.6 avg
- Cincinnati: 32-164, 5.1 avg
- Buffalo: 23-92, 4.0 avg
- Miami: 22-63, 2.9 avg
- Tennessee: 40-201, 5.0 avg

So only two teams during this stretch "ran all over the Patriots": Cincy and Tennessee. And in both those games, NE's defense held them to 13 and 14 points, respectively.

 

[Saints Rest]

Last 8 games of the year (following the Ravens game)....

- Beat Philly, 17-10. Eagles were up 3-0, 10-0, 10-3, 10-6, 10-9, before a 3rd quarter touchdown gave NE a 17-10 lead. The Pats' D managed to keep Philly in check, allowing their offense to finally produce something. At that point, Philly didn't need to pass. They had, with 10:55 left in the third quarter, tons of time to run anything in their playbook. The Pats' D just held firm all game long, whether NE was behind or ahead by one score.

- Beat Dallas, 13-9. Pats were up 7-0, 10-0, 10-3, 10-6, 13-6, and 13-9. For all but a few minutes, Dallas (one of the best offenses in the league last year) was within a single score. Brady finished just 17-37 for 190 yards, and the Pats' offense couldn't get untracked, so this was all on the defense to hold the line and win the game.

- Lost to Houston, 28-22. Defense played poorly.

- Lost to KC, 23-16. Might have seemed like the D played poorly in this game, but they held KC well under their season norms (at least in games when Mahomes played) in points and yards. The offense couldn't do jack, and of course the Pats got robbed of the Harry TD. You'd happily take 23 points and 346 yards allowed to KC any day of the week. For the last 8:50 of the third quarter and all the fourth quarter, the Pats stonewalled the Chiefs, giving the offense chance after chance to come back. The D held up great despite being behind.

- Beat Cincy, 34-13. Game was well in hand for most of the second half.

- Beat Buffalo, 24-17. Close game all the way, with the lead switching hands early. But NE was behind 17-13 early in the fourth quarter. Once Buffalo got a 17-13 lead with 7:34 left in the third, the Pats' D stepped up and stoned them.

- Lost to Miami, 27-24. Just a disaster all the way around.

- Lost to Tennessee, 20-13. The last six came on Brady's pick-six at the end. But otherwise, NE held Ten to just 14 points and 272 yards. The offense didn't do jack squat. In 95% of playoff games in Foxboro, you'd happily take a defense that allowed 14 points and 272 yards. The Pats' offense only needed to be semi-decent and they win that game. But they sucked on offense all game long. Can't really put that one on the defense.

So numerous times in the last 8 games, in situations where the offense was sucking, or when the Pats were behind, or just ahead by one score, the defense played really well and kept them in the game, giving the offense chance after chance. Just twice all year - Houston and Miami - did the D truly just lay an egg. They didn't even lay an egg in the Ravens' game. In that game they held the Ravens to fewer points and yards than they normally accrued, and Baltimore was aided by an egregious non-called pick play on a crucial fourth down conversion. And they played well against KC. Against those two teams, you're gonna give up some points and yards, and the Pats' D did a much better than average job against both of those opponents.


In those games, here's the opponents' rushing:

- Philly: 21-81, 3.9 avg
- Dallas: 26-109, 4.2 avg
- Houston: 23-52, 2.3 avg
- KC: 29-75, 2.6 avg
- Cincinnati: 32-164, 5.1 avg
- Buffalo: 23-92, 4.0 avg
- Miami: 22-63, 2.9 avg
- Tennessee: 40-201, 5.0 avg

So only two teams during this stretch "ran all over the Patriots": Cincy and Tennessee. And in both those games, NE's defense held them to 13 and 14 points, respectively.

This is a nice summary of the D's efforts last season, and what it only touches on is the overall weakness that was the Pats' Offense last year. We've been very spoiled for almost 20 years of offensive excellence, such that it's easy to forget how far the O had fallen last year.

Other threads have touched on the sources of that fall, and it clearly remains to be seen how much improvement we can expect from any of those areas. Here's how I would order the probabilities of improvement:

1. TE. Yes, they are likely relying on rookies, but the bar was so low last year, that anything will likely be an improvement.
2. O-Line. There are assumptions here -- will Thuney remain with the team? Will Wynn stay healthy? Will Mason and Cannon rebound? But Andrews' return will surely be an improvement over Karras.
3. WR. Basically expecting a 2nd year leap from Henry (and maybe Myers), and a return to pre-injury form from Sanu. Both of which are likely.
4. QB. I think the best we can hope for here is that Stidham Year 2 is close to as good as Brady Year 20. But it's not like we are trying to replace Brady Year 7 or even Year 19.

 

[Super Nomario]

This is a nice summary of the D's efforts last season, and what it only touches on is the overall weakness that was the Pats' Offense last year. We've been very spoiled for almost 20 years of offensive excellence, such that it's easy to forget how far the O had fallen last year.

Other threads have touched on the sources of that fall, and it clearly remains to be seen how much improvement we can expect from any of those areas. Here's how I would order the probabilities of improvement:

1. TE. Yes, they are likely relying on rookies, but the bar was so low last year, that anything will likely be an improvement.
2. O-Line. There are assumptions here -- will Thuney remain with the team? Will Wynn stay healthy? Will Mason and Cannon rebound? But Andrews' return will surely be an improvement over Karras.
3. WR. Basically expecting a 2nd year leap from Henry (and maybe Myers), and a return to pre-injury form from Sanu. Both of which are likely.
4. QB. I think the best we can hope for here is that Stidham Year 2 is close to as good as Brady Year 20. But it's not like we are trying to replace Brady Year 7 or even Year 19.

WR and TE can improve quite a bit and still be pretty bad. That's likely for the WR and almost guaranteed for TE given how infrequently rookies contribute much there.

I think the biggest concern with respect to Stidham is turnovers. As punchless as the offense was at times last year, they took care of the football, with the third-lowest turnover rate in the league. Stidham didn't throw a lot of interceptions in college so I wouldn't expect a lot in the NFL, though probably more than Brady's 8; the bigger issue is sacks. In his 2017 season, he took 35 sacks compared to only 370 pass attempts; by contrast, Brady took only 27 last year while throwing 613 times. Stidham improved to 23 sacks vs 369 passes in 2018, but that's still not great and he took a ton of sacks in his otherwise-excellent preseason campaign last year. Sacks are not only drive-killers, but they produce fumbles at an order of magnitude more than other plays. Brady only fumbled four times in 2019. In addition to the D making the O look good, the O made the D look good by giving them quality field position (best in the NFL in 2019). Some of that was Bailey, but some was the O taking care of the football. If Stidham is closer to average in turnover rate, it's going to make the D look worse even if the O numbers stay similar.

 

[BaseballJones]

I agree, @Super Nomario. Sacks are enormous plays in football, for both of the reasons you cite, and I think Stidham will take a lot of them. He will make some escapes that Brady couldn't, and maybe even turn them into big plays because he's a good athlete. But it's hard to think of anyone with more pocket awareness than Brady, and he found ways to slither out of sacks, and/or get rid of the ball before getting sacked. Stidham may end up being good at those things, but it's definitely going to be a big step down from Brady in that area.

 

[SMU_Sox]

I would say that they are generally good against the run in their modified LB-heavy base D but they had trouble matching heavy personnel. The D last year relied on more LBs, right? The D also didn't have that many true DLs. For teams like TEN and BAL, teams designed to be heavier, this can lead to problems. Against TEN they ran at KVN and Wise and were successful doing that. I have been reviewing a lot on game pass and in my notes I thought they struggled against gap concepts all year in the run game especially if they were up against decent opponents. That makes some sense though. A lot of times they would have LBs on the LOS and their gaps were the target of the play. It's easier for OL to move LBs than it is true DLs to set up the hole for the guards to come pulling through.

I will look at the Baltimore game and Ten games again and note how/what schematically they did differently after the first 2-3 drives vs Baltimore and if they tried to make any adjustments against TEN. I think they went to having 4 DLs on the field against BAL. Against TEN they just lost badly in the trenches. They could have used a better run defending DE. You wonder if Cowart would get some reps there this year given he played edge at 300 pounds at Maryland sometimes. Same for Coe if he makes this team. Definitely the kind of body beautiful guy who you would assume could hold up better there.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Left without commentary, take it for what it's worth, etc etc:

PFF just released their 2020 roster rankings. The Pats came in 18th.
Using their grading system, 80-89.9 are considered "good/high quality" players. The Pats had two break 80, Gilmore and D. McCourty.
White, Edelman, Wynn, Thuney, Mason, Cannon, Beau Allen, John Simon, Winowich, Hightower and J McCourty were the only players to break 70-79.9 (average).
The rest of the projected starters fell below that, falling into the "below average, rookies or players not/barely active in 2019".

 

[Rough Carrigan]

Left without commentary, take it for what it's worth, etc etc:

PFF just released their 2020 roster rankings. The Pats came in 18th.
Using their grading system, 80-89.9 are considered "good/high quality" players. The Pats had two break 80, Gilmore and D. McCourty.
White, Edelman, Wynn, Thuney, Mason, Cannon, Beau Allen, John Simon, Winowich, Hightower and J McCourty were the only players to break 70-79.9 (average).
The rest of the projected starters fell below that, falling into the "below average, rookies or players not/barely active in 2019".

So, Thuney didn't grade out as a "good/high quality" player?

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

So, Thuney didn't grade out as a "good/high quality" player?

He was 79.2, so just missed.

Edit: If it makes you feel better, a quick scan tells me the only guard rated higher was Quenton Nelson.

 

[DJnVa]

He was 79.2, so just missed.

Edit: If it makes you feel better, a quick scan tells me the only guard rated higher was Quenton Nelson.

No guards are good except Nelson? Seems like a bell curve should make more sense. All players are relative to other current players.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

No guards are good except Nelson? Seems like a bell curve should make more sense. All players are relative to other current players.

Hey man, I don’t know how they come up with them. I’m sure some our ITP guys have a better understanding of it. Again, just a messenger here. If you have ESPN Insider, they republished it, which is where I saw it.

 

[tims4wins]

Here's the full list of projected starters:

Offense:
Stidham: 57.8
Michel: 66.5
White: 76.5
Asiasi: 79.0 (I don't get this, at all)
Edelman: 71.4
Sanu: 58.5 (I get this based on 2019, but I expect much better in 2020)
Harry: 65.1
Wynn: 70.7 (I think this goes up in 2020)
Thuney: 79.2
Andrews: 74.3
Mason: 75.1
Cannon: 70.1

Comments: with all 5 OL in the 70s, that is a really solid group, and I think there is room for improvement. The WRs suck, we'll see if Sanu and Harry improve. The RBs seem about right. I don't get the Asiasi grade but TE will definitely be better than 2019, although still likely below league average

Defense:
Guy: 66.7 (seems low, he is a solid player)
Allen: 72.6
Butler: 60.6
Simon: 73.3
Winovich: 72.2
Hightower: 71.3
Bentley: 66.0
Gilmore: 82.7
J. McCourty: 74.4
Jackson: 68.3
Chung: 55.6 (I get that he had a down year in 2019, but this seems super low)
D. McCourty: 80.8

Comments: secondary is the strength of the team as we all know. PFF likes the LB crew as well, solid grades to Simon, Wino, DH. DL the weakest unit on the defense, also the thinnest.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

The rating for Asiasi is pretty clearly denoted **, which is his college grade for last season, not what they grade him in the NFL. It's explained in the intro.

 

[tims4wins]

The rating for Asiasi is pretty clearly denoted **, which is his college grade for last season, not what they grade him in the NFL. It's explained in the intro.

Thanks, that makes sense. Seems high even for his college grade, that’s fairly elite.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Thanks, that makes sense. Seems high even for his college grade, that’s fairly elite.

Agreed, though I know nothing of these grades. As someone else mentioned, they don’t appear to be on a curve, so I’m not sure what to think about a college ranking especially.

 

[amfox1]

cam is coming to NE, per schefty

 

[AlNipper49]

Cam thread here

 

[McBride11]

The DPOY graded out at 82 but Marcus Peters of Balt grades out at 84?

And then from what I can see - Sherman is 90 and Dunbar of Sea is 88?

As usual it seems the PfF rankings need to be taken w a large grain of salt. SG had third best in Passer rating against (neither ahead were the 3 CB listed above). Sg was first DB in last 9 years. (Polamalu 9 years ago at S and Woodson 10 years ago at Cb).

Only T. White on Buff got votes as DPOY as a Cb.

So again how do Pff rankings work ? I believe they are usually questioned around here (unclear methodology and rankings that dont pass the smell test

While a Pats roster in the mid range probably is okay, some of the individual numbers dont add up.

https://www.pff.com/nfl/grades/position/cb
https://www.nfl.com/news/stephon-gilmore-named-2019-defensive-player-of-year-0ap3000001100158

 

[Cellar-Door]

The DPOY graded out at 82 but Marcus Peters of Balt grades out at 84?

And then from what I can see - Sherman is 90 and Dunbar of Sea is 88?

As usual it seems the PfF rankings need to be taken w a large grain of salt. SG had third best in Passer rating against (neither ahead were the 3 CB listed above). Sg was first DB in last 9 years. (Polamalu 9 years ago at S and Woodson 10 years ago at Cb).

Only T. White on Buff got votes as DPOY as a Cb.

So again how do Pff rankings work ? I believe they are usually questioned around here (unclear methodology and rankings that dont pass the smell test

While a Pats roster in the mid range probably is okay, some of the individual numbers dont add up.

https://www.pff.com/nfl/grades/position/cb
https://www.nfl.com/news/stephon-gilmore-named-2019-defensive-player-of-year-0ap3000001100158

He was #1 the previous year, PFF grading is not perfect, but complaining about whether he's 1st or 5th by their grading in such small samples isn't worth it, you should really just be looking at tiers and where a guy averaged out over several seasons.

I would also say that DPOY is less rigorously accurate than even PFF grades, it's just a vote by a bunch of writers, like every sport there is a mix of really good writers who get deep into tape and stats, and guys who say... who was the best defender on the best defense (or something similar). It's basically the same system as the one that gave Jeter 5 gold gloves because jump throws look cool.

 

[DJnVa]

View: https://twitter.com/ezlazar/status/1282710594257334280

 

[brandonchristensen]

ooo, Stiddy is a cool nickname.