Falcons brought an expanded group of analytic folks to the combine this year.

[atlbaby]

 

[DonOfThemBirds]

 

Here's the thing about coverage in regards to the Falcons. Should they put more priority on a corner or a more rangy safety?

[atlbaby]

9 minutes ago, DonOfThemBirds said:

 

Here's the thing about coverage in regards to the Falcons. Should they put more priority on a corner or a more rangy safety?

I say safety but both would work

[FalconFanSince1969]

25 minutes ago, DonOfThemBirds said:

 

Here's the thing about coverage in regards to the Falcons. Should they put more priority on a corner or a more rangy safety?

Both. I wouldn't be mad if we took a safety and a cb both in the first 3 rounds.

[takeitdown]

DT, corner, safety with the first 3 picks (in any order) would make a big difference. 

[CMarinoNFL]

Screams cornerback. Like.. shouts cornerback.

[Matt_The Iceman_Ryan]

I’d like to see the analytics on why coverage is perceived as more important? If they are using pass play percentage as a regression variable, it’s skewed.

 

This draft is gonna feel like we are so close to a stud talent on DL or LB but we are gonna settle for a CB that really is a day 2 player

Edited April 11, 2020 by Matt_The Iceman_Ryan

[Fernando C.]

We are going S.... at last they would have a chance to get a FS like Delpit...

[DonOfThemBirds]

41 minutes ago, Fernando C. said:

We are going S.... at last they would have a chance to get a FS like Delpit...

 

 

 

I don't know, it's been said that Winfield Jr. has been impressing coaches and scouts. He's rising and could end up being a 1st round pick.

[Foo Falcons]

Diggs over Henderson Rd1 IMO. Maybe trade back and get him and then trade up for Winfield. Wouldn't be opposed to that, though I'd prefer Kinkaw Rd1 if he's there. Maybe a trade up and then trade back of need be

[Rings]

1 hour ago, Matt_The Iceman_Ryan said:

I’d like to see the analytics on why coverage is perceived as more important? If they are using pass play percentage as a regression variable, it’s skewed.

 

This draft is gonna feel like we are so close to a stud talent on DL or LB but we are gonna settle for a CB that really is a day 2 player

Coverage is looked at as more important because it is more predictable, a more stable metric than pass rush, more consistent game to game, down to down. It is also more valuable as you can scheme a great pass rusher out of the game essentially, with quick drops, screens, play action, etc.  If you get a #1 corner, that allows your previously #1 CB to now guard their #2 WR, and your #2 CB on their #3 WR, you literally make the entire secondary better by one player, which will in turn help your pass rush. 

A dominant pass rusher still struggles to get home in under 2-2.5 seconds.  People want to point to San Fran for adding Nick Bosa, but forget to discuss they had the best coverage unit last year, it was Sherman’s best year since his surgery (even on plays where no pressure was created), and a ton of other guys played extremely well in the same circumstances.  If you can have 4-5 dominate guys on the line it is going to be huge, and that’s more valuable that one stud corner obviously, but that’s not easy to replicate.

You look at the best defenses in the last decade, some had good pass rush, all had great secondaries.  Legion of boom was Sherman, Chancellor and Thomas.  Denver had Von Miller, but they also had Chris Harris, Talib and Roby.

When the Browns took Ward two years ago in the draft, they asked why they took him over Chubb.  Their DC said that Garrett was a half second away from 6-8 more sacks the year prior, Ward helps him get home, Chubb doesn’t.  

Just some thoughts on what is front of my mind, I know they do a lot of work around WAR (wins above replacement) that all point to the same thing.

[Knight of God]

1 hour ago, Fernando C. said:

We are going S.... at last they would have a chance to get a FS like Delpit...

It better be. We better have come to realize 

[Kayoh]

6 hours ago, Rings said:

Coverage is looked at as more important because it is more predictable, a more stable metric than pass rush, more consistent game to game, down to down.

everything about this comment was on point except for this blurb, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Pass rush is more stable than coverage, but coverage is more valuable as far as actually winning games though. So it's harder to maintain good coverage over time, but it's more valuable when it is good than pass rush.

[etherdome]

So, who is the best Safety prospect in this draft?  Which prospect has the best combination of :

Field savvy, Coverage ability, Ball Skills, and Open-Field Tackle Reliability 

Which one of the following scores the best?  McKinney, Delpit, Winfield, or Davis?

[Ovie_Lover]

9 hours ago, DonOfThemBirds said:

 

Here's the thing about coverage in regards to the Falcons. Should they put more priority on a corner or a more rangy safety?

Safety. Good safeties can help CBs look better because they make their job easier.

[32wood84white]

Just hard to see CB in the first round. Or even safety if the player doesn’t have that all pro presence about him which I’m sure a player like that would be drafted well before we had a chance to get him anyways.

For me, i just don’t see how it’s not Chaisson or Kinlaw unless they are gone and we can trade back and pick up another pick. In that scenario sure CB could be our first pick.

But they didn’t pick up Takks 5th year option and imo outside of him having 10 plus sacks or 8 and showing he can stay healthy all year long, he most likely will be elsewhere next season. And if the hope is playoffs and deeper, this is your best shot at a rusher and that guys is Chaisson all day everyday since Young will be long gone.

[jfalconsp]

Cap space is tight again next year and easiest cut candidates are Rico, Brown, Carpenter, Bailey.

Outside of Gurley and Mack our entire offense comes back next season - even Gono is a RFA. The majority of this draft has to be defense not for this season but for next season - only S on the roster is Rico and he could easily be cut, only EDGE is Fowler, CBs are okay if Oliver/Sheffield/Miller can hold it down but far from confident there.

[Rings]

5 hours ago, Kayoh said:

everything about this comment was on point except for this blurb, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Pass rush is more stable than coverage, but coverage is more valuable as far as actually winning games though. So it's harder to maintain good coverage over time, but it's more valuable when it is good than pass rush.

From an analytics stand point it is less scheme dependent on your opponent.  If you are talking about actual yards given up, then that can be true, as that depends more on quality of qb you are facing, but whether or not they did their job it is less dependent on scheme they are facing, as to where pass rush can be manufactured through stunts, bad qbs holding the ball to long, qbs scrambling and making bad choices, double teams can effect it, screens, etc.  If you remove things like screens and play action and look at just true pass sets it’s the most telling for pass rush, oline and CBs as it removes those random trick plays everyone gets torched on.

It really comes down to I guess what metrics you are looking at, if it is something like a player grade like PFF, it will be stable, if it is something like yards or TDs allowed, it’s going to fluctuate more from the QB than the WR they are facing.  But pass rush you will have flukes like Beasley where it looks good in a box score but not from an impactful / doing their job consistently stand point.  If a CB gives up a low % of catches, or have a low target rate, they more often than not did their job.  Even if the throw was high or off, it could be that way because they didn’t allow a window for it to be put in.

I think this can go back and forth, anything defensively is going to fluctuate greatly by the quality level of your opponent, week to week, and similar to offense can be impacted greatly on the scheme you are running.

[vel]

5 hours ago, Kayoh said:

everything about this comment was on point except for this blurb, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Pass rush is more stable than coverage, but coverage is more valuable as far as actually winning games though. So it's harder to maintain good coverage over time, but it's more valuable when it is good than pass rush.

I disagree. You can negate good pass rushers. Like Rings said, you can point to the Niners DL, but that's a massive outlier. Unless we can add three top ten picks on rookie contracts to a DL, you aren't building that kind of DL consistently. So most DLs have one or two main guys and a bunch of role players. Given that, most offenses know who to scheme to negate. Take the Rams playoff game from 2017. Aaron Donald had half a sack and one QB hit. That's it. Good offenses and QBs know how to navigate a pass rush. How many times have we seen Matt get lit up all game just to lead us to late game heroics? That's another example. Pass rush is still heavily valued because of the history of the game. Yes, early on, QBs sucked and offenses were bland and most DL could just take over. That's not the same game being played anymore, yet the thought process hasn't updated. 

I can chip DEs with a TE and RB to make them work through three men before they get to the QB. This benefits the defense more because now they're covering less people, giving them the numbers advantage to double/bracket weapons, making the QB hold the ball longer. The longer the QB holds the ball, the more prone to sacks he is because the pass rush has time to get there. Without time, a pass rush is nothing. Just look at the Falcons this past year. They were allowing the most catches by a mile under 2.5 seconds. You can't scheme good coverage and you can't scheme against good coverage. That means you have to have players who can actually cover and a scheme that maximizes their ability. We had players who could cover much better than they were last year but a scheme that wasn't maximizing them. Like Rings pointed out, and something I agree with wholeheartedly, the best defenses have great secondaries. 

[xSICKxWITHxITx]

10 hours ago, Matt_The Iceman_Ryan said:

I’d like to see the analytics on why coverage is perceived as more important? If they are using pass play percentage as a regression variable, it’s skewed.

 

This draft is gonna feel like we are so close to a stud talent on DL or LB but we are gonna settle for a CB that really is a day 2 player

I dont rember where I saw it, on NFL Live or something. But they showed a CB was more important than a DE. They showed like a S Gilmore was more important that a J Clowney. They showed better/ tighter coverage led to the QB holding onto the ball and allowing the players you do have on the dline get home. 

[Matt_The Iceman_Ryan]

43 minutes ago, xSICKxWITHxITx said:

I dont rember where I saw it, on NFL Live or something. But they showed a CB was more important than a DE. They showed like a S Gilmore was more important that a J Clowney. They showed better/ tighter coverage led to the QB holding onto the ball and allowing the players you do have on the dline get home. 

They must be equating yards of separation with time to throw or something....

That is still highly affected by pre snap scheme alignment, no?

[FalconsIn2012]

6 hours ago, Kayoh said:

everything about this comment was on point except for this blurb, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Pass rush is more stable than coverage, but coverage is more valuable as far as actually winning games though. So it's harder to maintain good coverage over time, but it's more valuable when it is good than pass rush.

The truth is you can manufacture a pass rush.  The same can’t be said for coverage in the secondary.  

[Osiruz]

12 hours ago, CMarinoNFL said:

Screams cornerback. Like.. shouts cornerback.

I was going to say the same thing, sure free safety is important but shutdown dbs are even more important. If you can make the QB hold the ball sacks, tipped balls, ints, and fumbles will happen. We are just fine with either Kazee or Allen at FS, and there is no guarantee whomever we draft will be better year1. 

[xSICKxWITHxITx]

50 minutes ago, Matt_The Iceman_Ryan said:

They must be equating yards of separation with time to throw or something....

That is still highly affected by pre snap scheme alignment, no?

Man its been a while since I seen this, but bascially just said coverage helped the rusher more than the other way around. They said a good CB over a good DE was always the way to go. Im sure there is a lot more that goes into it. Ill see if I can find the show.

[xSICKxWITHxITx]

I cant find the show I watched, but found these so far.

 

https://www.pff.com/news/pro-pff-data-study-coverage-vs-pass-rush