|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 25, 2020 10:46:37 GMT -5
They actually completed 81.5% of the passes against Blake in 2018....44 of 54 targets. I actually agree with you, just watching him on some video (believe his 4 sacks and 15 pressures helped that grade that year)...he's brutal in coverage. Not athletic at all...so many of his tackles are of the clean up type where he is washed well past the LOS, not able to disengage from a block. I can go far more into detail with the stats, but I've seen enough to know he's not athletic and not very good...my eyes are my stats with him. Oh well, the ugly kids is ours now...it is, what it is.... dairylandexpress.com/2019/11/07/green-bay-packers-blake-martinez-era-end/Gotta go local to see what the beat writers and analysts covering the player they see every day have a consensus on, before we blindly say "love it"...and they simply suggest Blake is what we all thought he would be...a small, undersized non athletic linebacker who can't cover, can't shed blocks and only gets tackles well past the LOS. I hate to quote a quote within a quote that so long but a lot of this seems really subjective. Like "alot of his tackles took place down field" I mean what do you want him to do? NOT chase a guy that got past the line of scrimmage? Obviously not all of his tackles are going to be for a loss. All advanced statistics in football are subjective assuming that we define advanced statistics as the mark of the end of counting what actually occurred and the beginning of what might have occurred. It's why what works in baseball doesn't work in football no matter how much artifice is constructed around it. Advanced stats in baseball can be predictive, advanced stats in football are not.
|
|
|
Post by infinite420 on Mar 25, 2020 12:26:11 GMT -5
One thing I like about Martinez is the guy is a leader, a real one, not just a "good locker room guy" but a dude who was micd up and orchestrating things on field, in game. I think we have a head coach and staff that will be much better leaders than the last couple regimes, but we still are sorely missing those kinds of presences on the actual field. Hes no "captain of the D" type, like an Antonio Pierce
|
|
|
Post by infinite420 on Mar 25, 2020 12:34:18 GMT -5
They actually completed 81.5% of the passes against Blake in 2018....44 of 54 targets. I actually agree with you, just watching him on some video (believe his 4 sacks and 15 pressures helped that grade that year)...he's brutal in coverage. Not athletic at all...so many of his tackles are of the clean up type where he is washed well past the LOS, not able to disengage from a block. I can go far more into detail with the stats, but I've seen enough to know he's not athletic and not very good...my eyes are my stats with him. Oh well, the ugly kids is ours now...it is, what it is.... dairylandexpress.com/2019/11/07/green-bay-packers-blake-martinez-era-end/Gotta go local to see what the beat writers and analysts covering the player they see every day have a consensus on, before we blindly say "love it"...and they simply suggest Blake is what we all thought he would be...a small, undersized non athletic linebacker who can't cover, can't shed blocks and only gets tackles well past the LOS. I hate to quote a quote within a quote that so long but a lot of this seems really subjective. Like "alot of his tackles took place down field" I mean what do you want him to do? NOT chase a guy that got past the line of scrimmage? Obviously not all of his tackles are going to be for a loss. I dont think anyone has a problem w the tackle numbers, its the context of the numbers that matters. If he were an agressive run stopper that takes good angles and is strong at the POA, his numbers would actually be incredible. But he far more passive, than aggresive, and a guy like him doesnt have the instincts you want in a ILB/MLB to overcome his physical limitations. Hes a total stat padder, its going to look similar to games where Ogletree would have 12 tackles and you ask yourself was he even playing? No impact tackles, very few, if any tackles for loss and bad coverage, but he'll have 12 tackles, so the stat-tards will be on board.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 16:25:27 GMT -5
Still waiting. Is Martinez "great" or "brutal" at pass coverage because you said both. Just answer that. You can't. Because you know everything you're posting is complete trash, which is why you posted that he is both great and brutal in the same damn thread.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 16:27:28 GMT -5
................what are the odds in Vegas? I actually can answer that. Vegas only cares where the money goes when setting odds...in this case, they would surely know that 99.98% of the betting public would pick "C" So it would be something like 1000 to 1 for A and B, and 1 to 1000 for C I would obviously place a large bet on myself and have Aris take the fall like a 1980s WWF wrestler so we can split the money at those odds. I also have a habit of picturing posters like their avatar so I think Aris might have a head like a cinder block and could probably take a hit from a pool cue like a champ.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 16:29:11 GMT -5
Like you pointed out though, people can have differing opinions. ..................all his post's to the contrary. LMAO, no you can disagree with him...just as long as you agree with him. He actually agreed with me in this thread (Martinez isn't good in pass coverage) until he realized he agreed with me and then changed his opinion (Martinez is great in pass coverage). I think he just likes to argue, which is fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 17:07:58 GMT -5
Still waiting. Is Martinez "great" ..... Are you going to defend your stats or just spin away into face saving...you used stats, said Martinez is not a great cover guy because of the stats, after I said in 2018 he was graded as such by PFF...and then said the other two linebackers were great in coverage, and I posted the same identical PFF stats you used for Martinez as a poor cover guy...remember? See right above...the in quotes, what you said...you can do your Michael Moore and edit away all the bad stuff you want, but it's right up there Mike. Oh, then you went on the, tape is what does it for you spin.... as you failed to again defend the stats you suggested NOBODY would think Blake is a great coverage guy . ... that silly percentage of completions stat...and QB rating....while the other guys, Littleton and Schobert and now are trying to save more face...an Irish trait we all have. I always admit I am wrong...try it now. You are incredibly WRONG...remember, chocolate land is a few hops up ahead if things get too complicated, or if Dave Gettleman trades yet another draft pick for Williams to super squeeze for even more juice on a potential "free" agent.... BTW, this was Walter Football's ranking of Blake Martinez...and yeah, why we should use stats and film for ourselves ....and never "sites" walterfootball.com/freeagents2020ILB.php
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 17:11:38 GMT -5
..................all his post's to the contrary. LMAO, no you can disagree with him...just as long as you agree with him. He actually agreed with me in this thread (Martinez isn't good in pass coverage) until he realized he agreed with me and then changed his opinion (Martinez is great in pass coverage). I think he just likes to argue, which is fine. Big Red and Irish Mike?...I'm sensing some sort of freckled pint alliance
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 17:14:29 GMT -5
Are you going to defend your stats or just spin away into face saving...you used stats, Sorry, you are wrong. Go to reply #31 on page 2. You jumped all over my post trying to prove my stance of Martinez is not good in coverage wrong by citing PFF stats. I only brought stats in AFTER that to show you how foolish those PFF stats were. I did not try to use stats to prove my point at all.
Now, please state your stance. Is Martinez A) Great in coverage, B) Brutal in coverage or C) I don't want to answer out of fear of possibly accidentally agreeing with IrishMike?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 17:28:56 GMT -5
Are you going to defend your stats or just spin away into face saving...you used stats, Sorry, you are wrong. Go to reply #31 on page 2. You jumped all over my post trying to prove my stance of Martinez is not good in coverage wrong by citing PFF stats. I only brought stats in AFTER that to show you how foolish those PFF stats were. I did not try to use stats to prove my point at all.
You used the stats, to prove that Blake Martinez was not good in coverage. I said PFF said he was, in 2018. You used the following stats...Pass attempts, passes completed, % and QB rating. You then applauded his tackles. We debated tackles as all off ball ILB's get more tackles...with completion and higher QB ratings...cause that's their nature. I added the other variables as to HOW they get the ratings at PFF...you went PFF berserk, and started hopping around the place. Then... you said Littleton and Schobert were great coverage linebackers....and I then used the same stats you used, passes at, completions made, %...and the QB rating, and said, all about the same ...there goes your stats proving Blake was a poor cover guy, and thus proving that those variables made the difference in how PFF grades. All three of the linebackers we are discussing all get lots of tackles, all have poor % of passes to and completed, and all thus give up higher QB rating...all your arguments for Blake being bad in coverage....yet, that's in the nature of the off ball linebacker go into zone position. Who's opinion you using out there in google land? Look at them Mike, the millions of analyzed videos...and when doing stats, use them correctly and fairly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 17:41:00 GMT -5
PFF is the only one that says he gave up 2, every where else I have looked says 1; but does that make a difference to either of us? Not likely, 1 or 2 won't sway anyone.
He was #8 in pass breakups, #6 (tied) in TDs allowed, #11 in yards per reception and #10 in passer rating allowed. He just doesn't seem average to me. We also have to account for the fact he was up against Mike Evans (twice), Julio Jones (twice) and Michael Thomas (twice). That is 6 matches against 3 of the best WRs in the league. He also played the Rams (#4 passing attack), Arizona covering Fitzgerald, Houston covering Hopkins and Seattle facing Russell Wilson. Yes he gave up a lot of yards last year but facing this killer schedule, shadowing the #1 WR he still only gave up 1 TD and got 3 INTs.
As for you PFF stats about Martinez, no one cares about PFF and this is why. They rated him "great" in pass coverage and you are good with that. The QB rating when targeting him in 2018 was 118.1. They completed 73% of their passes against him lmao. Yeah great coverage there. Can you find a single person on this site to agree with you that was great coverage?
Like you pointed out though, people can have differing opinions. We shall see next year how these fella's do.
Let's go back into PFF hell now Mike...that place you use for Littleton but laugh at Blake Would you care to see how all your linebacker buddies you liked did in those stats? Littleton? 60 of 79 and 79.7%. 104.7 QB rating Mike says... Schobert 48 of 64 and 75%. 101.4 QB rating Here you go Mike...what is the difference between all these off ball linebackers and why do they all allow so many completions, and high QB ratings...while you laughed at a single one, in a 2018 year of Blake where he was rated high in coverage...but the two you claim are great in pass coverage, as instructed by from those very sites using the PFF system, have literally the same stats you laughed out as horrible...come on guy...tell me the reason why they are considered better in coverage then 2018 Blake?...and even easier, Blake in general I'll wait....this might take some time The QB rating when targeting him in 2018 was 118.1. They completed 73% of their passes against him lmao. Yeah great coverage there. Can you find a single person on this site to agree with you that was great coverage? - Mike
I love debating you Mike - all this free time I now have...two Irish gypsy kings drinking pints and never wrong.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 18:37:11 GMT -5
Blah blah blah. You brought stats into the discussion to show how great Martinez is in coverage. I provided stats simply to show how misleading one set of stats can be. Again because YOU brought stats into the discussion.
Still you can not answer the simple question. Do you think Martinez is great or poor in coverage?
|
|
|
Post by thetruth on Mar 25, 2020 18:39:24 GMT -5
Corey Littleton is way better football player than Blake Martinez and its not even close. I would bet a lot of money that you’ve never seen either play I would bet that as well. But he's really not wrong, IMO. If you value coverage
|
|
|
Post by Roswell on Mar 25, 2020 18:58:15 GMT -5
The Giants needed a guy who is familiar with the scheme they’re running so he can get everybody lined up. One of the biggest issues last year on D was communication.
Young players didn’t play well in part because they didn’t understand the scheme.
By signing Martinez, the Giants hope to eliminate that.
And as far as you “why didn’t we sign Littleton?” guys, maybe he didn’t want to come to the Giants, he’s from the West Coast. Not everybody wants to play for every team.
You can’t get everybody.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 25, 2020 19:06:23 GMT -5
The Giants needed a guy who is familiar with the scheme they’re running so he can get everybody lined up. One of the biggest issues last year on D was communication. Young players didn’t play well in part because they didn’t understand the scheme. By signing Martinez, the Giants hope to eliminate that. And as far as you “why didn’t we sign Littleton?” guys, maybe he didn’t want to come to the Giants, he’s from the West Coast. Not everybody wants to play for every team. You can’t get everybody. Yeah I pointed out that west coast thing about Littleton in the other thread. Lots of reasons he could have chose to stay over there. Still wish we would have landed him or Schobert but I'm good with Martinez. The LBs not covering was their biggest issue last year, LBs not being able to tackle was their second biggest issue and I think Martinez will be a big help in that area.
Good point about him and the scheme but let's not forget how many scheme guys we had on roster last year too, didn't help. I think Bettcher ran a very complex system. From my amateur analysis of Graham I don't think that will be as big an issue. Looks like he plays a lot of press man coverage which is much simpler than "when they are on the 20 yard line on the right hashmark and it's 2nd and 6 and wind is coming from the north east at less than 5 mph and it's an afternoon game vs a team from the south east....oh crap Evans just scored again".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 20:28:14 GMT -5
The QB rating when targeting him in 2018 was 118.1. They completed 73% of their passes against him lmao. Yeah great coverage there. Can you find a single person on this site to agree with you that was great coverage? - Mike on Blake Martinez Littleton (2019) 60 of 79 and 79.7%. 104.7 QB rating Schobert (2019) 48 of 64 and 75%. 101.4 QB rating
|
|
|
Post by Delicreep on Mar 25, 2020 20:38:39 GMT -5
The QB rating when targeting him in 2018 was 118.1. They completed 73% of their passes against him lmao. Yeah great coverage there. Can you find a single person on this site to agree with you that was great coverage? - Mike on Blake Martinez Littleton (2019) 60 of 79 and 79.7%. 104.7 QB rating Schobert (2019) 48 of 64 and 75%. 101.4 QB rating Seriously...I have the pool cues and will pay for the ring
|
|
|
Post by giants38 on Mar 25, 2020 22:02:44 GMT -5
Martinez. Is there such a stat? How many tackles were made at or behind LOS and how many five yards downfield.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2020 6:59:11 GMT -5
Martinez. Is there such a stat? How many tackles were made at or behind LOS and how many five yards downfield. Well, if you allow the STOPS stat from PFF to advance that tackles stat, they do a fairly good job www.pff.com/news/pro-defensive-stops-a-more-comprehensive-metric-than-tacklesIt continues, but they get it right with what the film says, and who the best at it are...so the science IS there. Blake? He had 51 stops last year, excellent, and 7th of all linebackers. Zack Cunningham led with 65 Littleton had 45
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Mar 26, 2020 7:16:00 GMT -5
Bottom line he is a player who is on the field a lot (missed only 3 games I think), makes a ton of tackles ( impact imshmact...lol), he is on fresh team with fresh coaches.
The guy is going to be a leader in the middle of the defense.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Mar 26, 2020 8:18:35 GMT -5
Seriously...I have the pool cues and will pay for the ring Don't bother. I added him to my ignore list so we don't drag down anymore threads. Won't be a problem anymore. emoji
|
|
|
Post by giants8493 on Mar 26, 2020 8:34:07 GMT -5
I hate to quote a quote within a quote that so long but a lot of this seems really subjective. Like "alot of his tackles took place down field" I mean what do you want him to do? NOT chase a guy that got past the line of scrimmage? Obviously not all of his tackles are going to be for a loss. I dont think anyone has a problem w the tackle numbers, its the context of the numbers that matters. If he were an agressive run stopper that takes good angles and is strong at the POA, his numbers would actually be incredible. But he far more passive, than aggresive, and a guy like him doesnt have the instincts you want in a ILB/MLB to overcome his physical limitations. Hes a total stat padder, its going to look similar to games where Ogletree would have 12 tackles and you ask yourself was he even playing? No impact tackles, very few, if any tackles for loss and bad coverage, but he'll have 12 tackles, so the stat-tards will be on board. it is just really hard to fathom how you can lead the NFL in tackles yet be critical how many tackles he has.
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Mar 26, 2020 8:41:52 GMT -5
I dont think anyone has a problem w the tackle numbers, its the context of the numbers that matters. If he were an agressive run stopper that takes good angles and is strong at the POA, his numbers would actually be incredible. But he far more passive, than aggresive, and a guy like him doesnt have the instincts you want in a ILB/MLB to overcome his physical limitations. Hes a total stat padder, its going to look similar to games where Ogletree would have 12 tackles and you ask yourself was he even playing? No impact tackles, very few, if any tackles for loss and bad coverage, but he'll have 12 tackles, so the stat-tards will be on board. it is just really hard to fathom how you can lead the NFL in tackles yet be critical how many tackles he has. they question the "impact" or "game changing" nature of his tackles. You see they know every tackle and how it impacts the game from start to finish. He may have made, for example, 10 tackles in a game but none really made a difference.
I hear Martinez actually makes a point of padding his stats. He makes all the easy tackles because that's the type of player he is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2020 9:08:28 GMT -5
Bottom line he is a player who is on the field a lot (missed only 3 games I think), makes a ton of tackles ( impact imshmact...lol), he is on fresh team with fresh coaches. The guy is going to be a leader in the middle of the defense. I'm hoping for this new coaching/scheme help, and his leadership as well...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2020 9:19:15 GMT -5
Seriously...I have the pool cues and will pay for the ring Don't bother. I added him to my ignore list so we don't drag down anymore threads. Won't be a problem anymore. I see you peeking Mike. Stats...they are a funny thing...great when they help your many, many arguments, but can also prove all those arguments wrong...sorry Mike, but at least you can now cherry pick the stats you want in your many other debates...I'm still watching though, thru PFF binoculars
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 26, 2020 9:38:12 GMT -5
it is just really hard to fathom how you can lead the NFL in tackles yet be critical how many tackles he has. they question the "impact" or "game changing" nature of his tackles. You see they know every tackle and how it impacts the game from start to finish. He may have made, for example, 10 tackles in a game but none really made a difference.
I hear Martinez actually makes a point of padding his stats. He makes all the easy tackles because that's the type of player he is.
It’s science.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2020 9:42:35 GMT -5
I dont think anyone has a problem w the tackle numbers, its the context of the numbers that matters. If he were an agressive run stopper that takes good angles and is strong at the POA, his numbers would actually be incredible. But he far more passive, than aggresive, and a guy like him doesnt have the instincts you want in a ILB/MLB to overcome his physical limitations. Hes a total stat padder, its going to look similar to games where Ogletree would have 12 tackles and you ask yourself was he even playing? No impact tackles, very few, if any tackles for loss and bad coverage, but he'll have 12 tackles, so the stat-tards will be on board. it is just really hard to fathom how you can lead the NFL in tackles yet be critical how many tackles he has. Well PFF suggests he makes a lot of STOPS...or meaningful tackles. Most every Packer fan and writer/analyst suggests he his overrated in tackles by watching him
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Mar 26, 2020 9:44:49 GMT -5
they question the "impact" or "game changing" nature of his tackles. You see they know every tackle and how it impacts the game from start to finish. He may have made, for example, 10 tackles in a game but none really made a difference.
I hear Martinez actually makes a point of padding his stats. He makes all the easy tackles because that's the type of player he is.
It’s science. some are "blinded by science"... Just ask Tom Dolby
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2020 10:08:22 GMT -5
One thing I like about Martinez is the guy is a leader, a real one, not just a "good locker room guy" but a dude who was micd up and orchestrating things on field, in game. I think we have a head coach and staff that will be much better leaders than the last couple regimes, but we still are sorely missing those kinds of presences on the actual field. Hes no "captain of the D" type, like an Antonio Pierce not saying he's a pierce level guy but hes not drifting about the field with no clue. the guy is allegedly pretty sharp and helps direct the D is all im saying
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Mar 26, 2020 10:28:49 GMT -5
some are "blinded by science"... Just ask Tom Dolby science is largely subjective, isn't it? I may have missed that class.
|
|