Anyone who says his contract is justified is calling him elite. He is a good LB but overpaid, and Im sorry I just would like to see more out of a guy who got PAID than what he has given us.
How so? Stringer is trying to sell Dansby being better than Ray Lewis?? To me its a no brainer that Lewis is more valuable to a team than Dansby would be. Karlos as you said is solid in alot of areas...but to me that doesnt justify his pay or make him a top 5 ILB.
Ray Lewis in coverage last year: 23/33, 69.7%, 273 Yards, 131 YAC, 0 TDs, 1 INT, 7 PDs, 82.0 QB Rating
I get that FIn-o, I thought I was clear on what I was saying in the first post..It's a projection by me, if you think it's me just saying things to be optimistic, I'm willing to bet it isn't... There are times in players careers where they take the next step you know,your argument is only based on what you've seen thus far without any type of forecast as to what you may see...I'm saying the man is capable physically, and mentally, to prove you wrong..
Obviously I take no issue with your optimism for Dansby in 2012...infact i welcome it. But some people think he is already at the level we are hoping he achieves. Thats who im debating with, not your stance that he will improve.
Actually there was a little bit of a snafu in my rankings. Ray Lewis' 2011 didn't figure into it. I fixed it and he supplants Dansby as #3 of the 37 linebackers. Willis, Cushing and Lewis are all stacked pretty tight at 43, 45 and 46, then Dansby at 51. Like I said though, Dansby clearly upper echelon. Whether you call it elite or not, I don't know. I think because he's upper echelon in ALL phases and so good all-around, so well-rounded, that makes him elite. A lot of those other linebackers have exploitable holes in their games.
That int against grossman in the link is a really nice example of what this player can do that others cannot, he read it like a safety, had the quickness to react, the athleticism to backpedal, and the body length and wingspan to make the catch. He's a strait up 3 down linebacker, and I think you have to judge him according to those that do the same, and put some sort of perspective on the overall package he brings to the table. I mean the guy has a nice package...what..
Trust me I would rather Dansby be a top 5 ILB....but I just cant honestly tell myself that without feeling like Im crazy. Stats or no Stats (because there is a solid arguement either way) I see atleast 7-8 ILB's I would personally MUCH rather have than Karlos. So naturally I think being the 2nd highest paid MLB is ridiculous. Just off the top of my head even...Lewis, Willis, Urlacher, Laurinaitis, Timmons, Lee, Posluszny, D. Johnson...are all guys I think are better players, Im sure there are valid arguments for guys I just named being worse and Im sure a valif argument for guys I DIDNT name being better. Point is we deserve MORE out of Dansby for what he's making....I welcome him to play better in 2012.
I don't see how you can have any sort of consistent measure to justify some of those names besides "I say so"
I re-did the study because I had some concerns about the methodology and the PFF website's miscalculations which led to non-inclusion of certain guys, etc. Did a bit more thorough job of it this time. This time the study included a total of 75 linebackers. One thing I wanted to definitely do was make a cut-off where if you didn't have enough snaps in the season then that season wouldn't qualify. The reason for this is because I don't want part-time players muddying up the water in terms of stop percentages and pass coverage statistics, etc. I figured 75% participation is the highest cutoff on PFF, and there are about 1000 defensive snaps a season, so I set the cutoff at 750 snaps. I also got a little, not much but a little, more creative with the formulas. I wanted to reflect penalties but it didn't seem important enough to get its own ranking. I figure a missed tackle is in a lot of ways like a penalty. You miss a tackle and the ball advances. You get a penalty, the ball advances. So I did penalties and missed tackles together as a ratio to solo tackles. I also gave PFF's "Overall" subjective rating its place. I did TDs allowed in coverage minus INTs, divided by snaps. I did YPA. I didn't do anything else with the coverage data because I didn't want the sum to be over-weighted toward coverage. All in all I think it looks about right to me. Brian Cushing and Patrick Willis come out on top, followed by Lawrence Timmons, NaVorro Bowman and then Karlos Dansby. It suggests Dansby is a top 5 type linebacker which again is the argument that I would make based on how well-rounded he is. Across the 6 measures, he's the 5th most consistent (standard deviation), and the other 4 guys are just consistently bad (Chad Greenway, Dhani Jones, Julian Peterson and Stephen Cooper). Karlos Dansby is unusually well-rounded. The guys that were the next most well-rounded while also being good were James Farrior, Ray Lewis, Derrick Johnson and Patrick Willis.
Hmm, nice observation. Although I thought it was clearly stated I said this is MY opinion when naming the players. And NOBODY has a "consistent measure" to justify he is worth his contract. That's what Iam debating...that he is NOT elite and not worthy of his $$
Can you please explain how you come up with your LB rankings? Dansby is everywhere on the field and plays every down for us. Hes the backbone of our defense! Use your eyes, not Madden rankings.
And ofcourse there is always one.. I have likely watched more football than you X20, so please save the "hero posts"
By those statistics its suggested he is better than Patrick Willis...sorry that I dont agree with that. Dansby is a solid ILB not an elite LB. There is no category that proves ELITE other than opinion, and Im guessing I have the majority of football fans/people on my side of the spectrum that do not believe Dansby is worthy of being paid like the 2nd best MLB in football. To those who feel Dansby is snubbed from pro bowls and top 100 lists and Im HATING on my own teams player??? Sorry you feel that way.
Coverage wise he can play man vs most RBs & TEs w/o a problem. He's good in the hook/curl/flat zones, he can cover down the seam in a Tampa 2 look. How many ILBs can do all of that? He can play the run well. He gets his guys aligned correctly pre-snap and diagnoses plays effectively. He has the quickness & recognition to shoot gaps and make tackles for loss, but also the size and physicality to fill holes/spill plays towards his help defenders. He can take on/shed blockers and still make plays on the ball carrier & he has the speed to chase plays down from the back side or recover if he's caught out of position. How many ILBs can do all of that? He can play inside or outside, weak side or strong side, he even played FS in passing situations for the Cardinals. He's not dominant in any specific area but he can do just about anything that you'd ever want a LB to do, and he can do it well. I don't know where that puts him in a top-down ranking with other NFL backers, to each his own I suppose. But I think you'd be hard pressed to name more than five ILBs that are clearly a notch above him.
Ray Lewis is not just one of the best LBs, he's one of the best players period, to ever play. I won't argue there. Zach Thomas? Very good player, not nearly as versatile as Dansby. Zach couldn't cover TE's down the seam or stone pulling guards in the hole. ZT played in defenses that were specifically designed to free him up to make plays, and he excelled in that role on a level that Dansby never has. OTOH, ZT could never have excelled in a 3-4 and he was typically neutralized anytime an OL was able to get blockers on to him. It's all subjective and scheme dependent but intangibles aside I'd rather have Dansby. IMO Bart Scott does nothing better than Dansby, save trash talk. Their a wash in the run game but vs the pass I don't think there is any comparison. Brian Cushing plays OLB and he has the same role as a Cam Wake or Clay Matthews, disrupt the passing game. I'm not sure I could even compare the two. Pat Willis is the new flavor and it's well deserved. But IMO there's not a huge gap there, either. I hope that having Solia and Starks inside will allow Dansby more freedom to roam and make plays, but a lot of that depends on what the DC has to say. Hopefully we'll have a chance to revisit the issue in a few months, after we've all had a chance to see our guys on the field.
There's no doubt in my mind that this 4-3 suits Dansby and Burnett better. I think Misi is the one who was better off in a 3-4. I know that sounds weird because he's not exactly huge for a Strongside 3-4 backer... And size size he looks to be more 4-3 but the problem is, he is more motor and mess than fluidity and speed. Mixing it up on the line and aggressively moving forward and side to side a bit is more his style than back pedaling, covering bigger chunks of green, or even flowing widely out to the sideline. Expect some toss plays to his side, and if he cheats it, then they'll attack the greenery inside him and behind him with short routes. Question: are we more likely to play man or zone predominately in the pass D? Any ideas?
I'd still take Zach over Dansby, just because Zach's amazing ability to diagnose plays and communicate that to other defenders made the whole defense much much better. Dansby may be good at that, but not as good as Zach. When 7 or all 11 guys expect a play... Man that offense is in trouble.
Well none of your arguments make sense, so we might as well argue who's watched more football. When you make an argument it seems as if you're looking up Madden rankings. You just toss out the same random LBer names and conclude "he's not top 10". Based on what? Do you study all these top players and compare them to Dansby? Or do you go by Sports Center highlights? Strictly stats? Madden rankings? Without Dansby and what he brings this defense is not where it is. And WtF is a "hero" post?
Now just take what Gm said, and elevate the play this year... It's about him playing in the middle,with that skillset, it's about who's playing in front of him, it's about taking his training and nutrition seriously for the first time, it's about improving his quickness.. That boy is gonna ball this year.
Don't diss the Madden. Truth is, it was how I initially figured out who was good and why... Year back. Lol. I'd look through rankings and attributes, then watch those teams and guys play to see why they had those ratings. Over time I developed an eye for when I agreed, or didn't. Really, though, my understanding of football didn't develop until I read Dr Z's book and Pat Kirwan's book. Then Alen's ridiculously complex but informative posts. con, Boom and CK helped a lot too. But when in doubt, go with the Madden rating. lol
It's just PFF's "Overall" rating for a player. When you see "PFF rates so-and-so a +16.9 which makes him the 5th best ILB in the NFL this year" that's what it is referring to. I normally caution AGAINST over-use of that as a metric...it deserves mention because PFF scours every play in order to come up with that grade, but it's not deserving of bible worship. I put it as 1 out of equal weighted 6 measures. I felt that was appropriate.
