SBNation.com User Blog: Dr-P

50 completions plus rushing attempts = victory

Dr-P — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:40:51 -0000

50 completions plus rushing attempts = victory

The top-10 teams in rushing attempts + completions combined to post a record of 101-59 (.631) in 2012, with seven of those ten organizations advancing to the postseason.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, the bottom-10 teams combined for a 62-97-1 (.387) mark, with zero total playoff berths.

Kiffin on Fathers and Coaching Trees

Dr-P — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 16:58:41 -0000

Kiffin on Fathers and Coaching Trees

The Cowboys defensive coordinator raised his son Lane to be a coach at the top of his profession. And Monte also has been a figurative father to scores of coaches.

People don’t often consider Kiffin when they talk about "coaching trees" because he always has been an assistant himself. But Kiffin’s coaching tree is a virtual Giant Redwood.

Check out the partial list of coaches who Kiffin hired when he was with the Bucs, and Kiffin’s recollections of hiring each:

Change in scouting duties

Dr-P — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:54:59 -0000

Change in scouting duties

Will McClay has been named the assistant director of player personnel,

He will report to Stephen Jones, the club’s vice president and director of player personnel.

McClay will work alongside Tom Ciskowski, who has been named the director of scouting.

Before, his title of director of football research meant he worked closely with the pro side of scouting. Now, McClay will be more involved in the day-to-day operations for both pro and college scouting.

McClay is expected to have more communication with both Jerry and Stephen Jones in all personnel decisions.

Ciskowski will likely be on the road more, having a larger role in the college aspect of scouting and overseeing the draft process, which is a 365-day-a-year operation.

Real Red River Rivalry - Texas v Oklahoma

Dr-P — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 13:13:16 -0000

Real Red River Rivalry - Texas v Oklahoma

As an important geographic feature of this region, the Red River has lent its name to a valley, a Civil War campaign, and a famed college football rivalry between the Longhorns of Texas and the Sooners of Oklahoma.

But college pride has not been the only source of controversy
between Texas and Oklahoma regarding the Red River.

The River has been the cause of numerous historical conflicts between the two States, leading to a mobilization of their militias at one time, Oklahoma v. Texas, 258 U. S. 574, 580 (1922), and the declaration of martial law along a stretch of the River by Oklahoma Governor "Alfalfa Bill"Murray at another, see Okla. H. Res. 1121, 50th Legislature, 2d Sess. (2006) (resolution commemorating "AlfalfaBill" Murray’s actions during the "Red River Bridge War").

Such disputes over the River and its waters are a natural
result of the River’s distribution of water flows.

EX NY Safety Chad Jones drafted by MLB

Dr-P — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:05:01 -0000

EX NY Safety Chad Jones drafted by MLB

Despite being drafted in the third round by the New York Giants in the 2010 NFL Draft, it is that "second sport" that is giving Jones another shot at professional athletics.

After a 2010 car accident where Jones shattered his fibula and tibia, the former LSU star was never able to return to form. He was cut by the Giants in May of 2012 after failing to pass a physical.
Last week, however, Jones began a return to professional sports when the Cincinnati Reds drafted him in the 9th round of the MLB Draft. This is the third time Jones has been drafted to play baseball.

video from the Grammar Police

Dr-P — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:26:33 -0000

video from the Grammar Police

Grammar Lessons With Food
Posted on June 5, 2013 by Jeff Wysaski

Let’s learn a few important grammar lessons with the help of yummy, delicious food.

Leaders emerge as coaches for camp

Dr-P — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 14:01:51 -0000

Leaders emerge as coaches for camp

Cowboys players became coaches and coaches became commissioners Thursday during the second annual Dallas Cowboys U high school football camp proudly supported by Paragon Healthcare and the Texas National Guard..

More than 160 underserved student-athletes showed up at the Valley Ranch training facility and were divided into eight teams, each led by a Cowboys player.

Tony Romo, Brandon Carr, Jay Ratliff, DeMarcus Ware, Jason Witten, Sean Lee, Miles Austin and Doug Free all got their own team,

Effect of injuries on last year

Dr-P — Sun, 02 Jun 2013 18:05:51 -0000

Effect of injuries on last year

I know all teams suffer injuries. That’s life in the NFL. But when injuries then strike your backups, and you are now starting backups to the backups, things grow quite dicey.

Don’t forget the Cowboys had 11 starters this past season miss a total of 82 games. And it wasn’t just any starters.

Not so Secret Super Star

Dr-P — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:21:29 -0000

Not so Secret Super Star

Perhaps he’s more well-known than some of his fellow Secret Superstars, but linebacker Bruce Carter is still far from a household name, though he could be on his way in the Dallas Cowboys’ new defensive scheme.

part of a series by PFF on emerging players

Critical Mass

Dr-P — Sun, 12 May 2013 16:40:07 -0000

I have discussed the process that Garrett uses in the following article:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/23/4139190/the-process

It opens as follows:

The best future does not just happen. One should measure where you are starting from, where you want to go, and what to change to get there.

This is not a clean slate of paper as we have existing players and their contracts. Over time, the roster can and will change. Coaches come and go. Even owners can change, yet all those take time and you start with the existing team. The salary cap slows down the roster turnover in the best of times. The Mara enhancement makes it worse. No matter what you think of the players, coaches, even owner, one still has to start with what we have NOW.

I think we all have the end goal in sight: The Lombardi trophy and not just one.

The hard part is figuring out what needs to change to go from here to there. We have had two years of 8-8 records but are they the same? Did we have any differences in the roster turnover, coaches, injuries, will to fight until the end of the game, number and type of penalties and their yardage and effects. Did these have any effect on the final record?

Application of the process

The process is based on identifying cause and effect relationships and fixing the causes. The focus is internal and NOT about the results. Focus on the results and one can miss the changes that are occurring. These internal changes include:

New coaches – position coaches to teach fundamentals and S&C

Better talent – both drafted and FA

Better effort – the RKG at work

Better development – getting the younger players active on the team

Critical Mass

The improvement is not a straight line. Even with these internal improvements, the outcome is not immediately determined.

We have made a slew of small changes that improved the process significantly. Improve the process and you improve the results EVENTUALLY. Yet those internal improvements may not seem to have an effect at the time and then all at once the team seems to explode.

Critical mass is a term to describe what happens in a nuclear reactor. In nuclear energy, one keeps safety rods in place to keep the changes from getting out of hand and having an explosion. The rods allow energy to be released safely in a controlled manner. Take the rods out and the energy takes on a force of its own and reaches what is called critical mass.

The rods are inserted purposely, yet other things can hinder critical mass. These include health of the team, youth, and other things outside one’s control – luck, weather, and the other teams. These same phenomena can be seen in many other applications.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(sociodynamics)

The OL is an example of many changes whose total effect has not been seen yet. The OL has undergone a huge change since Garrett took over. Cohesion has taken a major hit, yet there is a pattern to what Garrett has done.

OL last year: Smith, Livings, Costa [Cook], Bernadeau, Free

Year before: Free, Nagy/PTBNL, Costa, Kosier, Smith

2 yrs before: Free, Kosier, Gurode, Davis, Colombo

Note that every year, 4 or more starters involved new players or in new positions. The backup changes are even more radical. Do you remember Baron, Proctor, Young, Bright, and McQ?

Garrett was willing to rid the team of high cost, low performers even at the cost of eating dead money to do so. Young players tend to be healthier and can recover quicker.

Colombo was a warrior, but he was literally on his last leg at the end. Kosier battled until the end but was done. At the end he was more valuable for his leadership and mentoring than his individual play. Davis should have been cut the year before in the uncapped year on performance alone.

Gurode was asked to take a pay cut as the team could not afford three centers. He was declining but we could have two centers for less money. The old cliché is that it is better to cut a guy one year too early than one year too late. He later signed with Baltimore and while he played guard, it seems the team made a good decision.

Adding talent for the long term and developing the OL internally. Three years ago, the team has invested a #1 picks, #4 and a #7. Two started immediately – Smith and Nagy. It is rare for a rookie OLs to do well in their first year. We got spoiled by the Tyronasaurus but Nagy had the more typical rookie experience. He took his hits but did much better than many players drafted much earlier. Arkin was a project and may yet pan out.

Further we added UDFAs in Kowalski, Leary in addition to Costa already on the team. We added Parnell and later signed Weems at tackles. These form a YOUNG nucleus for the future.

Hedging and Transition

Yet in the process of developing the OL internally in the long term, Garrett hedged his bets in the short term. His first year, he signed Dockery to be the veteran backup just in case. He had to start within days due to an injury to Nagy. Unfortunately, he did not do as well as this year when we signed Cook.

We brought back Holland, and he was our best internal OL guy. Yet can anyone say that he was more motivated and healthier BECAUSE he was cut? Even then he did not last even the shortened season suffering a season ending injury.

With all the young players, this past year Garrett added two FA guards to give them more time to develop. Then we lost Nagy on waivers trying to move him to IR. Costa was injured and we put Kowalski on PUP. Arkin took one for the team as he spent time at center, which delayed his progress at guard.

Even with the new additions, we had a major loss of cohesion. Livings, Costa, and Bernie all were injured during the summer. Bernie had off-season surgery and the OL never practiced together until the week before the opener. That lasted three plays and Cook took over at center, not knowing the playbook or even the terminology. It took several games for the OL to get used to the communication, and timing.

We now have a projected OL of

Smith, Costa, Frederick, Bernadeau, Free

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/4/28/4278058/what-to-do-with-the-ol-now

Even that may change. Yet we have two #1 picks at the most critical positions of left tackle and center. Free is actually the player on the OL that has the most time on the OL and he is not even 30. Regardless of what folks think about Free he gave us time to develop Smith and Parnell.

Vicious and Virtuous Cycles

Nor was the OL the only place we had major issues. We went through a number of LBs and Safeties. Each time we had backups, but they are backups for a reason – less talent, less experience, less something. Then we change the scheme to cover those problems, often taking away the strengths of other players on the team.

Then even those backups were replaced. This vicious cycle continued to the point of signing players off the street.

In doing so, we might have guys that knew the team, the coaches, or the scheme, but had not been in Woicik’s S&C. Most of that work occurs in the off season and it takes some time for its effects to be seen. The fact that the team was stronger in the fourth quarter is amazing given these new players.

Yet that works in reverse too. Every additional good player we get back or add, makes the other players that much more valuable.

Conclusion

We are reaching critical mass. Whether that has already occurred may only be obscured by the health of last year. Maybe we just have to remove the rods of lack of health from last year.

This should be most easily seen on the OL. Last year we thought we were set at center until TC. We had Costa who had improved significantly and Kowalski as a backup. We drafted Smith to be the LT of the future and that future came this year. In doing so, we switched Free back to RT where he had been successful in the past. We had some depth at guards, but added TWO FA to give them time to develop.

This year we used our number one pick on a center. There is a question of whether he is a center or guard. He is a center, IMO and the coaches have said so. Yet we have added one new starter to go along with Smith. They will form the nucleus for the OL for many years to come.

Adding Frederick means that the OL depth is improved at the least. We will not have to have a Dockery just for a quorum to practice.

It also means that we will have a lot of competition at all the OL interior positions. I think Costa can beat out one of the starters. The young guys of Leary and Arkin will be in the mix. In doing so, we can continue to get younger on the OL.

The last few years we have seen lots of changes. Yet that is not yet reflected in the W/L record. Yet let there be no mistake, the team has improved significantly. Let us see them healthy and working together and the outcomes will change. The team is waiting to explode this year.

I have discussed the process that Garrett uses in the following article:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/23/4139190/the-process

It opens as follows:

The best future does not just happen. One should measure where you are starting from, where you want to go, and what to change to get there.

I think we all have the end goal in sight: The Lombardi trophy and not just one.

Application of the process

New coaches – position coaches to teach fundamentals and S&C

Better talent – both drafted and FA

Better effort – the RKG at work

Better development – getting the younger players active on the team

Critical Mass

The improvement is not a straight line. Even with these internal improvements, the outcome is not immediately determined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(sociodynamics)

OL last year: Smith, Livings, Costa [Cook], Bernadeau, Free

Year before: Free, Nagy/PTBNL, Costa, Kosier, Smith

2 yrs before: Free, Kosier, Gurode, Davis, Colombo

Note that every year, 4 or more starters involved new players or in new positions. The backup changes are even more radical. Do you remember Baron, Proctor, Young, Bright, and McQ?

Garrett was willing to rid the team of high cost, low performers even at the cost of eating dead money to do so. Young players tend to be healthier and can recover quicker.

Further we added UDFAs in Kowalski, Leary in addition to Costa already on the team. We added Parnell and later signed Weems at tackles. These form a YOUNG nucleus for the future.

Hedging and Transition

We now have a projected OL of

Smith, Costa, Frederick, Bernadeau, Free

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/4/28/4278058/what-to-do-with-the-ol-now

Vicious and Virtuous Cycles

Then even those backups were replaced. This vicious cycle continued to the point of signing players off the street.

Yet that works in reverse too. Every additional good player we get back or add, makes the other players that much more valuable.

Conclusion

We are reaching critical mass. Whether that has already occurred may only be obscured by the health of last year. Maybe we just have to remove the rods of lack of health from last year.

Adding Frederick means that the OL depth is improved at the least. We will not have to have a Dockery just for a quorum to practice.

Training of a Tyronasaurus

Dr-P — Fri, 10 May 2013 14:29:32 -0000

Training of a Tyronasaurus

Following in the footsteps of two former Cowboys Pro Football Hall of Fame players – linebacker Randy White and offensive lineman Larry Allen – Smith started individual karate lessons about two months ago and trains two to three times a week.

"They did karate to get their hands quicker and smoother," Smith said. "It’s more about hand-eye coordination. Right now, I’m trying to get our offensive line into it."

Smith said three other Cowboys offensive linemen are also taking individual karate lessons this off-season: guards Nate Livings and Mackenzy Bernadeau and his good friend, tackle Jermey Parnell.

Like last year, Smith also attends yoga once a week in the off-season to help him with his flexibility, balance and hip movement.

Measuring the reliability of the OL

Dr-P — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:28:01 -0000

It is normal to measure how a product will operate or begin to fail if only for warranty purposes. After all, a product that does not work as it should will not sell very well or cause the manufacturer to spend lots of money on recalls or both.

Chrysler almost went bankrupt in the 80’s. At that time it was common for cars to have warranties for THREE years. They changed their warranties for FIVE years and started to sell a lot more cars. They changed their corporate fortunes significantly for another quarter century.

The most common and easiest way to measure the reliability of a product is to grade all its components and then multiply the individual components together. To capture a phrase from another company in a different industry Papa John – better ingredients equals better pizzas.

Yet, because the factors are multiplied together, their individual effect on each other is magnified. For example let us have a product with 5 components – say an OL.

Let us assume that the components are pretty good – let’s give them each an individual score of 90%. That sounds pretty good INDIVIDUALLY but their effects together can be devastating.

.9 x .9 x .9 x .9 x. 9 = .54049. This is failing as a UNIT.

If we upped each of their individual grades to .95 which is an A+

.95 x .95 x .95 x .95 x .95 = .7737808 for the unit, which translates as a C+. Think about that everyone individually has to be an A+ and the unit still is only average.

We have to get everyone to have an A++ score of 98% to get the entire unit a grade of A

.98 x .98 x .98 x .98 x .98 = .9039207 unit scores

For an OL to operate as a UNIT, then all their individuals have to have near perfect games. Their mistakes individually are among the most visible in the league. When an OL loses a block and the QB is sacked everyone knows. It is obvious who is off-sides, flinches, or misses the snap count. Everyone knows your name as their names are announced to the world for holding penalty.

For an offense with 50 plays that means that each player on the OL can only mess up one play each. Yet if they each mess up on different plays, that is 5 plays that are blown.

In a game of inches, a single play could be determinative. The most telling is that if only Dez had his hand a few inches differently, the team would be in the playoffs. I am sure that others can point out specific plays that made or broke the season.

Not every play is life or death. We get another chance on 2nd down and then 3rd down. Yet the probability of success decreases with each down. Woe to the team that has a player screw up negating an otherwise perfect play – the TD called back is the worst example.

For that reason, OL guys can be considered terrible even for average performance. Their impression is vivid and that sticks with the public. Costa and Bernie have gotten such reputations as terrible. Livings is clumped as bad even as he was at the 80th percentile of all guards.

Remember a single play by one individual can be devastating for a game and ultimately a season. Would you like your reputation to be so graded?

Backups

Teams will have injuries, but a team can only guess how many and at what position. Rosters should be built to have reasonable backups across the team.

Backups are supposed to be able to fill in for starters for brief periods of time. Yet they are backups for a reason. It is safe to say that their individual ratings will be lower than the starters. The backups to the backups are even lower. And given the limit to the number of players on a roster at any one time, choices have to be made.

Then throw in the salary caps and teams often do not have the full complement of backups. We were literally signing players off the street last year. On the OL we brought back Dockery as he understood his role on the team. Yet any game with Dockery meant that better options were not available.

We had major injuries to our starter and primary backup at center. We played most of the season with a THIRD STRING center.

Cook did credibly well INDIVIDUALLY. Yet his effect on the rest of the UNIT was noticeable. Free had 6 of his 15 penalties and Smith had 6 of his 11 penalties in the first three games. As the unit worked together, the timing, communication, and coordination improved. The RATE of penalties dropped significantly.

Further it is expected that players will improve over time. The initial reports note the biggest problems and then they are corrected. Nobody starts out in life as a full blown adult. It takes time.

Smith played LT for the first time in his NFL career. His first three games were TERRIBLE, but by the end of the season he was playing at a high rate.

Bernadeau has played in the NFL for several seasons. Yet this year, Bernadeau playing center for the first time in a NFL game and his scores at center were also terrible.

It is safe to say that Smith and Bernie and others should NOT be graded simply on their initial games.

Further, one can develop players over time. We have slowly inserted Parnell in more games. He also started his first games at LT and did credibly well. Yet let us remember the game that he started at LT.

That game Livings had his worst game of the season as he was between a backup project LT and a 4th string emergency center in Bernie. Dockery was the RG replacing Bernie. The D Coordinator feasted on the interior of the OL. Parnell did ok, but Free did even better at RT.

Vicious and Virtuous Cycles

The D will try to attack the weakest link. The OL has to work together to minimize that. One can use the FB or TE to help block if you have an individual weakness. Yet that is hard with TWO or more weak links.

This past year we were constantly shuffling players around and trying to work around weak points. This year we need to have players healthy and working together.

We have often talked about the vicious cycle. A player is injured so we bring in a backup who is less talented. Then we change the scheme to help cover that weak point and in doing so take away the strength of other players. Reiterate several times each time degrading the unit.

Yet that works in reverse too. We can have the virtuous cycle. We have one additional stronger guy in Frederick. We should start out the season with a number one starter healthy and ready to play. Even if you thought Cook was decent [and I do] he was the third string. Frederick will have some growing pains, as most rookies do on the OL, but he will improve as the season goes on.

Further, many have criticized Costa [the starter the last two years]. He too had growing pains but many only remember his initial games. He improved dramatically as his second season went on and came back last year better. The coaches did not make any moves anticipating that center would be improved with Costa and Kowalski back. Only with their injuries did the team trade for Cook. We were adapting all season long.

Having Frederick means that one position is solid, but it also means that we have much better depth at guard. There will be a strong battle among the Costa, Kowalski and Cook to be the primary backup. One or more will then shift to compete at guard. This is in addition to the returning starters in Livings and Bernadeau and two young guys in Arkin and Leary. The entire interior of the OL should be stronger, healthier and more competitive this year.

Smith will be solid at LT. We still need to determine what will happen at RT. That has been chronicled everywhere else. Yet let’s take a worst case and say RT is not upgraded. That means that the OL only has ONE issue instead of multiple ones. The reliability of the OL should be greatly enhanced.

Yet, because the factors are multiplied together, their individual effect on each other is magnified. For example let us have a product with 5 components – say an OL.

Let us assume that the components are pretty good – let’s give them each an individual score of 90%. That sounds pretty good INDIVIDUALLY but their effects together can be devastating.

.9 x .9 x .9 x .9 x. 9 = .54049. This is failing as a UNIT.

If we upped each of their individual grades to .95 which is an A+

.95 x .95 x .95 x .95 x .95 = .7737808 for the unit, which translates as a C+. Think about that everyone individually has to be an A+ and the unit still is only average.

We have to get everyone to have an A++ score of 98% to get the entire unit a grade of A

.98 x .98 x .98 x .98 x .98 = .9039207 unit scores

For an offense with 50 plays that means that each player on the OL can only mess up one play each. Yet if they each mess up on different plays, that is 5 plays that are blown.

Remember a single play by one individual can be devastating for a game and ultimately a season. Would you like your reputation to be so graded?

Backups

Teams will have injuries, but a team can only guess how many and at what position. Rosters should be built to have reasonable backups across the team.

We had major injuries to our starter and primary backup at center. We played most of the season with a THIRD STRING center.

Further it is expected that players will improve over time. The initial reports note the biggest problems and then they are corrected. Nobody starts out in life as a full blown adult. It takes time.

Smith played LT for the first time in his NFL career. His first three games were TERRIBLE, but by the end of the season he was playing at a high rate.

Bernadeau has played in the NFL for several seasons. Yet this year, Bernadeau playing center for the first time in a NFL game and his scores at center were also terrible.

It is safe to say that Smith and Bernie and others should NOT be graded simply on their initial games.

Vicious and Virtuous Cycles

This past year we were constantly shuffling players around and trying to work around weak points. This year we need to have players healthy and working together.

What to do with the OL now

Dr-P — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 11:48:09 -0000

It is a little early and I think it will be a good topic closer to TC.

Frederick continues the strategy of having all the interior linemen be able to play mulitple positions, but I suspect that Frederick becomes the starting center. He is a better anchor than the other options. With a strong center we can take advantage of the better mobility and quickness of the others.

With one addition, he changes the entire OL as having a stronger center makes the guard play a lot better. We will have lots of options in the interior of the line and that will play out from now to the end of TC.

Issues we have to work out

Let’s get the team to TC first. We still have some draft picks, UDFA, and FA to go. There are some issues that will help sort out the OL, including talent, potential, age [both old and very young] and health.

1. Dockery is gone
2. What to do with Free
3. Will Costa and/or Kowalski be healthy
4. How healthy is Bernie
5. I suspect that one or both of Arkin and Leary do not make the team
6. Parnell, Weems and all the other place holders
7. Presume Smith, Frederick and Cook are safe

Cook is the backup everything. He has value as the Proctor game day utility backup at multiple positions. That allows us to have one less OL suited up.

Let us assume that Costa and Kowalski are healthy. If not, then the discusion become both easier and harder. Costa is still on IR and Kowalksi was not really ever healthy last year. Their roster spots are a function of their health. I could see one of Costa or Kowalski moving to guard. Both have played guard when needed.

Two years ago I remember one of the coaches making a comment that they were very happy with Kowalski making the team and that he would push Costa. But they also added K may not be the final answer [obviously we drafted Frederick] and that Costa’s long term position might be guard.

We then have some competition at guard with Bernadeau, Livings, the non-center of Costa/Kowalski and one of Arkin/Leary. Not all will survive the competition.

Bennie is relatively young himself. He had off-season surgery and took a while to recover. He was playing at a high level at guard until we moved him to be the emergency center. I think Bernie is a keeper.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Arkin took one for the team working at center and delaying his progress at guard. His clock is ticking, but Birddog is high on his prospects.

Leary was highly touted, got a 3rd round evaluation and got paid as a 5th rounder. Yet he could not make the team and was able to be resigned to the PS. eventually he made some progress and we signed him to the active squad at the end of the season. He improved, but had a long way to go and the signing was more to control his contract.

Livings is the oldest player on the OL [not counting Dockery]. Livings was older than Bernie and could mentor Smith in his first games at LT this past year. That is not so important this coming year. He was the best interior lineman we had last year, but then again so was Holland the year before.

Livings is this year’s Holland in multiple ways. That could haunt him as he is the outcast guard not being able to play center.

I think we keep Livings for one more year as his contract was set up for two years. So I think he becomes the veteran backup that Dockery was supposed to be. He could be cut if the young guys work out. Both Bernie and Livings were signed to give time to develop the young guys.

Jerry said

“He [Fredericks] represents a draft pick, but what he really is is a foundation there in the middle that when we’ve got him and Smith on the outside, we can fill in the blanks as we go along over the next few years if he is the player that we expect him to be.”

Two number one picks on the OL.

12-12-1990…..Smith
12-31-1989…..Frederick

These are YOUNG guys to build around.

12-12-90…..Smith
04-29-89….Leary
01-02-89…..Kowalski
10-07-87…..Arkin
07-11-87.....Costa

07-20-86 ….Parnell
01-03-86…..Bernadeau
01-06-84…..Free
05-08-83…..Cook
03-16-82…..Livings

09-07-80 ….Dockery

The ones we are thinking about moving first are the oldest. Dockery is gone. Bernie and Livings were signed to contracts that we can cut after this year with little cap hit. Free is Free.

Cook is the most unusual but he can be the veteran backup that Dockery was supposed to be and still be the Proctor game day utility backup.

My best guess RIGHT NOW

LT…..Smith ……………..Parnell

LG…..Costa/Kowalski….Livings

OC…..Frederick ………..Costa/Kowalski/Cook

RG…..Bernie…………….Arkin/Leary

RT…..Free……………….Parnell

Parnell has earned some playing time, but I am not sure that he is a starter. Weems could be another project, but I think he is a place holder until the end of camp. We could use one more real tackle. That depends on what we do with Free and when we do that. Yet Free has been an issue for some time as my first post in november pointed out

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/11/22/3679408/ol-background-and-discussion

Questions that all inter-relate

Question 1 – are the players healthy? If not they could be cut/IR/PUP.

Question 2 - how much dead money to eat with the FA guards Livngs and Bernie. Livings is past his prime and is Bernie more of a young guy to develop like Costa/Kowalksi/Arkin/Leary or a transition guy like Livings.

Question 3 - how much dead money to eat on Free. I think we have one more year because of his salary cap hit. Yet we will find out sooner than later.

Question 4 - if we keep Costa and/or Kowalski, then do we need the 30 year old Cook, who is the second oldest behind Livings.

It is a little early and I think it will be a good topic closer to TC.

Issues we have to work out

Cook is the backup everything. He has value as the Proctor game day utility backup at multiple positions. That allows us to have one less OL suited up.

We then have some competition at guard with Bernadeau, Livings, the non-center of Costa/Kowalski and one of Arkin/Leary. Not all will survive the competition.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Arkin took one for the team working at center and delaying his progress at guard. His clock is ticking, but Birddog is high on his prospects.

Livings is this year’s Holland in multiple ways. That could haunt him as he is the outcast guard not being able to play center.

Jerry said

Two number one picks on the OL.

12-12-1990…..Smith
12-31-1989…..Frederick

These are YOUNG guys to build around.

12-12-90…..Smith
04-29-89….Leary
01-02-89…..Kowalski
10-07-87…..Arkin
07-11-87.....Costa

07-20-86 ….Parnell
01-03-86…..Bernadeau
01-06-84…..Free
05-08-83…..Cook
03-16-82…..Livings

09-07-80 ….Dockery

The ones we are thinking about moving first are the oldest. Dockery is gone. Bernie and Livings were signed to contracts that we can cut after this year with little cap hit. Free is Free.

Cook is the most unusual but he can be the veteran backup that Dockery was supposed to be and still be the Proctor game day utility backup.

My best guess RIGHT NOW

LT…..Smith ……………..Parnell

LG…..Costa/Kowalski….Livings

OC…..Frederick ………..Costa/Kowalski/Cook

RG…..Bernie…………….Arkin/Leary

RT…..Free……………….Parnell

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/11/22/3679408/ol-background-and-discussion

Questions that all inter-relate

Question 1 – are the players healthy? If not they could be cut/IR/PUP.

Question 3 - how much dead money to eat on Free. I think we have one more year because of his salary cap hit. Yet we will find out sooner than later.

Question 4 - if we keep Costa and/or Kowalski, then do we need the 30 year old Cook, who is the second oldest behind Livings.

Original Lumpy dies

Dr-P — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:16:15 -0000

Original Lumpy dies

rank Bank, who as Clarence "Lumpy" Rutherford served as the dim-witted foil to "Beaver" Cleaver and brother Wally on the classic TV comedy "Leave It to Beaver," died Saturday. He was 71.

What to do with the OL

Dr-P — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:21:50 -0000

The OL has to do better than last year, and there is every indication that they will improve. Yet, the questions are how much to improve and how to further the improvement?

Logic

The first thing we should look at logic. The opposite of terrible is NOT TERRIBLE. Great is not the opposite of terrible. Don’t expect the team to change from the worst to first. Neither should one set up a straw man argument that failing to be the best automatically dooms the current OL.

The opposite of terrible includes both below average and average, as well as above average and great. Just upgrading from terrible to below average would be an improvement. Further going from below average to average is an improvement.

More importantly, despite many opinions that the OL was terrible, it was actually just below average as a UNIT. Small changes can improve the team.

Process

Second, anything we do at OL must be part of the process for the entire team.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/23/4139190/the-process

One should read the Factors for judging the OL and discussions on measurement particularly PFF scores

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/13/3985294/factors-to-measure-in-the-upgrade-of-the-ol

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/3/3947588/stats-iii-pff-overall

The OL is a subset of the entire team. System theory says that if you change one part of the system you must also change something else as everything is inter-related. Examples include improving the pass rush affects the coverage and vice versa. A better RB will help the OL.

Many have noted how a mobile QB, such as Romo, helps the OL. Fewer have noted that Romo holds on the ball too long and that HURTS the OL.

Short term versus long term

The OL has been totally revamped in the last few years. We have gone from one of the oldest OL in the NFL to one of the youngest. Garrett was willing to eat dead money to rid the team of high cost low performers. We cut/did not resign Davis, Holland, Gurode, and Colombo as starters. The backups have had even more changes from folks like Proctor, Bright, Baron, Young, etc

That hurts in the short term. Rookies, even first rounders, generally do not do well their first year and often take several years to develop. Costa improved last year from the beginning of the season to the end. His improvement continued over the off-season and the coaches were high on him. He battled injuries this year but demonstrated their faith when he did play.

First Impressions

Costa is the poster boy for folks’ opinion of a player based on first impressions. Bernadeau is this year’s Costa. One should look at trend analysis for their improvement.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Draft picks

Garrett wanted to upgrade the OL from within. The year before last, we used three draft picks on the OL – Smith in the 1st, Arkin in the 4th and Nagy in the 7th.

Smith was drafted to be the future LT. He did so well his first year, that the future came last year. Yet, even he had some growing pains this year.

Nagy made the team, and started his first year based on his grit, but had the more typical rookie year taking major hits. Nagy beat out Holland, who was given the starting position on a silver platter but arrived to camp injured and out of shape. Holland was cut in TC.

We were looking forward to see Nagy continue to improve this year. Unfortunately, we lost Nagy on waivers trying to move him to IR during TC this year.

Arkin was a 4th rounder. There are about 100 NFL ready players each year and these are mostly clustered in the first three rounds. By the time the 4th round appears, players have some sort of flaw and tend to be hit or miss. Teams that can identify the flaw and mitigate it can find good talent.

Arkin’s flaw was that he was from a small school, with lessor coaching, and competition. Additionally, while talented, he was projected to move inside from tackle to guard. As such, he was considered a project that needed time to develop.

UDFA

Kowalski was signed as a UDFA. He did so well in TC that he forced the issue on the OL. We asked Gurode to take a pay cut. Gurode refused and was cut. We could not afford three centers and with his degenerative knees, we went with Kowalski and Costa. Both were younger, had upside, and together were cheaper than Gurode by himself.

I thought that the team would have started Kowalski, except that they did not want another rookie playing on a very young OL. Costa, a UDFA signed the year before, with his one year experience was still more experienced. This year was going to be an epic competition at TC, but both were injured.

Kowalski was placed on PUP and was never really healthy all year. Costa started, but eventually went IR based on his ankle. Losing Costa and Kowalski to injury, we tried Arkin at center this TC. That delayed his progress so we traded for a 3rd string center in Cook.

We added Leary as a UDFA this year. We thought he had 3rd round talent and paid him 5th round money to sign. Many thought he was a lock to make the team on the money alone. Yet, he said that he made too many mistakes and was cut.

We signed him to the PS, where he improved to the point where other teams were sniffing around. We then signed him to the active roster to keep his rights. We shall see if that is warranted.

We have developed Parnell internally. He got quality snaps this year, splitting time with Free. Regardless of what one thinks about Free, he has given us time to develop Smith and Parnell.

Short term adjustments

Jack Welch, former CEO of GE used to say – you have to live long enough to get to the long term.

Despite the youth movement, Garrett tweaked the long term plan to add Dockery as the veteran backup, just in case. Nagy got hurt and Dockery was starting with a week of signing. Unlike the trading and signing of Cook this year, Dockery really did not help and capped his year with a season ending injury. He was not resigned at the end of the year.

Holland was brought back amid more injuries. Holland was the best OL that year as he came back more motivated and healthy. But let there be no doubt, his motivation was a direct result being cut at TC. Even then he did not last his shortened season, having another season ending injury. Many wanted to resign him again, but we did not.

This TC, we had major injuries and brought back Holland, Dockery, and Loper to give the team a quorum to practice. Holland was the best player but wanted too much money. Money, age, injury history, and discussions of his playing time were discussed. Additionally Holland was just a guard in a time when the team wanted position flexibility. We ended up signing Dockery by default.

Many, me included, thought that we would resign Holland after the first game when salaries were not guaranteed. We had other roster issues. With each passing game, it became less likely for us to ever resign Holland to the team.

This year, we signed two FA guards in Livings and Bernadeau to give time to develop the young guys. Each was signed to relatively cheap contracts that after two years we could cut with minimal cap hits. Livings took hits as the season wore on. Normally the rock of the OL, he had four bad games. Among then were the first DC game where he was between a backup project LT in Parnell and a 4th string emergency guy who had never played center in a NFL game in Bernie. Dockery then replaced Bernie at RG. Needless to say the D Coordinator feasted on the interior.

Dockery was so bad, that in the second DC game, Livings played hurt as that was a better option than a healthy Dockery. Overall for the season, Livings was ranked about the 80th percentile for all guards. Dcokery, the oldest OL guy will not be back. Livings, the 2nd oldest probably starts again next year.

Bernie started slowly after off-season surgery. As he recovered, he did better. He was playing at the high level that made him the first FA to be signed until we moved him to center. he was terrible at center and then took a while to regain his level of play at guard. Just returning a healthy Bernadeau makes the OL significantly better.

What we know

The OL needs to play better as a unit this next year

We have limited money for FA

We have limited number of draft picks and have other needs

We have several ways to acquire/upgrade players – FA, draft, and internal development

There are opportunity costs. Given a limited amount of resources, spending in one area is not available to spend in other areas. We have limited resources in the salary cap and number of draft picks as well as roster spots.

Last year, we had the opportunity to sign Urbik and Rinehart both of whom were RFA s with 3rd round tenders. Given we gave up our 2nd round pick, it is reasonable to see why we did not bite that bullet.

We were not going to sign a big name/big $$$ FA. Last year the big names were Nicks and Grubbs. Even Nicks' old team could not afford him and signed Grubbs for millions of dollars less. We did not even spend Holland money. This year we are even more constrained.

Buffalo signed Urbik to a long term contract, but Rinehart and Levitre were available in FA this year. We were not going to spend Levitre money and Rinehart and other names such as Thomas from NE would not have been that much of an improvement given our limited cash to spend. Instead we seem to be looking at safety and LB for our limited FA money.

I have long said we should draft a OT. The best OTs are taken in the 1st and 2nd rounds, such as the Tyronasaurus. In the draft mock contest, I was one of the few to select Johnson in the first round. He has improved to the point that he probably out of reach now.

We might take the next level. Armistead will go somewhere between the 2nd and 4th rounds. He has high potential but he will time to develop. That is fine with us keeping Free/Parnell for another year. See Kegbearer post

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/19/4125220/doug-frees-days-done-in-dallas

We could go Menelik Watson in the 3rd round. Yet by that time we might as well go in another direction. Several have discussed various guards. Yet the ratio of FA/draft pick for guards is relatively marginal to other positions. Value says look elsewhere in the draft and sign a FA guard instead.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/5/4066960/value-approach-to-roster-management

Given the constraints, I expect the team to use all the non-capped methods to improve the OL. These include more coaching, get healthy, and get the starters to work together.

The OL has to do better than last year, and there is every indication that they will improve. Yet, the questions are how much to improve and how to further the improvement?

Logic

More importantly, despite many opinions that the OL was terrible, it was actually just below average as a UNIT. Small changes can improve the team.

Process

Second, anything we do at OL must be part of the process for the entire team.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/23/4139190/the-process

One should read the Factors for judging the OL and discussions on measurement particularly PFF scores

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/13/3985294/factors-to-measure-in-the-upgrade-of-the-ol

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/3/3947588/stats-iii-pff-overall

Many have noted how a mobile QB, such as Romo, helps the OL. Fewer have noted that Romo holds on the ball too long and that HURTS the OL.

Short term versus long term

First Impressions

Costa is the poster boy for folks’ opinion of a player based on first impressions. Bernadeau is this year’s Costa. One should look at trend analysis for their improvement.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Draft picks

Garrett wanted to upgrade the OL from within. The year before last, we used three draft picks on the OL – Smith in the 1st, Arkin in the 4th and Nagy in the 7th.

Smith was drafted to be the future LT. He did so well his first year, that the future came last year. Yet, even he had some growing pains this year.

We were looking forward to see Nagy continue to improve this year. Unfortunately, we lost Nagy on waivers trying to move him to IR during TC this year.

UDFA

We signed him to the PS, where he improved to the point where other teams were sniffing around. We then signed him to the active roster to keep his rights. We shall see if that is warranted.

We have developed Parnell internally. He got quality snaps this year, splitting time with Free. Regardless of what one thinks about Free, he has given us time to develop Smith and Parnell.

Short term adjustments

Jack Welch, former CEO of GE used to say – you have to live long enough to get to the long term.

What we know

The OL needs to play better as a unit this next year

We have limited money for FA

We have limited number of draft picks and have other needs

We have several ways to acquire/upgrade players – FA, draft, and internal development

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/19/4125220/doug-frees-days-done-in-dallas

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/5/4066960/value-approach-to-roster-management

Given the constraints, I expect the team to use all the non-capped methods to improve the OL. These include more coaching, get healthy, and get the starters to work together.

The Process

Dr-P — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:59:56 -0000

The best future does not just happen. One should measure where you are starting from, where you want to go, and what to change to get there.

I think we all have the end goal in sight: The Lombardi trophy and not just one.

One way to analyse that is to use a process perspective. A standard quality processes often involve five steps called DMAIC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma

The DMAIC project methodology has five phases:

DEFINE the problem.

We want to win the NFL championship REPEATEDLY in a cost effective manner. Note repeatedly is a different goal from one and done and implies a long term approach. Given salary caps, every player acquisition has a longer term than just this year.

MEASURE key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data.

These include key outputs such as wins to get to the playoffs, wins in the playoffs..

Inputs include Offense, defense, special teams and all the stats involved.. These include yards, points, penalties for our team and our opponents. One should note the starting position for the offense and ability to convert 3rd downs and turnovers affect each of the three units.

Constraints include salary cap, roster size, depth, injuries, talent, RKG characteristics individually and as a unit, coaching, schemes, luck

ANALYZE the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships.

Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation.

One could focus on the outputs and you do NOTHING for the process. The right underlying inputs must change for good outputs. Comparing outputs without considering the imputs is worthless for improvement. Two outcomes with different input processes are NOT equal. This is true regardless of whether they have the same output in any given time frame.

The key is the relationship between the input factors. Repair the cause and you ultimately cure the problem and hence get a good output. Attempt to fix a symptom that is NOT a cause of a problem and any output effect is random in nature. In fact, you could cause worse problems.

Imagine having pneumonia with a bad cough. So you take a cough drop and your throat FEELS better so you can talk more and cause worse problems. Yet if you take antibiotics to cure the infection, eventually you cure the problem and your throat will get better also.

It is best to work backwards and ask why a problem exists or what caused the problem. First list all the problems and then try to put them into some order. Patterns will emerge and it is often a single cause is responsible for multiple bad results.

IMPROVE or optimize the current process

One should do this based upon data analysis using techniques such as design of experiments, poka yoke or mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new, future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability.

Once you know what are the underlying root causes, one should fix the root causes. This will not immediately cause good outputs. In fact, one might get worse results immediately.

Imagine a business that is losing money. A new manager rids the firm of lots of outdated inventory by speeding up the process of manufacturing to selling. For a while the sales might be great but they are getting paid on credit so the firm does not yet have the money to replace the old inventory with new inventory. Yet inventory is listed as assets so having fewer assets shows the firm in worse shape.

Garrett ate dead money to rid the team of high cost low performers. This hurt in the short term but opens the team flexibility up in the long term.

We have hired new coaches since Garrett took over. In particular we have talked about Woicik as the strength and conditioning program. We have been stronger at the end of the game. His first year was during the lockout and that was the worst of all times as the off-season is where the most benefit occurs. If anything this effect has been hidden by the influx of so many players off the street that have not had a full year of this work.

Other coaches have worked on fundamentals. Callahan was noted every day during TC for his INDIVIDUAL work. Our LB and secondary coaches were able to work miracles with players literally off the street.

CONTROL the future state process

This is done to ensure that any deviations from target are corrected before they result in defects. Implement control systems such as statistical process control, production boards, visual workplaces, and continuously monitor the process.

The following is just ONE part of the full process for improvement. Each of these can be considered processes in their own right with inputs and outputs that effect other processes too.

We want better talent

See strategy series of articles that I wrote. Then we need a scouting process to identify the characteristics for each position. Are they the right size and other measrueables Are they RKG?

Are they young, mature, experienced, healthy, coachesWe need to measure how each player currently on the roster fits the characteristic Do we have a player on the roster now for each position. Do we have his replacement and depth

Do we have a process to acquire others that we need. We need a budget for each position and for each player. We need to improve the positions in the most cost effective manner. Salary caps prevent us from having stars everywhere. There must a way to prioritize improvements

We want the players to develop individually and as a unit.

Do we have the right coaches and the right schemes. Coaches and Players have to fit the scheme. Are we giving young players time and snaps to get experience and are the individuals playing together as a unit

Conclusion

Garrett is famous for talking about the process to the point of parody. Yet he IS working the process. It is a slow endeavor, but one needs to focus on the internal not the final output.

The best future does not just happen. One should measure where you are starting from, where you want to go, and what to change to get there.

I think we all have the end goal in sight: The Lombardi trophy and not just one.

One way to analyse that is to use a process perspective. A standard quality processes often involve five steps called DMAIC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma

The DMAIC project methodology has five phases:

DEFINE the problem.

MEASURE key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data.

These include key outputs such as wins to get to the playoffs, wins in the playoffs..

Constraints include salary cap, roster size, depth, injuries, talent, RKG characteristics individually and as a unit, coaching, schemes, luck

ANALYZE the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships.

Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation.

IMPROVE or optimize the current process

Once you know what are the underlying root causes, one should fix the root causes. This will not immediately cause good outputs. In fact, one might get worse results immediately.

Garrett ate dead money to rid the team of high cost low performers. This hurt in the short term but opens the team flexibility up in the long term.

CONTROL the future state process

The following is just ONE part of the full process for improvement. Each of these can be considered processes in their own right with inputs and outputs that effect other processes too.

We want better talent

See strategy series of articles that I wrote. Then we need a scouting process to identify the characteristics for each position. Are they the right size and other measrueables Are they RKG?

We want the players to develop individually and as a unit.

Conclusion

Garrett is famous for talking about the process to the point of parody. Yet he IS working the process. It is a slow endeavor, but one needs to focus on the internal not the final output.

Emmitt speaks on safety rules

Dr-P — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 13:42:33 -0000

Emmitt speaks on safety rules

The NFL is changing its rules to prevent ball-carriers from initiating contact with the crown of the helmet.

It’s an attempt to make the game safer – but the league’s all-time leading rusher, Emmitt Smith, thinks the NFL should have its own head examined.

Effect of the rookie salary schedule

Dr-P — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:16:51 -0000

Effect of the rookie salary schedule

PFF has a series on evaluating the cost effectiveness of teams. One trend that emerged from this analysis was how the old and new Collective Bargaining Agreements affected the value of high draft picks over the past five years.

The results are exactly as you would expect, with players in their rookie contract in the new CBA being undervalued, and those in their rookie contract from the old CBA being overvalued. What might surprise you is just how exceptionally true that is.

Player-Team Fit

Dr-P — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:06:53 -0000

The other day it was supposed to snow. Instead, we got a little rain. Later that night, we got some ice and the roads were terrible. Worst of all, the ice on the roads were the black ice type, which is the thin layer of ice that is virtually transparent, that allows the roads to be seen through the ice so drivers aren’t aware of the dangers.

I mention this because, snow, rain, ice are all of the same material. Yet each has its own characteristics. So is it with football players. We should be aware of the differences in characteristics of players that might not be apparent. Teams should look for players that fit their needs.

There are several aspects to team fit. As we go into free agency and the draft, a good team should keep in mind fit when adding/subtracting players to the roster. There has been tremendous roster turnover in the last few years to fit the Garrett model.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4062968/roster-turnover

We see the top ___ [pick a number] lists of players available and who would not want the best ___ [fill in the blank with position of your desires]. Yet all players are not the same even at the same position. Some are the differences are obvious and some are not.

Scheme

On some level this discussion has started. No one disputes that the 3 4 requires different players skill sets than the 4 3. At the minimum, there is a tradeoff of a LB for another DT.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918624/3-4-or-4-3-defense-from-an-accounting-perspective

There are different supply and demand for 3 4 versus 4 3 players. Tom Ryle noted this in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/3/4060942/dallas-cowboys-4-3-defense-2013-draft-monte-kiffin-stephen-jones

One can have a decent argument on the merits of the 3 4 versus 4 3 on football terms but that is for another day. Yet the impact will be felt in other ways too. Some have speculated on how the move with affect the special teams. Just one example is having one less starting LB might affect the number of backups available for ST duty.

Position

While the 3 4 OLB is similar to the 4 3 DE, they are not quite the same position. The prototypical sizes are different to take into account their slightly different responsibilities. Thus, we see articles on how player A is gaining or losing weight.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-JonathanBales/RTN-How-Cowboys-Personnel-Fits-Monte-Kiffens-4-3-Defense/bf6245c0-9280-4322-bcbe-73c1d239f819

We have seen many articles on how players A, B, and C fit the new 4 3 defense as opposed to the 3 4. Lee and Carter are both fine 3 4 ILBs, but is one is better suited for the 4 3 Mike as opposed to Willie? And we all will try to guess is who will be the Sam.

In the last few years, some of the draft sites are beginning to separate out the skill sets of a 3 4 OLB versus a 4 3 OLB and 3 4 DE and a 4 3 DE and DTs. Drafttek is just one example if you go to this page you will see categories for many types of players. This site also tries to show how a player might be seen with a higher rating for one position than another.

http://www.drafttek.com/2013-NFL-Draft-Prospect-Rankings/Top-QBs.asp

1 tech versus 3 tech DT

Then the additional DT is not identical to having two 3 4 NT. MosesArt notes the need for a one gap and discusses explain the importance of the 1 Technique, his responsibilities, and which current NFL players thrive in this position.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/7/3964806/defensive-line-the-1-technique

Archie tries to answer where Lissemore will play:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4064656/dallas-cowboys-mailbag-sean-lissemore-4-3-defense

Who is the 1 gap and who is the 3 gap is not the only major discussion this spring. Just one example is KD Drummond asking who is the DE and is the strong side different than the other.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/28/4034070/dallas-cowboys-mailbag--strongside-defensive-end-

DB coverage

Regardless of the configuration of the front seven you pick, the secondary has its own issues. Pick an article on Kiffen and the Tampa 2 and its variants.

Do you want a press cover or a zone coverage back, let alone the slot versus outside? Carr and Claiborne were picked because of their size and press coverage skills. We kept Scandrick for a reason.

Or perhaps we should get a safety who is a ball hawk or leader. Elam was brought to the team several years ago. Individually he did not have great personal accomplishments and left the next year. Yet his ability to install the Ryan D, especially in the lockout year, was very valuable. Additionally, his leadership meant that the secondary did not have the lost look. Further, he allowed Sensabaugh to focus on his own individual play. We have moved on from both.

Nor is this limited to defense. We have the OL with two types of blocking – the mobile and the mauler. Questions of which is the better draft pick, Cooper or Warmack reflect this discussion. OCC has just one of several articles on guard availability and the comments discuss fit.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4062962/nfl-mock-drafts-2013-sb-nation-picks-chance-warmack-for-cowboys

Other characteristics include

The RKG.

There should be a comprehensive article on what constitutes a RKG, but it does not mean choir boy, but instead a player whose enthusiasm for the game is manifested by his work ethic, teamwork, and dedication.

Witten defines the RKG, Bennett did not. Dez had some maturity issues, but he has dedicated himself to improvement.

Self-motivation.

The new CBA places limits on number and types of practices in the off-season and during the season even the bye weeks. This will place a premium on players who are self-motivated. Lee is a film room warrior in the best sense. Further, he took it upon himself to learn Ryan’s defense and became a leader.

He took Carter under his wing. During their off-season workouts, he would make Cater call out his responsibilities. They worked out their mental aspects not just their bodies. The growth was apparent.

Conclusion

There are more variations on the type of players than meets the eye. We are seeing a lot more detailed information than in the past. Hopefully as the team roster is further shaped, the team will get players that better fit their needs.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4062968/roster-turnover

Scheme

On some level this discussion has started. No one disputes that the 3 4 requires different players skill sets than the 4 3. At the minimum, there is a tradeoff of a LB for another DT.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918624/3-4-or-4-3-defense-from-an-accounting-perspective

There are different supply and demand for 3 4 versus 4 3 players. Tom Ryle noted this in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/3/4060942/dallas-cowboys-4-3-defense-2013-draft-monte-kiffin-stephen-jones

Position

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-JonathanBales/RTN-How-Cowboys-Personnel-Fits-Monte-Kiffens-4-3-Defense/bf6245c0-9280-4322-bcbe-73c1d239f819

http://www.drafttek.com/2013-NFL-Draft-Prospect-Rankings/Top-QBs.asp

1 tech versus 3 tech DT

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/7/3964806/defensive-line-the-1-technique

Archie tries to answer where Lissemore will play:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4064656/dallas-cowboys-mailbag-sean-lissemore-4-3-defense

Who is the 1 gap and who is the 3 gap is not the only major discussion this spring. Just one example is KD Drummond asking who is the DE and is the strong side different than the other.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/28/4034070/dallas-cowboys-mailbag--strongside-defensive-end-

DB coverage

Regardless of the configuration of the front seven you pick, the secondary has its own issues. Pick an article on Kiffen and the Tampa 2 and its variants.

Do you want a press cover or a zone coverage back, let alone the slot versus outside? Carr and Claiborne were picked because of their size and press coverage skills. We kept Scandrick for a reason.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/4/4062962/nfl-mock-drafts-2013-sb-nation-picks-chance-warmack-for-cowboys

Other characteristics include

The RKG.

Witten defines the RKG, Bennett did not. Dez had some maturity issues, but he has dedicated himself to improvement.

Self-motivation.

Conclusion

real killer bunnies

Dr-P — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 13:22:36 -0000

real killer bunnies

The bulky-browed primates, the scientists speculate, were unable to adapt their hunting skills to small game. And that was not a small thing, because big game are just that: big.

Hunting larger animals — chasing them, felling them, hauling them home — expends considerable resources of time and energy.

Small game, on the other hand, is less demanding of hunters. It might take more cunning to catch a rabbit, but it generally takes less physical energy.

And this discrepancy might have made an important evolutionary difference, the thinking goes, particularly as large animals reduced in numbers."

Value approach to roster management

Dr-P — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:03:46 -0000

Value approach to roster changes

Here is a list of the amounts. The first figure is the franchise tag amount. The second figure is the transition tag.

QB…..14,896,000…...13,068,000

DE…..11,175,000…….9,151,000
CB…..10,854,000…….9,095,000
WR….10,537,000…….8,867,000

OL……9,828,000…….8,709,000

LB……9,619,000…….8,358,000

DT……8,450,000…….7,039,000
RB……8,219,000…….6,970,000
S………6,916,000……6,002,000
TE…….6,066,000……5,194,000
P/K…...2,977,000…….2,700,000

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Official-franchise-tag-transition-tag-numbers-for-2013.html

This basic information about the cost of each position provides the basis for managing a team roster based on cost. There are several strategies that one can employ to lower the cost of a team’s roster.

Rookies

The rookie salary schedule is based on slotting. So, all other things being equal, it makes sense to draft high cost positions and use FA to get lower cost positions. After all if the salary is fixed then to draft a high cost position gives a better ratio than for a low cost position. I call this the Von Miller effect.

High cost position/slot > Low cost position/slot

Means that high cost positions are better than low cost positions for the same draft pick. One should draft a tackle and sign a FA guard.

This works for multiple positions too. For example if a team has two needs – a tackle and a guard. If a tackle commands a higher salary than a guard, [and they do] then to draft a tackle and sign a FA guard will be a better deal than to draft a guard and signing a FA tackle.

The really good players will get their money in their second contract regardless of position. Yet for several years the team with high cost position players on rookie contracts will get a bigger advantage over teams that get really good players at lower cost positions. Those really good players at lower cost positions will also get a good second contract and the team will still save money but not as much.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/31/3937402/strategy-v-the-von-miller-rookie-effect

Yet all things are not equal. Other factors include

How long it takes to learn and succeed at a position. Even the best CB will make mistakes, rookies make mistakes but rookie CBs definitely make mistakes. OCC showed that even first round OL guys take several years to do well.

The success rate at each position. The draft charts are based on the premise that every pick is a risk, but the probability of success goes up the earlier one picks. Birddog has noted that there are different success rates by position. Yet this must be looked at with more detail. Guards have a higher rate of success because only the very best are drafted in the first round. Yet there will be many more DE taken each year. The real question is will the 3rd or 4th DE be worth the first guard.

Need and depth at the position on your team. The greater the depth at a position means that a team can afford to wait for a player to develop.

Risk propensity of a team. Teams may choose a player with the highest ceiling [highest potential] or the highest floor [ready to play now]. High ceiling guys have a greater risk of failure than those with high floors, who are by definition ready to play. Yet those high floor guys may never get any better.

Supply and demand of FA for specific skills not just position. For example, do you want a press versus zone cover CB or the speed versus possession type of WR?

These are broad categories. We know that tackles are more expensive than guards or centers, and halfbacks are more expensive than fullbacks. There are several approaches to how to draft covered elsewhere

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/25/3914680/draft-strategy-ii-draft-chart-inefficiency

Free Agents

There are several kinds of FA available. Generally, drafted players are cheaper than FA. So teams want to develop their own players. In order to draft the best player available then teams must have no needs. So teams should fill holes with mid-range mid-dollar role model FA. The idea is to use FA for SHORT TERM needs while you develop your own.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/19/3894642/types-of-free-agents

Schemes

Schemes matter from a cost point of view. With the old franchise numbers I explored the difference in the 3 4 from the 4 3 defense just on cost. In essence, one is trading one LB for a DT. LB are now more expensive than DT, that was not always the case.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918624/3-4-or-4-3-defense-from-an-accounting-perspective

Stars

Teams benefit from stars. Stars increase the marketing value of a team. This was recognized by the CBA in free agency. The union wanted everyone to be able to change teams. Yet, the CBA notes that teams can control a few contracts, the franchise and transition tags, that are exceptions to the FA. To minimize the use of these contracts, they have a defined high cost.

Further, we know that the NFL is a star system, where just like in Hollywood the stars get the lion’s share and the rest try to get by. The difference in the best players, as shown in the franchise numbers, from even the better than average players is striking. This difference is bigger than the difference from the better than average player and the merely average.

http://www.overthecap.com/top-player-salaries.php?Position=QB

Some of this difference is merely time lag between the most recent contracts and those signed years ago. There is a ratchet effect as each new contract sets the new going rate and those who have signed several years ago fall behind.

DAT effect

The salaries do not go up in a straight line, instead it is a curve. Yet in a cap constrained there is a way to reap value. I have called this the DAT effect. The idea is to get a better than average player but not the best.

DAT was among the best, but never the biggest name or the highest cost LB. So the team got good value out of him as a better than average LB, but could spend the difference in cost from the very best LB on other areas of the team.

Best player > better than average player but Best player/salary < better than average player/salary

Yet this does not carry all through the ranks of player talent

Better than average player/salary > average player/salary

Further, spending money on the very best players is more risky. Teams that spend too much money on stars, tend to skimp on quality backups. When the inevitable injury occurs, there are holes that other teams can exploit.

OTOH, teams that have more better than average players instead of a few stars across the board can afford to have better depth. This has several advantages

* Filling in for injuries without having holes that other teams can exploit

* Giving starters more rest to be better in the late part of games

* Developing backups to start

* Competing at practice makes everyone better

* Letting stars leave in FA if they get too expensive.

Harvests

Knowing when to harvest a player is important. I have noted that teams have to let players go if they get too expensive, even if they have talent left.

Yet letting players walk means that the team gets nothing in return. So a team better have a long term plan that evaluates

* every player and

* every position and

* the depth at that position for talent, cost, where they are in talent, potential and development

Teams should try to trade high cost players before they reach the end of the contract. Yet with the salary cap the timing is important. The best time is one year before the end of the contract. There will be a small cap hit, but the team gets something in return. Trading with many years left on the contract is more desirable to the new team but the old team then has a bigger cap hit.

Other

The cost of coaching is not covered by salary cap. Teams ought to spend as much as they can to get the best coaches possible. Similarly the scouts are not covered so a team ought to invest as much as possible.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3925172/strategy-iv-managing-the-high-end-of-the-roster

These are value strategies are based on value. Yet the true value is in the performance of a team.

Value approach to roster changes

Here is a list of the amounts. The first figure is the franchise tag amount. The second figure is the transition tag.

QB…..14,896,000…...13,068,000

DE…..11,175,000…….9,151,000
CB…..10,854,000…….9,095,000
WR….10,537,000…….8,867,000

OL……9,828,000…….8,709,000

LB……9,619,000…….8,358,000

DT……8,450,000…….7,039,000
RB……8,219,000…….6,970,000
S………6,916,000……6,002,000
TE…….6,066,000……5,194,000
P/K…...2,977,000…….2,700,000

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Official-franchise-tag-transition-tag-numbers-for-2013.html

Rookies

High cost position/slot > Low cost position/slot

Means that high cost positions are better than low cost positions for the same draft pick. One should draft a tackle and sign a FA guard.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/31/3937402/strategy-v-the-von-miller-rookie-effect

Yet all things are not equal. Other factors include

Need and depth at the position on your team. The greater the depth at a position means that a team can afford to wait for a player to develop.

Supply and demand of FA for specific skills not just position. For example, do you want a press versus zone cover CB or the speed versus possession type of WR?

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/25/3914680/draft-strategy-ii-draft-chart-inefficiency

Free Agents

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/19/3894642/types-of-free-agents

Schemes

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918624/3-4-or-4-3-defense-from-an-accounting-perspective

Stars

http://www.overthecap.com/top-player-salaries.php?Position=QB

DAT effect

Best player > better than average player but Best player/salary < better than average player/salary

Yet this does not carry all through the ranks of player talent

Better than average player/salary > average player/salary

OTOH, teams that have more better than average players instead of a few stars across the board can afford to have better depth. This has several advantages

* Filling in for injuries without having holes that other teams can exploit

* Giving starters more rest to be better in the late part of games

* Developing backups to start

* Competing at practice makes everyone better

* Letting stars leave in FA if they get too expensive.

Harvests

Knowing when to harvest a player is important. I have noted that teams have to let players go if they get too expensive, even if they have talent left.

Yet letting players walk means that the team gets nothing in return. So a team better have a long term plan that evaluates

* every player and

* every position and

* the depth at that position for talent, cost, where they are in talent, potential and development

Other

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3925172/strategy-iv-managing-the-high-end-of-the-roster

These are value strategies are based on value. Yet the true value is in the performance of a team.

Roster Turnover

Dr-P — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 16:02:27 -0000

We are currently focusing lots of attention right now on the tagging, or not, of Spencer, and the upcoming new draft. Yet, the changes each year pale in comparison over time.

Since 2010 we have had two head coaches, with Garrett taking over in mid-season from Wade Phillips. It is natural for a head coach to put a stamp on the team by introducing new players to replace others. Some of the turnover is natural or independent of coaches, such as players retiring or a career ending injury.

Yet, a major reason for a new coach in the first place is to get more out of the team. Indeed, one of the best things about a new coach is that he evaluates players differently. Thus, a new coach will, and should, have a major effect on turnover. This is true even if the offensive and defensive schemes remain the same.

Garrett took over in mid-season which is an unusual time for coaching changes and that minimizes his ability to shape a team immediately. Normally, this is done in the off-season as being on the opening day rosters guarantees the salary for veterans. Still the opening day roster provides a baseline for comparison.

Since 2010, there were only 24 players from that opening day roster that made it to the opening day roster in 2012.

On offense there are 09 players left:

Romo, F Jones, Austin, Bryant*, Ogletree,

Witten, Phillips, Costa*, and Free

On defense there are 14 players left:

Brent*, Hatcher, Lissemore*, Ratliff, Spears,

Lee*, Spencer, Ware, Church*, V Butler

Jenkins, McCray, Scandrick and Sensabaugh

On special teams we still have Ladoucer.

Phillips was on the injured reserve list in 2010 after his rookie year in 2009. V Butler and Ogletree were also rookies in 2009. The 06 names with asterisks were rookies in 2010. So from 2009 there are only 18 players left.

It is not surprising that the offense has fewer members. Garrett was the OC, before he was the HC, and he was most familiar with the skills, cost and productivity of those members. So the offense was his major focus in his first year to shape the team.

Garrett went after the non-productive high cost folks even to the point of eating dead money to do so. The OL was a major focus. Only Costa and Free remain from 2010.

Next year, our RBs might be completely changed since he took over.

Additionally, the first off-season was marked by the lockout. So, while we hired a new DC, in Ryan; he had a limited time to evaluate the defensive players. There was a major change in the defensive roster last year.

These names include several who probably will not be back. At this point it would be a guess, but Jones, Ogletree, Brent, Spears, and Jenkins are not expected to play a role. Free and McCray are also possibilities.

The opening game roster could include as few as 9 members from the 2009 roster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Dallas_Cowboys_season

We are currently focusing lots of attention right now on the tagging, or not, of Spencer, and the upcoming new draft. Yet, the changes each year pale in comparison over time.

Since 2010, there were only 24 players from that opening day roster that made it to the opening day roster in 2012.

On offense there are 09 players left:

Romo, F Jones, Austin, Bryant*, Ogletree,

Witten, Phillips, Costa*, and Free

On defense there are 14 players left:

Brent*, Hatcher, Lissemore*, Ratliff, Spears,

Lee*, Spencer, Ware, Church*, V Butler

Jenkins, McCray, Scandrick and Sensabaugh

On special teams we still have Ladoucer.

Garrett went after the non-productive high cost folks even to the point of eating dead money to do so. The OL was a major focus. Only Costa and Free remain from 2010.

Next year, our RBs might be completely changed since he took over.

The opening game roster could include as few as 9 members from the 2009 roster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Dallas_Cowboys_season

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Dallas_Cowboys_season

Texas Independence Day

Dr-P — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 14:12:30 -0000

Texas Independence Day

Today is, of course, the 177th anniversary of the day in 1836 when Texans declared its independence from Mexico. Texas' own Fourth of July. It's a day of remembrance and celebration commemorated across the state, but most especially at Washington-on-the-Brazos, where the Texas Declaration of Independence was framed and issued.

franchise tag numbers

Dr-P — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 21:22:46 -0000

franchise tag numbers

The deadline for teams to apply these designations to players is 4 p.m. ET on Monday.
Here is a list of the amounts. The first figure is the franchise tag amount. The second figure is the transition tag.

- See more at: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Official-franchise-tag-transition-tag-numbers-for-2013.html#sthash.xODoEf4D.dpuf

PFF rates the front office

Dr-P — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 17:16:05 -0000

PFF rates the front office

It might be a surprise the Cowboys ended up doing so well, getting the most for their money. They had a number of injuries which caused the team to not live up to expectations, but some of the injuries came to their young talent who aren’t making much to begin with. Outside of cornerback, where they’ve invested a lot of money, the Cowboys are actually doing a decent job of getting the most out of their players.

Rangers hire Pudge as Asst to GM

Dr-P — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:01:52 -0000

Rangers hire Pudge as Asst to GM

The Rangers have hired former catcher Ivan Rodriguez to be a special assistant to general manager Jon Daniels, the club announced Thursday.

According to a press release, Rodriguez "will assist the Rangers baseball operations group in a number of areas, including amateur, professional, and international scouting, player instruction on the major and minor league level, and talent evaluation. He will also be involved in community and marketing endeavors on behalf of the club."

Factors to measure in the upgrade of the OL

Dr-P — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:02:24 -0000

There are several major factors to measure about the OL. Each area is important in its own right, but they all interact with the others. You can’t change one area without affecting the others. These include, but are not limited to:

Coaching/blocking scheme

Continuity

Individual talent

Depth

OL versus QB or RB

Coaching/Blocking scheme

Dallas changed the OL philosophy this last year and we hired a new OL coach in Callahan. Just about every training camp article noted how much individual attention Callahan had with each OL guy.

One issue that shows the interconnectedness is whether a good coach finds player to fit his system/scheme or whether the coach adapts the system/scheme to the talent on the team.

In the short term, one has to adapt to the talent on hand. Long Ball noted

Depends on offensive philosophy . . .

If you’ll remember, Garrett initially wanted a more athletic OL to run stretch plays, pull, and operate in space. Then, the decision was they needed more size to surround Costa. Ever heard the expression “we’re neither fish nor fowl”

Yet in the longer term, a coach has more leeway. Thus, there are many articles each year on the players in the draft and in FA. Long Ball further noted that some players are better for a particular type of scheme. He noted that one FA that many folks want to sign, Levitre is probably better suited for a ZBS. Levitre is a player looking for a pay-day . . .

We have known that a major weakness of several players such as Costa was weakness. When Garrett took over, one of his first hires was a new Strength and Conditioning coach. Woicik has been successful in the past winning SB rings at both Dallas and NE.

Yet that is a long term upgrade. Still we saw Cost improve his strength over the full year last year.

If anything this upgrade for the entire team has been hidden, especially on the Defense. We had players literally hired off the street. Woicik's efforts should be most notable this upcoming year. his work is mostly done in the off-season. His first year was the lockout year. The second year, we had major roster changes, but we still saw most the players in better condition. We certainly were more competitive in the fourth quarter this year.

Continuity.

OCC has written a great article on continuity that should be read in its entirety.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/13/3981620/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-continuity-personnel-changes

Several key points emerge. It is not just the individual talent of the five OL guys, but how well they play together. Some of that is merely a function of time on the team.

We brought back Holland the year before last after cutting him. One reason why he was a successful as he was is that he had played on the team for years. Thus, the players next to him knew what he could do and vice versa.

This summer, we brought him back along with Dockery and Loper, the King of the Roster Transaction. We ended up with Dockery, who was not good, but had played with the team the year before. At least we knew what to expect.

Some of the continuity is just communication. Cook, individually, played well at center. Yet, it took several games for the team to adjust to his timing. Free had 6 of his 15 penalties and Smith had 6 of his 11 penalties in the first three games. Cook was a late TC addition and started without knowing the playbook or even the terminology.

The formula for calculating continuity has its quirks. OCC noted that Philadelphia was average this year measured in continuity. A major reason for that was that Jason Peters, their best OL player, was out for the season. Thus, the “starter” for the season was a backup. They suffered a great deal with the OL, but it was not due to continuity.

Contrast that with Dallas. We also placed a starter on IR this year, but that was in mid-season. Except for 3 snaps, Cook was the de facto starter even though he was the 3rd stringer. Costa was the starter, but came back too soon in mid-season only to be lost again. We changed centers often this year, with the resulting loss of continuity.

Individual talent

This is the focus of many articles. We draft, sign, and cut players individually. So evaluating their performance is a critical part of a team. Unfortunately, this is just one factor in measureing the OL. OCC starts us out

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/1/3936492/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-success-2012#141752513

Tom Ryle adds his comments in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/16/3880862/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-tyron-smith-doug-free-nate-livings-mackenzy-bernadeau#138515747

IamIronside posted a classic article on the OL as a whole as part of a series of evaluating each position on the team. Look inside his article and the comments for several others including my own.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3878118/position-outlook-offensive-line-edition#141100485

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/11/22/3679408/ol-background-and-discussion

One issue about individual talent is that many observers make up their mind on initial impressions and do not see the development over time. OCC discussed this development in an article on trend analysis

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/17/3882570/a-tale-of-two-halves-trending-dallas-cowboys-players-in-2012#138898693

A more in-depth discussion of trend analysis is

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Depth

Rabblerouser discussed how important quality depth is to a team. He noted the effects of injuries to the starters.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/4/3951854/five-decisions-that-shaped-the-cowboys-season-pt-v-offseason-injuries

Depth is a function of quality and quantity. One has to be able to manage the roster on the OL and all other areas. One has to be able to let guys go who get too expensive, even if they are still talented. In order to do that one better have younger, cheaper guys that you are developing who are ready to step in. I discussed this in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918450/strategy-iii-team-roster-management

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3925172/strategy-iv-managing-the-high-end-of-the-roster

Faninfitandthin noted

Offensive lines are somewhat like chains. If one link breaks, there’s probably going to be a sack or a tackle for a loss. It may not matter much how strong the other links are, or if one particular link is exceptionally strong.

If a team spends half its salary cap on a single star player and the minimum salary on the other 52 other players, it’s going to have no depth and a very low median salary. But if a team has a high median salary by allotting its salary cap equally among its players, it may not have any superstars, but it will have nothing but depth. (Cap hit is probably the best measure of NFL salaries, because it includes base salary plus amortized bonuses.)

That may be a function of the quality of all the starters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/nothing-more-critical-to-redskins-than-offensive-line-depth/2011/11/02/gIQAZNbAhM_blog.html

If you spend too much in one area, then you tend to skimp on quality depth elsewhere. When the inevitable injury occurs, then other teams can exploit the holes that are left by poor backups.

OL as opposed to QB or RB

I can’t find the articles but last year footballoutsiders discussed how the OL interacts with the RB and the QB.

With the RB, we should note the famous lines of Nate Newton – We were just a bunch of fat boys until Emmett started running behind us. The key point is that a great RB makes the OL look a lot better. We saw flashes of that with a healthy Murray.

FO also had a series of articles last year discussing how the QB can have a major effect on the OL in addition to the obvious ways that an OL affects the QB. They measured the time it took for each sack. They divided the time into three segments based on time

The first segment was the fast sacks. In this area, they blamed the OL. In the third segment, the longest time to being sacked – they blamed the QB. In the middle, it was indeterminate.

There is no question that Romo was able to escape many sack attempts. Yet he is also well known to hold onto the ball too long. He is high risk/high return.

Conclusion

There are many factors that affect the OL. It is not just the individual talent. Since Garrett took over, there has been a multi-year process to upgrade the OL. We have seen a massive turnover of the roster, added new coaches and the process continues.

Coaching/blocking scheme

Continuity

Individual talent

Depth

OL versus QB or RB

Coaching/Blocking scheme

Dallas changed the OL philosophy this last year and we hired a new OL coach in Callahan. Just about every training camp article noted how much individual attention Callahan had with each OL guy.

One issue that shows the interconnectedness is whether a good coach finds player to fit his system/scheme or whether the coach adapts the system/scheme to the talent on the team.

In the short term, one has to adapt to the talent on hand. Long Ball noted

Depends on offensive philosophy . . .

Yet that is a long term upgrade. Still we saw Cost improve his strength over the full year last year.

Continuity.

OCC has written a great article on continuity that should be read in its entirety.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/13/3981620/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-continuity-personnel-changes

Several key points emerge. It is not just the individual talent of the five OL guys, but how well they play together. Some of that is merely a function of time on the team.

Individual talent

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/1/3936492/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-success-2012#141752513

Tom Ryle adds his comments in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/16/3880862/dallas-cowboys-offensive-line-tyron-smith-doug-free-nate-livings-mackenzy-bernadeau#138515747

IamIronside posted a classic article on the OL as a whole as part of a series of evaluating each position on the team. Look inside his article and the comments for several others including my own.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3878118/position-outlook-offensive-line-edition#141100485

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/11/22/3679408/ol-background-and-discussion

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/17/3882570/a-tale-of-two-halves-trending-dallas-cowboys-players-in-2012#138898693

A more in-depth discussion of trend analysis is

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/5/3955914/stats-iv-trend-analysis

Depth

Rabblerouser discussed how important quality depth is to a team. He noted the effects of injuries to the starters.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/4/3951854/five-decisions-that-shaped-the-cowboys-season-pt-v-offseason-injuries

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/26/3918450/strategy-iii-team-roster-management

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/28/3925172/strategy-iv-managing-the-high-end-of-the-roster

Faninfitandthin noted

That may be a function of the quality of all the starters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/nothing-more-critical-to-redskins-than-offensive-line-depth/2011/11/02/gIQAZNbAhM_blog.html

If you spend too much in one area, then you tend to skimp on quality depth elsewhere. When the inevitable injury occurs, then other teams can exploit the holes that are left by poor backups.

OL as opposed to QB or RB

I can’t find the articles but last year footballoutsiders discussed how the OL interacts with the RB and the QB.

The first segment was the fast sacks. In this area, they blamed the OL. In the third segment, the longest time to being sacked – they blamed the QB. In the middle, it was indeterminate.

There is no question that Romo was able to escape many sack attempts. Yet he is also well known to hold onto the ball too long. He is high risk/high return.

Conclusion

Core of Rangers

Dr-P — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:44:46 -0000

Core of Rangers

Grading the Rangers' core: A-

Sure, the Angels have once again stolen the headlines, and they might be the on-paper favorites in the AL West.

But that's no indictment of the Texas core. The only thing keeping them from the highest possible grade is Kinsler's seeming decline. Everything else, though, looks uncommonly strong.

Stats IV – Trend Analysis

Dr-P — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:38:59 -0000

OCC had a great article that noted that one can get more information about our players by looking at their performance over time. His methodology was simple; he divided the season into two eight-game groups. He then compared players’ PFF scores for those first eight games to the second game. As he said

The Cowboys record of the final eight weeks suggests that the Cowboys played better football in the second half of the 2012 season. It also stands to reason that some players were better in the second half of the season than they were in the first half.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/17/3882570/a-tale-of-two-halves-trending-dallas-cowboys-players-in-2012

His thesis was that the season cumulative grades can hide the improvement of the players over the season. Often, we see only the final team record and player scores and declare them hits of misses. This is good for determining who gets to go the playoffs, but not so good for evaluating where our needs for the future lay.

Expanded version

I commend OCC for this article to show trends. Trend analysis is an important tool. Not only can we see the trends over time, but can look at specific inflection points, where the trend line changes, to help us find true causes for further analysis.

Here we can use Bernadeau as an example. Bernadeau’s season can be described in four parts – not just two. Let’s look at Bernie’s season.

His overall score is misleading. One, his ranking at guard is based on the cumulative scores AT GUARD, so missing games cut his scores down. He had only 14 rated games at guard but is compared to players who had 16 games rated at guard. Technically missing one or more games provides an opportunity to raise or lower his score. Yet, given how he was playing at the time, he probably would have raised his score.

Two, he was terrible at center. He had learning pains in his first two games at center in the NFL. Just like the Tyronasaurus had two terrible games in his first games in the NFL at LT, this may not be the final answer to how well Bernie could actually play at center in the future. Yet I think his natural position, along with our depth at center, means that Bernie is a guard.

Then, just like reading a book and getting interrupted, you don’t go back to pick up exactly where you left off. He was bad at center and it took a while to return to form at guard when he moved back. Yet every game at RG after his return was better than the game before and he ended with a last game of 2.0, which is much better than average.

Part one – open the season after recovering from off-season surgery – BAD and memorable for everyone just like Costa.

Week…….grade…improvement

Week 1…..-0.8

Week 2…..-2.5…..-2.3

Week 3…..-4.3…..-1.8

Part two – healthy at RG – major improvements and what the scouts expected

Week 4….-1.4……2.9…not yet fully healthy but major improvement

Week 6….-0.2……1.2

Week 7…..1.4……1.6

Week 8…..3.2……1.8

Week 9…..1.3…..-1.8 but still noteworthy good

Week 10…2.0……0.7

Part three - move to center and the return to guard – bad

Week 11…..-3.5…………not comparable as in a new position

Week 12…..-3.3…..0.2

Week 13…..-2.8…………again not comparable in a new position back to guard

Week 14…..-1.2…..1.6…huge gain in performance though still bad

Part four – return to guard – start slow and improve every game to end at a high level again

Week 15…..-0.7…..0.5…below average but still a major gain in performance

Week 16…..-0.3…..0.4…below average but still a major gain in performance

Week 17…...2.0…..2.3…again at a high level

Key points

The key is that I divided the season into groups AFTER the season was over. The change is performance was a key to ask what happened to cause the change. In retrospect, it was obvious that he was not really healthy at the start of the season. As he got healthier, so did his performance.

Then, his performance was dramatically changed when he shifted positions. It is important to note that his scores at center and guard are so different. Yet one should not compare PFF scores across different positions, as they are normed by their positions.

More analysis

Dividing the season into halves, thirds, or quarters or any other number has the advantage of providing a way to measure change over the season. Yet, the division is rather arbitrary.

One criterion is to have a large enough sample size so that the statistics are stable and relatively immune from extreme results or outliers. Bill Parcells, no stat whiz, said four games or so stabilized the results.

Another is ease. Dividing the season into halves or quarters is relatively simple 16/2 and 16/4 get 8 and 4 games respectively. Dividing seasons into thirds is more difficult, but we can use per game statistics to smooth out the differences of 16/3 or 5+ games.

Yet another important factor one can us is divide the season based on important events. One such event is major injury. Every player has his own cycle, but we also can note important events that affect major units.

Here we have a good way to divide the last season based on who was the center. This obviously affected Bernie, but also the rest of the OL a whole.

Weeks 01-04

We used Cook as the starting center. This is important as Cook was the 3rd string center obtained in a last minute trade. He did not know the playbook or the terminology.

Weeks 05-12

We got Costa back for a game and a half, and then we used Cook for another two games until he was injured. We used Bernadeau as the 4th string center. The hallmark of the middle of the season was a lack of continuity. No three games in a row with the same OL.

We had the game with Smith also out during this spell and used Parnell. The interior of the OL was Livings, Bernie and Dockery. Livings, who was normally the rock but was between a project backup LT in Parnell and a 4th string center who had never played at the position in the NFL. Dockery is just bad.

Parnell seemed to do well. Free did even better than Parnell. Yet the middle of the OL was so bad that the D Coordinators feasted on them and the tackle scores should be evaluated accordingly.

Weeks 13-17

We got Cook back. We can note the following for the OL. Note these are the OL stats; there were other sacks, hits etc. that can be attributed to other players. I used the PFF stats for attribution.

………………..01-04…..05-12…..13-17

Sacks………….08.0…….13.0…….05.0

Sacks/game…..02.0…….01.9…….01.0…..down significantly

QB hits………..07.0……16.0……..09.0

Sacks/game…..01.8…….02.3……..01.8…..middle of the season inflates the total

QB hurries…….38.0……66.0……..38.0

Hurries/game….09.5……09.5……..07.6…..down significantly

Penalties………14.0……17.0…….12.0

Penalties/g…….03.5……02.4…….02.4…..down significantly

Conclusion

We get more information than just the final scores bu using trend analysis. We can track their performance over time and see increases or decreases. Further, we by looking at specific points where the performance makes a major change we can use that as an indicator for more investigation to determine why the change occurred,

We should note that the OL, as a unit, was much better by the end of the season, compared to early in the season. This should bode well for our off-season evaluation.

The key is to get the starters healthy and practicing together. They did not play as a unit until the last week before the opener. That lasted for 3 snaps. The OL took some time to adjust, but they did. They were playing well until Cook went down with another injury. Yet again they adjusted over time.

Next season we should have basically the same OL for the first time in years. We can work on continuity more than evaluation. Further we have some additional young players for solid depth in Arkin and Leary before we add anyone else in FA or the draft.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/17/3882570/a-tale-of-two-halves-trending-dallas-cowboys-players-in-2012

Expanded version

Here we can use Bernadeau as an example. Bernadeau’s season can be described in four parts – not just two. Let’s look at Bernie’s season.

Part one – open the season after recovering from off-season surgery – BAD and memorable for everyone just like Costa.

Week…….grade…improvement

Week 1…..-0.8

Week 2…..-2.5…..-2.3

Week 3…..-4.3…..-1.8

Part two – healthy at RG – major improvements and what the scouts expected

Week 4….-1.4……2.9…not yet fully healthy but major improvement

Week 6….-0.2……1.2

Week 7…..1.4……1.6

Week 8…..3.2……1.8

Week 9…..1.3…..-1.8 but still noteworthy good

Week 10…2.0……0.7

Part three - move to center and the return to guard – bad

Week 11…..-3.5…………not comparable as in a new position

Week 12…..-3.3…..0.2

Week 13…..-2.8…………again not comparable in a new position back to guard

Week 14…..-1.2…..1.6…huge gain in performance though still bad

Part four – return to guard – start slow and improve every game to end at a high level again

Week 15…..-0.7…..0.5…below average but still a major gain in performance

Week 16…..-0.3…..0.4…below average but still a major gain in performance

Week 17…...2.0…..2.3…again at a high level

Key points

More analysis

Dividing the season into halves, thirds, or quarters or any other number has the advantage of providing a way to measure change over the season. Yet, the division is rather arbitrary.

Here we have a good way to divide the last season based on who was the center. This obviously affected Bernie, but also the rest of the OL a whole.

Weeks 01-04

We used Cook as the starting center. This is important as Cook was the 3rd string center obtained in a last minute trade. He did not know the playbook or the terminology.

Weeks 05-12

Parnell seemed to do well. Free did even better than Parnell. Yet the middle of the OL was so bad that the D Coordinators feasted on them and the tackle scores should be evaluated accordingly.

Weeks 13-17

We got Cook back. We can note the following for the OL. Note these are the OL stats; there were other sacks, hits etc. that can be attributed to other players. I used the PFF stats for attribution.

………………..01-04…..05-12…..13-17

Sacks………….08.0…….13.0…….05.0

Sacks/game…..02.0…….01.9…….01.0…..down significantly

QB hits………..07.0……16.0……..09.0

Sacks/game…..01.8…….02.3……..01.8…..middle of the season inflates the total

QB hurries…….38.0……66.0……..38.0

Hurries/game….09.5……09.5……..07.6…..down significantly

Penalties………14.0……17.0…….12.0

Penalties/g…….03.5……02.4…….02.4…..down significantly

Conclusion

We should note that the OL, as a unit, was much better by the end of the season, compared to early in the season. This should bode well for our off-season evaluation.

Stats III - PFF overall

Dr-P — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 16:56:35 -0000

As part of the continuing series on statistics, the next few articles will discuss PFF ratings. Their ratings are used by many but tend to be controversial by some.

Profootballfocus.com has several components. It has a free site which includes articles, often based on their own database. In this regard, it is similar to what this board does.

It also has a premium site that one can subscribe to get their database of statistics. Here they include two major additional parts

- A basic rating of every player for every game that is updated each game with cumulative statistics and some additional signature statistics

- Some group statistics, such as their rating of the pass blocking efficiency ratings.

The premium site including their database is controversial. This article will discuss PFF overall and its methodology. They attempt to measure the individual components of what is a team sport. That is a difficult endeavor. I will discuss in later articles how one could make adjustments to their data and the group stats

Background

Many draft sites have popped up that rate each player in many ways. Rabblerouser provided a good evaluation of various sites:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/2/13/2792946/dallas-cowboys-draft-scouting-the-scouts-2012-edition#storyjump

There is not the same level of analysis to evaluate current NFL players. PFF is about the only source, and as such, gets lots of attention. One might not like PFF data, but ANY data is better than nothing. At least folks can discuss elements using the same relative terms and background.

I have said from day one, if you don’t like their data – GET BETTER DATA. I encourage that and outlined a method for BTB/SN to do so

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/31/3937176/be-your-own-occ

As Birddog26 said

While I do not always agree with all of PFF's numbers at times, I do have a huge amount of respect for the work they are doing

If not for PFF, there would be a huge hole in the stats that fans can look at and use. They do a great job considering they do not have a few million in payroll budget that some teams put into research along with state of the art equipment. I will say, that they are probably better than 2/3’s of the NFL teams out there at grading.

Floyd1 grasps the major use for PFF

At least the grades allow the coaches to work on the more deficient problems with individual players. Now I don't know if the coaches grade differently, but these grades give us an idea what the players are doing right and wrong.

I discuss the use of statistics for diagnostic purposes in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/1/3940756/stats-i-the-value-depends-upon-what-you-use-them-for

Methodology

The first and best advice to give on PFF methodology is to read their methodology for grading.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

One should be careful to not compare statistics from two or more different sites. Individual sites can, and do, subtly change their definitions from other sites, but as long as THEY follow their own methodology, one can use their stats and analysis internally.

This article will highlight their main thrusts underlying their grading. They seem to be relatively reliable and valid for the purposes to which they aim.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/2/3944244/stat-ii-data-sample-size-and-measuring-statistical-analysis

Different positions

You cannot compare players at different positions. PFF norms [read curves] the positions differently so a grade at one position is not the same as another. One way to compensate for that effect is to compare each player to how they rank among their peers. Using the percentile basis, we can note that Livings was better at guard than Smith was at tackle compared to their peer groups but not necessarily say that Livings was better than Smith.

Overall grades

They evaluate each player, and each position, for each game. Each position has several sub-components which they sum together to get an overall grade for each game. There are many skill sets for each player and some players have more of one skill than another. For example, for offensive tackles, they rate

#	Pos.	Name	Team	Snaps	Overall	Pass Block	Screen Block	Run Block	Penalty	# of Pen	QB Sk	QB Ht	QB Hu

The overall score is the sum of the pass blocking, screen blocking, run blocking and penalty scores. The individual skills tend to be more accurate as they are more easily defined compared to one big number. The overall number is often used for ranking purposes; however, their individual sub-scores can be individually sorted and ranked. For example OCC uses just the receiving scores for evaluating TE’s instead of the overall score.

Their evaluation of these individual skills per play, though they recognize it is difficult to measure the impact of individuals on a team sport. They are quite open that they say they will miss some and thus give no ratings on some plays if they cannot determine the individual component of a play.

Further, one should note that they will adjust the official stats so that they are easier to use mathematically. As they say

“Statistics in their raw form are considered objective. But in our opinion, with the small number of NFL games played each season, raw stats are very often unintelligent. If a QB throws three interceptions in a game but one came from a dropped pass, another from a WR running a poor route and a third on a Hail Mary at the end of the half, it skews his stats by far too great an amount to be useful. Our “subjective” grading allows us to bring some intelligence to the raw numbers”

Each Game

Players are evaluated with a range of scores. They consider the range from -1 to 1 about average. Zero is the mean score and is considered average. Outside those range is considered noteworthy. Below -1 is considerably below average and above 1 is considerably above average. One should note the distribution of a normal bell curve.

Penalties

One of the more controversial aspects of their scoring involves penalties. They will provide a score for each game based on penalties. The say, with some justification, that a penalty by an individual player is a bad play and should be evaluated as such. They keep track of penalties as a separate sub-skill and then add in that along with the other sub-skills in the overall grade for each game and cumulative scores. Yet, the effect of penalties on the final evaluation seems to be overrated by many who complain.

For example, Smith had an overall score of 3.8 but even if you added back his penalty score of -3.3 that would be a 7.1 overall that would move his ranking from 40 to tied with 32 of 80 rated tackles and change his percentile ranking from 50 percentile to 60 percentile.

The biggest thing was his first two games with scores of -3.1 and -5.2 respectively. The major thing is that he improved significantly from those two games.

Cumulative scores

One gets an evaluation for each game played. Players with more games played have more opportunities to change their grade. Thus their cumulative scores are most valuable for extremes, the best players who played all the games and the worst players who played each game.

The players in the middle may be based on several factors

- stars who missed many games

- good backups who play well behind stars in many games

- backups who get to play in place of injured stars who miss games

- lesser starters who play average on all games

- players who play outstanding in a few games and subject to small sample size bias

One should take their rankings based on cumulative scores into account for the middle players and make adjustments. Further adjustments are discussed in another article.

As part of the continuing series on statistics, the next few articles will discuss PFF ratings. Their ratings are used by many but tend to be controversial by some.

Profootballfocus.com has several components. It has a free site which includes articles, often based on their own database. In this regard, it is similar to what this board does.

It also has a premium site that one can subscribe to get their database of statistics. Here they include two major additional parts

- A basic rating of every player for every game that is updated each game with cumulative statistics and some additional signature statistics

- Some group statistics, such as their rating of the pass blocking efficiency ratings.

Background

Many draft sites have popped up that rate each player in many ways. Rabblerouser provided a good evaluation of various sites:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/2/13/2792946/dallas-cowboys-draft-scouting-the-scouts-2012-edition#storyjump

I have said from day one, if you don’t like their data – GET BETTER DATA. I encourage that and outlined a method for BTB/SN to do so

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/1/31/3937176/be-your-own-occ

As Birddog26 said

While I do not always agree with all of PFF's numbers at times, I do have a huge amount of respect for the work they are doing

Floyd1 grasps the major use for PFF

I discuss the use of statistics for diagnostic purposes in

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/1/3940756/stats-i-the-value-depends-upon-what-you-use-them-for

Methodology

The first and best advice to give on PFF methodology is to read their methodology for grading.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

This article will highlight their main thrusts underlying their grading. They seem to be relatively reliable and valid for the purposes to which they aim.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/2/2/3944244/stat-ii-data-sample-size-and-measuring-statistical-analysis

Different positions

Overall grades

#	Pos.	Name	Team	Snaps	Overall	Pass Block	Screen Block	Run Block	Penalty	# of Pen	QB Sk	QB Ht	QB Hu

Further, one should note that they will adjust the official stats so that they are easier to use mathematically. As they say

Each Game

Penalties

The biggest thing was his first two games with scores of -3.1 and -5.2 respectively. The major thing is that he improved significantly from those two games.

Cumulative scores

The players in the middle may be based on several factors

- stars who missed many games

- good backups who play well behind stars in many games

- backups who get to play in place of injured stars who miss games

- lesser starters who play average on all games

- players who play outstanding in a few games and subject to small sample size bias

One should take their rankings based on cumulative scores into account for the middle players and make adjustments. Further adjustments are discussed in another article.