Before & After getting/losing a marquee CB

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

The hypothesis is that true impact players at the cornerback position are much harder to find than people realize, and the difference most corners make for a defense is way overrated around here.

 

I started by listing the names of all highly-thought-of corners I could who have switched teams somewhat recently (the list came off the top of my head, I'm sure I forgot at least a couple obvious ones). Then I simply looked at their old teams' pass defense ranking (total yardage) the last year they had him and then after they lost him, and his new team's ranking before and after they acquired him.

 

You'll find no claims this is the be-all, end-all of player evaluation. Rather, this study merely skims the surface. But still, I was surprised by some of the numbers, and believe them worthy of discussion.

 

Players are randomly listed in the order I thought of them.

 

Champ Bailey

2003: Denver was 5th before getting Bailey, Washington was 14th in their final season with Bailey.

2004: Denver is 6th when they get Bailey, Washington improves to 7th when they lose him.

 

CONCLUSION: The first player considered is one of the most interesting. The player who is the consensus #1 shutdown corner leaguewide changing addresses results in an improvement for the team that loses him, and a slight drop for the team that gets him. Is it not supposed to be the other way around?

 

Charles Woodson

2004: Raiders are 30th in Woodson's final healthy season with the team.

2005: Woodson plays in only 6 games in his final season as a Raider, and they rank 18th. Green Bay has the #1 rated pass defense before getting him.

2006: Without Woodson, the Raiders are now #1. Green Bay falls from 1 to 17.

 

CONCLUSION: Completely backwards from what a strong CB advocate might expect. The more Woodson plays, the worse off the Raiders are, to the point that they're #30 when he's healthy and #1 when he's gone! Green Bay's #1 pass defense falls to #17 with his so-called "addition."

 

Nate Clements

2006: Our Bills are 7th in Nate's final season here. San Fran is 26th before signing him.

2007: Buffalo freefalls to 29th with the loss of Clements. '9ers inch up to 22nd.

 

CONCLUSION: We certainly felt the loss of Clements in the numbers, there's no denying that. Still, this tip-of-the-iceberg study finds no evidence that this brand name cornerback made the type of impact on his new team that they thought they were paying for. Huge loss for his old team, little gain for his new team...may not have been worth what it took for the '9ers to get him. But it sure would be great to see him in a Bills uni again.

 

Dre' Bly

2006: Denver is 21st before getting Bly. Detroit is 25th in his final season with the team.

2007: Denver goes up to 7 with Bly. Detroit drops to 31 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: The corners are now on base and batting .250. Huge difference for Denver when they got him, and Detroit landed in one of the few spots worse than their last ranking with him. The numbers suggest he's worth the investment.

 

Antoine Winfield

2003: Bills are #2 in his final year with (unarguably) the greatest sports franchise on the planet. Vikings are #26 before the big signing.

2004: Bills stay strong at #3 after the loss. Vikings drop to #29.

 

CONCLUSION: Another CB whose team's ranking goes down in his first season. Still, the small changes can likely be chalked up to standard deviation.

 

Ty Law

2003: In his final healthy season with the Patriots, the club has the #1 pass defense.*

2004: Law plays just 7 games, and New England is #17*. Before getting Law, the Jets are #14.

2005: After losing Law, NE plummets to #30*. After getting Law, the Jets shoot up to #2. Before getting Law, the Chiefs are #31.

2006: With Law, the Chiefs rise to #18. With his loss, the Jets are back down at #14.

 

CONCLUSION: Ty Law dominates, no questions asked. The Pats* were better off the more he played, to the point that they were #1* when he was fully healthy and #30* after he was gone. The Jets were average to start, then #2 when they got him, then average when he left. Then he took KC from 30 to 14. Chalk another one up for the CBs!

 

Samari Rolle

2004: Baltimore is #10 before getting Rolle. Rolle plays in 11 games for Tennessee, who are #26.

2005: Baltimore inches up to #8 with Rolle. Tennessee improves to #17 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Small improvement on his new team. Another corner whose old team has a higher ranking without him than they did in his last season there. Not much impact to be found from these numbers.

 

Shawn Springs

2003: Washington is #14 before getting Springs. Seattle is #24 in his final season with the team.

2004: Washington goes up to #7 with Springs. Seattle is #23 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Solid improvement for the 'Skins with his acquisition. No change for Seattle with his loss. May have been a good pickup for Washington.

 

* = Team is known to have cheated. Ranking may not have been obtained legitimately.

 

 

-Three out of the 9 (or 33.3%) teams gaining a cornerback (Ty Law is counted twice) actually had a worse pass defense ranking than they had before getting their corner. Should that number really be as high as one-third?

 

-That same mark (33.3%) represents CBs who were were able to raise their new team's ranking 10 or more spots higher than it was the previous year. If corners have the direct impact on pass D we've been lead to believe, why can't we expect that mark to be much higher?

 

-44.4% (4-of-9) teams losing a corner actually improved their pass defense.

 

Thoughts?

[BuckeyeBill]

Very interesting study and read. I just wish I had a good comment to go along with it.

[K-9]

The first thing I look at when evaluating a team's passing yards allowed is their rushing yards allowed, particularly average yards per attempt.

 

The second thing I look at is the number of pass attempts against. Was the team often ahead in games and other teams were forced to throw?

 

From a raw numbers point of view I enjoyed your analysis. From a determative point of view, those numbers deserve a second look.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[colin]

giants had a barely ok pass rush, added a solid rook corner and madison got healthy

result: best pass rush in the nfl and a super bowl win

 

bills had a top 8 pass rush and lose clements

result: pass rush falls off, aaron and kelsey combine for as pathetic a number of sacks and strahan and uminura did the last year.

 

conclusion: all players count. corners can play well out the gate but are expensive in FA. corners are important to pass D.

 

anyone who says (as i have read from some people on this board) that corners don't help pass D are simply ignorant, insane, on drugs, or all three.

[Mickey]

The hypothesis is that true impact players at the cornerback position are much harder to find than people realize, and the difference most corners make for a defense is way overrated around here.

 

I started by listing the names of all highly-thought-of corners I could who have switched teams somewhat recently (the list came off the top of my head, I'm sure I forgot at least a couple obvious ones). Then I simply looked at their old teams' pass defense ranking (total yardage) the last year they had him and then after they lost him, and his new team's ranking before and after they acquired him.

 

You'll find no claims this is the be-all, end-all of player evaluation. Rather, this study merely skims the surface. But still, I was surprised by some of the numbers, and believe them worthy of discussion.

 

Players are randomly listed in the order I thought of them.

 

Champ Bailey

2003: Denver was 5th before getting Bailey, Washington was 14th in their final season with Bailey.

2004: Denver is 6th when they get Bailey, Washington improves to 7th when they lose him.

 

CONCLUSION: The first player considered is one of the most interesting. The player who is the consensus #1 shutdown corner leaguewide changing addresses results in an improvement for the team that loses him, and a slight drop for the team that gets him. Is it not supposed to be the other way around?

 

Charles Woodson

2004: Raiders are 30th in Woodson's final healthy season with the team.

2005: Woodson plays in only 6 games in his final season as a Raider, and they rank 18th. Green Bay has the #1 rated pass defense before getting him.

2006: Without Woodson, the Raiders are now #1. Green Bay falls from 1 to 17.

 

CONCLUSION: Completely backwards from what a strong CB advocate might expect. The more Woodson plays, the worse off the Raiders are, to the point that they're #30 when he's healthy and #1 when he's gone! Green Bay's #1 pass defense falls to #17 with his so-called "addition."

 

Nate Clements

2006: Our Bills are 7th in Nate's final season here. San Fran is 26th before signing him.

2007: Buffalo freefalls to 29th with the loss of Clements. '9ers inch up to 22nd.

 

CONCLUSION: We certainly felt the loss of Clements in the numbers, there's no denying that. Still, this tip-of-the-iceberg study finds no evidence that this brand name cornerback made the type of impact on his new team that they thought they were paying for. Huge loss for his old team, little gain for his new team...may not have been worth what it took for the '9ers to get him. But it sure would be great to see him in a Bills uni again.

 

Dre' Bly

2006: Denver is 21st before getting Bly. Detroit is 25th in his final season with the team.

2007: Denver goes up to 7 with Bly. Detroit drops to 31 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: The corners are now on base and batting .250. Huge difference for Denver when they got him, and Detroit landed in one of the few spots worse than their last ranking with him. The numbers suggest he's worth the investment.

 

Antoine Winfield

2003: Bills are #2 in his final year with (unarguably) the greatest sports franchise on the planet. Vikings are #26 before the big signing.

2004: Bills stay strong at #3 after the loss. Vikings drop to #29. Another CB whose team's ranking goes down in his first season. Still, the small changes can likely be chalked up to standard deviation.

 

Ty Law

2003: In his final healthy season with the Patriots, the club has the #1 pass defense.*

2004: Law plays just 7 games, and New England is #17*. Before getting Law, the Jets are #14.

2005: After losing Law, NE plummets to #30*. After getting Law, the Jets shoot up to #2. Before getting Law, the Chiefs are #31.

2006: With Law, the Chiefs rise to #18. With his loss, the Jets are back down at #14.

 

CONCLUSION: Ty Law dominates, no questions asked. The Pats* were better off the more he played, to the point that they were #1* when he was fully healthy and #30* after he was gone. The Jets were average to start, then #2 when they got him, then average when he left. Then he took KC from 30 to 14. Chalk another one up for the CBs!

 

Samari Rolle

2004: Baltimore is #10 before getting Rolle. Rolle plays in 11 games for Tennessee, who are #26.

2005: Baltimore inches up to #8 with Rolle. Tennessee improves to #17 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Small improvement on his new team. Another corner whose old team has a higher ranking without him than they did in his last season there. Not much impact to be found from these numbers.

 

Shawn Springs

2003: Washington is #14 before getting Springs. Seattle is #24 in his final season with the team.

2004: Washington goes up to #7 with Springs. Seattle is #23 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Solid improvement for the 'Skins with his acquisition. No change for Seattle with his loss. May have been a good pickup for Washington.

 

* = Team is known to have cheated. Ranking may not have been obtained legitimately.

 

 

-Three out of the 9 (or 33.3%) teams gaining a cornerback (Ty Law is counted twice) actually had a worse pass defense ranking than they had before getting their corner. Should that number really be as high as one-third?

 

-That same mark (33.3%) represents CBs who were were able to raise their new team's ranking 10 or more spots higher than it was the previous year. If corners have the direct impact on pass D we've been lead to believe, why can't we expect that mark to be much higher?

 

-44.4% (4-of-9) teams losing a corner actually improved their pass defense.

 

Thoughts?

Though I very much appreciate the work you put into this very interesting analysis, ultimately I don't think it is very revealing to try and measure the worth of an individual player by comparing team performance from two different years when the amount of variables in play are mind boggling. For this analysis to have any valididty at all, you would have to be able to know how team A would have fared in year X if they still had the player they lost vs. how they fared without him. Of course, that is impossible. Comparing defensive rankings from year X to year Y is comparing yesterdays apples to todays oranges.

 

I think the far easier question to ask is simply whether or not the player you lost was better, worse or the same as his replacement. I think we would all agree that Marshawn was an upgrade from Willis yet we fielded the worst offense in the history of the franchise when we replaced Willis with Marshawn. You are basically doing the same thing with these corners.

 

You do not improve a team by losing good players. No amount of analysis will change that. As for the value of CB's to a defense which I think is more your point, that also has way too many variables involved to come up with a universal answer. That is why the debate has come up so often around here, because there is no argument ending data available.

 

For me, the easiest way for the Bills to approach personnel decisions is to ascertain the relative strength and weaknesses of each position on the team. From there, they will have to also gauge how important each position is to team success given what they want to do. Frankly, I don't think that is as high on their list of concerns as it is on ours.

 

The situation at CB is pretty bleak. Thomas was our nickel back the last two years, he is now gone. We lost Nate. We signed Webster to replace him and he is now gone as well. McGee has been up and down. Greer certainly was a pleasant surprise but one surprise year doesn't a legit starter make. Looking over the defense, CB is clearly the weakest position on the field. We like our starting safeties and we have Wendling developing. We also have Wilson who remains an interesting if risky option for depth at safety. Between McCargo and Stroud, our top DT's are looking pretty good. We have Poz, Kawika and Angelo at LB which is as good a starting set of LB's as we have had in awhile. The DE's, Denney, Schobel and Kelsay better show us that last year was an anomaly, we have certainly paid them as if we didn't need to replace them. That leaves CB.

 

All this talk about how important it is to have a top CB is largely academic. The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB. The only position that I think would merit a first round pick is if a guy drops who can rush the passer. That could be a LB, a DT or a DE. I have never been happy with Denney, Schobel and Kelsay but they had put up numbers just good enough to warrant keeping them around. If a guy is there at 11 who can really get after the passer, I could definitely see them going that way. Otherwise, I think it will be a CB or a WR. Not because or inspite of the defense we play or the offense we play but because that is where we suck: CB, WR and rushing the passer.

[ans4e64]

Good post, but unfortunately, Nice Swing is right.

[Adam]

Interesting points by both. I do agree with Nice Swing though- individual players do not compete in vacuums. Champ Bailey may be the best CB of this generation, but I think I might be able to play on Denver's defensive line right now

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

The situation at CB is pretty bleak. Thomas was our nickel back the last two years, he is now gone. We lost Nate. We signed Webster to replace him and he is now gone as well. McGee has been up and down. Greer certainly was a pleasant surprise but one surprise year doesn't a legit starter make. Looking over the defense, CB is clearly the weakest position on the field. We like our starting safeties and we have Wendling developing. We also have Wilson who remains an interesting if risky option for depth at safety. Between McCargo and Stroud, our top DT's are looking pretty good. We have Poz, Kawika and Angelo at LB which is as good a starting set of LB's as we have had in awhile. The DE's, Denney, Schobel and Kelsay better show us that last year was an anomaly, we have certainly paid them as if we didn't need to replace them. That leaves CB.

 

All this talk about how important it is to have a top CB is largely academic. The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB. The only position that I think would merit a first round pick is if a guy drops who can rush the passer. That could be a LB, a DT or a DE. I have never been happy with Denney, Schobel and Kelsay but they had put up numbers just good enough to warrant keeping them around. If a guy is there at 11 who can really get after the passer, I could definitely see them going that way. Otherwise, I think it will be a CB or a WR. Not because or inspite of the defense we play or the offense we play but because that is where we suck: CB, WR and rushing the passer.

Really good post.

 

I still think that improving our comatose offense has to be the top priority mostly because FA resulted in heavy investments on the D side that solved a lot of big problems. That said, your arguments are irrefutable about CB and I hope we pick up 1 or more in the draft (maybe the 1st day) or some vet acquisition. Pass rushing certainly could use improvement and depth, but not at the expense of scoring.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Though I very much appreciate the work you put into this very interesting analysis, ultimately I don't think it is very revealing to try and measure the worth of an individual player by comparing team performance from two different years when the amount of variables in play are mind boggling. For this analysis to have any valididty at all, you would have to be able to know how team A would have fared in year X if they still had the player they lost vs. how they fared without him. Of course, that is impossible. Comparing defensive rankings from year X to year Y is comparing yesterdays apples to todays oranges.

But thats sort of the point. There are quite a few posters here, likely the majority of the board, who believe if the Bills find a way to acquire a premier cornerback, then this team is SET with the pass defense. The brain trusts of the 49ers, Vikings and Packers may disagree on that point. Its hard for some to think that linemen, yes LINEMEN, can have even more to do with pass defense than the guys who cover the recievers directly. If other teams haven't seen the desired results (significantly imrpoved pass defense) from a major addition at the cornerback position, why should we assume we will?

 

I think the far easier question to ask is simply whether or not the player you lost was better, worse or the same as his replacement. I think we would all agree that Marshawn was an upgrade from Willis yet we fielded the worst offense in the history of the franchise when we replaced Willis with Marshawn. You are basically doing the same thing with these corners.

I also think we would all agree that if CBs are the kind of difference makers that many here believe, they would have a more direct impact on pass defense than a running back would on total offense. That hardly seems an equal comparison.

 

The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB.

Defensive End should be #1 on the shortlist. This team was 29th in the league in sacks last year, and has only one (other posters might have said we have none) impact player at the position. In a system that demands consistent pressure from only the front four, not only is the desperate need for a pass rushing left end there, but the seemingly perfect fit for the roll is expected to be on the board. Scouting report after scouting report gives Derrick Harvey credit for outstanding quickness and acceleration off the line. He is a proven commodity as a pass rusher. Furthermore, he played left end nearly his entire college career. This player has the upside to help our pass defense more than I can imagine from any cornerback in the draft.

 

Safety should be #2. Speaking from purely a 'need' standpoint as opposed to the players available, we have only one reliable safety while we have three rock solid cornerbacks. Besides that fact, many might call safety the more important position in the Tampa 2. Defensive tackle should be #3. Let's compare:

 

McGee is solid. Stroud is solid.

Greer is solid. McCargo is unproven.

Will James is solid. Spencer Johnson/Kyle Williams are also unproven.

 

If you can get an impact player at (arguably) the most important defensive position in today's NFL, and you happen to have only one proven starter for two spots, I don't see how you can pass that up for a cornerback.

 

Speaking in terms of where you can improve the defense immediately, corner should come in at #4. If you're talking long-term, LB should also come in ahead of CB, as this is Crowell's walk year.

 

My view is that 1) there isn't much evidence that gaining a premier corner will significantly improve a team's pass defense, 2) we already have 3 solid cornerbacks anyway, plus a 4th with upside, 2 of which have good size, and 3) we can get an impact player at a more needy position.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

The first thing I look at when evaluating a team's passing yards allowed is their rushing yards allowed, particularly average yards per attempt.

 

The second thing I look at is the number of pass attempts against. Was the team often ahead in games and other teams were forced to throw?

 

From a raw numbers point of view I enjoyed your analysis. From a determative point of view, those numbers deserve a second look.

 

GO BILLS!!!

I actually originally planned to include marks in both total pass defense and yards allowed per pass play, but the first site I found only sorted by the total, and it was late...

 

Good point though, that would indeed be helpful.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

giants had a barely ok pass rush, added a solid rook corner and madison got healthy

result: best pass rush in the nfl and a super bowl win

Absolutely. The Giants pass rush was the result of Sam Madison getting healthy.

[SuperKillerRobots]

I think what this proves is nothing. Not to train on your parade, because the idea was well-laid-out, but I don't think you analyzed enough data to say what you wanted to. Some one else mentioned that you should have included rushing yards given up or average rushing yards per carry, which I believe would have shown a more complete picture.

 

One thing I will add that might be the hardest to actually quantify is the schemes that the CBs were used in. For example, when Shawn Springs came to the Redskins, their pass defense improved. Might that be because Gregg Williams needed a corner who could play on an island to make his defense work? Also, Seattle got slightly better in the rankings. Could that be because they didn't need a corner of his atributes? Or maybe they had another guy to step in right away - unlike the Bills after Clements left.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

One thing I will add that might be the hardest to actually quantify is the schemes that the CBs were used in. For example, when Shawn Springs came to the Redskins, their pass defense improved. Might that be because Gregg Williams needed a corner who could play on an island to make his defense work? Also, Seattle got slightly better in the rankings. Could that be because they didn't need a corner of his atributes? Or maybe they had another guy to step in right away - unlike the Bills after Clements left.

Good points all around.

 

I think what this proves is nothing. Not to train on your parade, because the idea was well-laid-out, but I don't think you analyzed enough data to say what you wanted to. Some one else mentioned that you should have included rushing yards given up or average rushing yards per carry, which I believe would have shown a more complete picture.

I agree that this conclusively PROVES absolutely nothing. What I hope it does accomplish is to raise some questions. Namely, why is there hardly any correlation between 1) adding a premier cornerback, and 2) having a significantly improved pass defense?

 

Are there more variables than we can count effecting the results? You bet. Are there more numbers I could've added to better support the argument? Most likely. This isn't an AKC thread, so there won't be any claims of superiority of knowledge or that anything has been undoubtedly proven. The concept isn't perfect.

 

But yet, if I sat down and did a similar study with defensive ends...instead of ends changing teams, I'd use ends that had emerged with 10+ sacks, and look at the pass defense numbers before and after...I'm confident there would be a stronger correlation between 1) getting a new 10+ sack DE, and 2) having a significantly improved pass defense than I found in the numbers 1 and 2 italicized above. Would you agree?

 

Why is that?

 

That seems like a question which anyone who believes CB is a bigger need position than DE should be able to answer.

[Steely Dan]

The hypothesis is that true impact players at the cornerback position are much harder to find than people realize, and the difference most corners make for a defense is way overrated around here.

 

I started by listing the names of all highly-thought-of corners I could who have switched teams somewhat recently (the list came off the top of my head, I'm sure I forgot at least a couple obvious ones). Then I simply looked at their old teams' pass defense ranking (total yardage) the last year they had him and then after they lost him, and his new team's ranking before and after they acquired him.

 

You'll find no claims this is the be-all, end-all of player evaluation. Rather, this study merely skims the surface. But still, I was surprised by some of the numbers, and believe them worthy of discussion.

 

Players are randomly listed in the order I thought of them.

 

Champ Bailey

2003: Denver was 5th before getting Bailey, Washington was 14th in their final season with Bailey.

2004: Denver is 6th when they get Bailey, Washington improves to 7th when they lose him.

 

CONCLUSION: The first player considered is one of the most interesting. The player who is the consensus #1 shutdown corner leaguewide changing addresses results in an improvement for the team that loses him, and a slight drop for the team that gets him. Is it not supposed to be the other way around?

 

Charles Woodson

2004: Raiders are 30th in Woodson's final healthy season with the team.

2005: Woodson plays in only 6 games in his final season as a Raider, and they rank 18th. Green Bay has the #1 rated pass defense before getting him.

2006: Without Woodson, the Raiders are now #1. Green Bay falls from 1 to 17.

 

CONCLUSION: Completely backwards from what a strong CB advocate might expect. The more Woodson plays, the worse off the Raiders are, to the point that they're #30 when he's healthy and #1 when he's gone! Green Bay's #1 pass defense falls to #17 with his so-called "addition."

 

Nate Clements

2006: Our Bills are 7th in Nate's final season here. San Fran is 26th before signing him.

2007: Buffalo freefalls to 29th with the loss of Clements. '9ers inch up to 22nd.

 

CONCLUSION: We certainly felt the loss of Clements in the numbers, there's no denying that. Still, this tip-of-the-iceberg study finds no evidence that this brand name cornerback made the type of impact on his new team that they thought they were paying for. Huge loss for his old team, little gain for his new team...may not have been worth what it took for the '9ers to get him. But it sure would be great to see him in a Bills uni again.

 

Dre' Bly

2006: Denver is 21st before getting Bly. Detroit is 25th in his final season with the team.

2007: Denver goes up to 7 with Bly. Detroit drops to 31 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: The corners are now on base and batting .250. Huge difference for Denver when they got him, and Detroit landed in one of the few spots worse than their last ranking with him. The numbers suggest he's worth the investment.

 

Antoine Winfield

2003: Bills are #2 in his final year with (unarguably) the greatest sports franchise on the planet. Vikings are #26 before the big signing.

2004: Bills stay strong at #3 after the loss. Vikings drop to #29.

 

CONCLUSION: Another CB whose team's ranking goes down in his first season. Still, the small changes can likely be chalked up to standard deviation.

 

Ty Law

2003: In his final healthy season with the Patriots, the club has the #1 pass defense.*

2004: Law plays just 7 games, and New England is #17*. Before getting Law, the Jets are #14.

2005: After losing Law, NE plummets to #30*. After getting Law, the Jets shoot up to #2. Before getting Law, the Chiefs are #31.

2006: With Law, the Chiefs rise to #18. With his loss, the Jets are back down at #14.

 

CONCLUSION: Ty Law dominates, no questions asked. The Pats* were better off the more he played, to the point that they were #1* when he was fully healthy and #30* after he was gone. The Jets were average to start, then #2 when they got him, then average when he left. Then he took KC from 30 to 14. Chalk another one up for the CBs!

 

Samari Rolle

2004: Baltimore is #10 before getting Rolle. Rolle plays in 11 games for Tennessee, who are #26.

2005: Baltimore inches up to #8 with Rolle. Tennessee improves to #17 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Small improvement on his new team. Another corner whose old team has a higher ranking without him than they did in his last season there. Not much impact to be found from these numbers.

 

Shawn Springs

2003: Washington is #14 before getting Springs. Seattle is #24 in his final season with the team.

2004: Washington goes up to #7 with Springs. Seattle is #23 without him.

 

CONCLUSION: Solid improvement for the 'Skins with his acquisition. No change for Seattle with his loss. May have been a good pickup for Washington.

 

* = Team is known to have cheated. Ranking may not have been obtained legitimately.

 

 

-Three out of the 9 (or 33.3%) teams gaining a cornerback (Ty Law is counted twice) actually had a worse pass defense ranking than they had before getting their corner. Should that number really be as high as one-third?

 

-That same mark (33.3%) represents CBs who were were able to raise their new team's ranking 10 or more spots higher than it was the previous year. If corners have the direct impact on pass D we've been lead to believe, why can't we expect that mark to be much higher?

 

-44.4% (4-of-9) teams losing a corner actually improved their pass defense.

 

Thoughts?

 

Lots of nice work but I agree with some of the guys below that it's really inconclusive. I think it's obvious that Buffalo needs a high draft pick CB.

 

 

giants had a barely ok pass rush, added a solid rook corner and madison got healthy

result: best pass rush in the nfl and a super bowl win

 

bills had a top 8 pass rush and lose clements

result: pass rush falls off, aaron and kelsey combine for as pathetic a number of sacks and strahan and uminura did the last year.

 

conclusion: all players count. corners can play well out the gate but are expensive in FA. corners are important to pass D.

 

anyone who says (as i have read from some people on this board) that corners don't help pass D are simply ignorant, insane, on drugs, or all three.

 

Two words: Coverage Sack. How many interceptions do DL's make compared to DB's? Turnovers are one of the biggest needs in order to win a game. The team that wins the turnover battle usually wins the game.

 

 

Though I very much appreciate the work you put into this very interesting analysis, ultimately I don't think it is very revealing to try and measure the worth of an individual player by comparing team performance from two different years when the amount of variables in play are mind boggling. For this analysis to have any valididty at all, you would have to be able to know how team A would have fared in year X if they still had the player they lost vs. how they fared without him. Of course, that is impossible. Comparing defensive rankings from year X to year Y is comparing yesterdays apples to todays oranges.

 

I think the far easier question to ask is simply whether or not the player you lost was better, worse or the same as his replacement. I think we would all agree that Marshawn was an upgrade from Willis yet we fielded the worst offense in the history of the franchise when we replaced Willis with Marshawn. You are basically doing the same thing with these corners.

 

You do not improve a team by losing good players. No amount of analysis will change that. As for the value of CB's to a defense which I think is more your point, that also has way too many variables involved to come up with a universal answer. That is why the debate has come up so often around here, because there is no argument ending data available.

 

For me, the easiest way for the Bills to approach personnel decisions is to ascertain the relative strength and weaknesses of each position on the team. From there, they will have to also gauge how important each position is to team success given what they want to do. Frankly, I don't think that is as high on their list of concerns as it is on ours.

 

The situation at CB is pretty bleak. Thomas was our nickel back the last two years, he is now gone. We lost Nate. We signed Webster to replace him and he is now gone as well. McGee has been up and down. Greer certainly was a pleasant surprise but one surprise year doesn't a legit starter make. Looking over the defense, CB is clearly the weakest position on the field. We like our starting safeties and we have Wendling developing. We also have Wilson who remains an interesting if risky option for depth at safety. Between McCargo and Stroud, our top DT's are looking pretty good. We have Poz, Kawika and Angelo at LB which is as good a starting set of LB's as we have had in awhile. The DE's, Denney, Schobel and Kelsay better show us that last year was an anomaly, we have certainly paid them as if we didn't need to replace them. That leaves CB.

 

All this talk about how important it is to have a top CB is largely academic. The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB. The only position that I think would merit a first round pick is if a guy drops who can rush the passer. That could be a LB, a DT or a DE. I have never been happy with Denney, Schobel and Kelsay but they had put up numbers just good enough to warrant keeping them around. If a guy is there at 11 who can really get after the passer, I could definitely see them going that way. Otherwise, I think it will be a CB or a WR. Not because or inspite of the defense we play or the offense we play but because that is where we suck: CB, WR and rushing the passer.

 

In the latest issue of TSN Clifton Brown says: "Having too many CB's is like having too much money." I agree. Too many people here don't appreciate the importance of the CB position. So many of the football experts believe CB is a need for Buffalo. It's not just one guy, it's lots of guys. I think a large consensus of the draftniks know more than a lot of people here.

 

But thats sort of the point. There are quite a few posters here, likely the majority of the board, who believe if the Bills find a way to acquire a premier cornerback, then this team is SET with the pass defense. The brain trusts of the 49ers, Vikings and Packers may disagree on that point. Its hard for some to think that linemen, yes LINEMEN, can have even more to do with pass defense than the guys who cover the recievers directly. If other teams haven't seen the desired results (significantly imrpoved pass defense) from a major addition at the cornerback position, why should we assume we will?

 

 

I also think we would all agree that if CBs are the kind of difference makers that many here believe, they would have a more direct impact on pass defense than a running back would on total offense. That hardly seems an equal comparison.

 

 

Defensive End should be #1 on the shortlist. This team was 29th in the league in sacks last year, and has only one (other posters might have said we have none) impact player at the position. In a system that demands consistent pressure from only the front four, not only is the desperate need for a pass rushing left end there, but the seemingly perfect fit for the roll is expected to be on the board. Scouting report after scouting report gives Derrick Harvey credit for outstanding quickness and acceleration off the line. He is a proven commodity as a pass rusher. Furthermore, he played left end nearly his entire college career. This player has the upside to help our pass defense more than I can imagine from any cornerback in the draft.

 

Safety should be #2. Speaking from purely a 'need' standpoint as opposed to the players available, we have only one reliable safety while we have three rock solid cornerbacks. Besides that fact, many might call safety the more important position in the Tampa 2. Defensive tackle should be #3. Let's compare:

 

McGee is solid. Stroud is solid.

Greer is solid. McCargo is unproven.

Will James is solid. Spencer Johnson/Kyle Williams are also unproven.

 

If you can get an impact player at (arguably) the most important defensive position in today's NFL, and you happen to have only one proven starter for two spots, I don't see how you can pass that up for a cornerback.

 

Speaking in terms of where you can improve the defense immediately, corner should come in at #4. If you're talking long-term, LB should also come in ahead of CB, as this is Crowell's walk year.

 

My view is that 1) there isn't much evidence that gaining a premier corner will significantly improve a team's pass defense, 2) we already have 3 solid cornerbacks anyway, plus a 4th with upside, 2 of which have good size, and 3) we can get an impact player at a more needy position.

 

 

You're really downplaying the role of a CB. Linemen and CB's are not equally involved in pass coverage. CB's are the most important cog in the pass defense wheel. Linemen don't make interceptions. A team that wins the turnover battle wins the game in most instances.

 

I guess your opinion of "rock solid" and my opinion of "rock solid" disagree. You seem to be ignoring the term "Coverage Sack". As mentioned above having too many CB's is like having too much money. Why are all the professional draftniks saying that CB is a big need for Buffalo? You will see Buffalo take a CB with one of their first three picks and that is as it should be.

[Mickey]

Lots of nice work but I agree with some of the guys below that it's really inconclusive. I think it's obvious that Buffalo needs a high draft pick CB.

 

 

 

 

Two words: Coverage Sack. How many interceptions do DL's make compared to DB's? Turnovers are one of the biggest needs in order to win a game. The team that wins the turnover battle usually wins the game.

 

 

 

 

In the latest issue of TSN Clifton Brown says: "Having too many CB's is like having too much money." I agree. Too many people here don't appreciate the importance of the CB position. So many of the football experts believe CB is a need for Buffalo. It's not just one guy, it's lots of guys. I think a large consensus of the draftniks know more than a lot of people here.

 

 

 

 

You're really downplaying the role of a CB. Linemen and CB's are not equally involved in pass coverage. CB's are the most important cog in the pass defense wheel. Linemen don't make interceptions. A team that wins the turnover battle wins the game in most instances.

 

I guess your opinion of "rock solid" and my opinion of "rock solid" disagree. You seem to be ignoring the term "Coverage Sack". As mentioned above having too many CB's is like having too much money. Why are all the professional draftniks saying that CB is a big need for Buffalo? You will see Buffalo take a CB with one of their first three picks and that is as it should be.

I agree, I don't see any of our corners as being "solid". McGee is the only starter among them. I was as impressed with Greer as anyone last year but at best, he is a marginal starter. We definitely need help on the offense so I am not saying CB is our top need but it is high on the list.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Lots of nice work but I agree with some of the guys below that it's really inconclusive. I think it's obvious that Buffalo needs a high draft pick CB.

 

 

 

 

Two words: Coverage Sack. How many interceptions do DL's make compared to DB's? Turnovers are one of the biggest needs in order to win a game. The team that wins the turnover battle usually wins the game.

 

 

 

 

In the latest issue of TSN Clifton Brown says: "Having too many CB's is like having too much money." I agree. Too many people here don't appreciate the importance of the CB position. So many of the football experts believe CB is a need for Buffalo. It's not just one guy, it's lots of guys. I think a large consensus of the draftniks know more than a lot of people here.

 

 

 

 

You're really downplaying the role of a CB. Linemen and CB's are not equally involved in pass coverage. CB's are the most important cog in the pass defense wheel. Linemen don't make interceptions. A team that wins the turnover battle wins the game in most instances.

 

I guess your opinion of "rock solid" and my opinion of "rock solid" disagree. You seem to be ignoring the term "Coverage Sack". As mentioned above having too many CB's is like having too much money. Why are all the professional draftniks saying that CB is a big need for Buffalo? You will see Buffalo take a CB with one of their first three picks and that is as it should be.

First off: how many "coverage sacks" do you really think one secondary is capable of forcing over the course of a season? Four? Five?

 

Secondly, who do you think plays a role in more turnovers over the course of a season: your Pro Bowl defensive end or your Pro Bowl cornerback?

 

No position on the football field is capable of forcing more turnovers than an impact defensive end.

 

Linemen and CB's are not equally involved in pass coverage. CB's are the most important cog in the pass defense wheel.

Strongly agree with your first sentence, strongly disagree with your second sentence.

 

Your linemen are the ones making the opposing quarterback aware that he can't sit back there all day to pick your coverage apart. Without impact players along your defensive front, your secondary (no matter how talented) will be hung out to dry. The reverse is not necessarily true: as long as you have average play from your cornerbacks, a top-notch pass rush can carry a strong pass defense (and force turnovers) on its own. It doesn't require premier performance from the corners (particularly in a system that puts a bit more emphasis on the safeties).

 

If our pass rush is as anemic as it was last season, our CBs could be Champ Bailey and Dre' Bly, and we could still have pass defense issues. Just ask the Broncos, who last season were tied for 23rd in interceptions and tied for 24th in yards allowed per pass play.

 

Upgrading the pass rush, specifically the LDE position, is the road to improving the defense.

[Bill from NYC]

Though I very much appreciate the work you put into this very interesting analysis, ultimately I don't think it is very revealing to try and measure the worth of an individual player by comparing team performance from two different years when the amount of variables in play are mind boggling. For this analysis to have any valididty at all, you would have to be able to know how team A would have fared in year X if they still had the player they lost vs. how they fared without him. Of course, that is impossible. Comparing defensive rankings from year X to year Y is comparing yesterdays apples to todays oranges.

 

I think the far easier question to ask is simply whether or not the player you lost was better, worse or the same as his replacement. I think we would all agree that Marshawn was an upgrade from Willis yet we fielded the worst offense in the history of the franchise when we replaced Willis with Marshawn. You are basically doing the same thing with these corners.

 

You do not improve a team by losing good players. No amount of analysis will change that. As for the value of CB's to a defense which I think is more your point, that also has way too many variables involved to come up with a universal answer. That is why the debate has come up so often around here, because there is no argument ending data available.

 

For me, the easiest way for the Bills to approach personnel decisions is to ascertain the relative strength and weaknesses of each position on the team. From there, they will have to also gauge how important each position is to team success given what they want to do. Frankly, I don't think that is as high on their list of concerns as it is on ours.

 

The situation at CB is pretty bleak. Thomas was our nickel back the last two years, he is now gone. We lost Nate. We signed Webster to replace him and he is now gone as well. McGee has been up and down. Greer certainly was a pleasant surprise but one surprise year doesn't a legit starter make. Looking over the defense, CB is clearly the weakest position on the field. We like our starting safeties and we have Wendling developing. We also have Wilson who remains an interesting if risky option for depth at safety. Between McCargo and Stroud, our top DT's are looking pretty good. We have Poz, Kawika and Angelo at LB which is as good a starting set of LB's as we have had in awhile. The DE's, Denney, Schobel and Kelsay better show us that last year was an anomaly, we have certainly paid them as if we didn't need to replace them. That leaves CB.

 

All this talk about how important it is to have a top CB is largely academic. The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB. The only position that I think would merit a first round pick is if a guy drops who can rush the passer. That could be a LB, a DT or a DE. I have never been happy with Denney, Schobel and Kelsay but they had put up numbers just good enough to warrant keeping them around. If a guy is there at 11 who can really get after the passer, I could definitely see them going that way. Otherwise, I think it will be a CB or a WR. Not because or inspite of the defense we play or the offense we play but because that is where we suck: CB, WR and rushing the passer.

 

Your post was well thought and I appreciate this. However, I do think that you left out 2 very important factors:

 

1) Playing in the elements:

 

The Bills play some games in wind, rain and snow. I was at a game at RWS where Drew Bledsoe was having trouble throwing medium range passes. Like him or hate him, Drew had one of the best arms of all time.

My point is that passing/pass defense in Buffalo is very often (if not almost always) less important than out-muscling opponents. This also applies to games we play Foxboro and New Jersey. The Bills are an injury away from Duke Preston, which equals losses, 1st round corner or not.

 

2) History:

 

The Bills have a history of drafting first round defensive backs and losing. You cannot dispute this, can you? At one point we had Winfield and Clements. Oh yeah.....we lost, and we will continue to lose as long as we stupidly allot our best resources to defensive backs, only to watch them leave town the very second they can.

 

This football team needs a guy like Branden Albert. He is young, athletic and versatile. He would be able to step in and protect our young qb. JP needed help, and we had 4 first day picks in 06, including the #8. We left with a DT and 2 defensive backs. Then, we drafted yet another defensive back early in the 4th. This was stupid then, and it would be stupid today. Sadly, I fully expect more of the same idiocy this afternoon.

 

In any event, I extend my best draft day wishes to you and to all TBD posters. Bills Fans deserve a break, and here is to hoping that these guys can break their cycle of stupidity. We are in this together as Bills Fans, and the 07 draft provided us with a ray of hope that Bills Management just might have their priorities in order.

 

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BuffOrange]

Though I very much appreciate the work you put into this very interesting analysis, ultimately I don't think it is very revealing to try and measure the worth of an individual player by comparing team performance from two different years when the amount of variables in play are mind boggling. For this analysis to have any valididty at all, you would have to be able to know how team A would have fared in year X if they still had the player they lost vs. how they fared without him. Of course, that is impossible. Comparing defensive rankings from year X to year Y is comparing yesterdays apples to todays oranges.

 

I think the far easier question to ask is simply whether or not the player you lost was better, worse or the same as his replacement. I think we would all agree that Marshawn was an upgrade from Willis yet we fielded the worst offense in the history of the franchise when we replaced Willis with Marshawn. You are basically doing the same thing with these corners.

 

You do not improve a team by losing good players. No amount of analysis will change that. As for the value of CB's to a defense which I think is more your point, that also has way too many variables involved to come up with a universal answer. That is why the debate has come up so often around here, because there is no argument ending data available.

 

For me, the easiest way for the Bills to approach personnel decisions is to ascertain the relative strength and weaknesses of each position on the team. From there, they will have to also gauge how important each position is to team success given what they want to do. Frankly, I don't think that is as high on their list of concerns as it is on ours.

 

The situation at CB is pretty bleak. Thomas was our nickel back the last two years, he is now gone. We lost Nate. We signed Webster to replace him and he is now gone as well. McGee has been up and down. Greer certainly was a pleasant surprise but one surprise year doesn't a legit starter make. Looking over the defense, CB is clearly the weakest position on the field. We like our starting safeties and we have Wendling developing. We also have Wilson who remains an interesting if risky option for depth at safety. Between McCargo and Stroud, our top DT's are looking pretty good. We have Poz, Kawika and Angelo at LB which is as good a starting set of LB's as we have had in awhile. The DE's, Denney, Schobel and Kelsay better show us that last year was an anomaly, we have certainly paid them as if we didn't need to replace them. That leaves CB.

 

All this talk about how important it is to have a top CB is largely academic. The fact is, if you want to improve this defense, the top position to address right now is CB. The only position that I think would merit a first round pick is if a guy drops who can rush the passer. That could be a LB, a DT or a DE. I have never been happy with Denney, Schobel and Kelsay but they had put up numbers just good enough to warrant keeping them around. If a guy is there at 11 who can really get after the passer, I could definitely see them going that way. Otherwise, I think it will be a CB or a WR. Not because or inspite of the defense we play or the offense we play but because that is where we suck: CB, WR and rushing the passer.

 

Very good post.

 

re: CB's a stat I find tremendously insightful is "yards given up per attempt" (thrown in their direction). You can get this from Football Outsiders. To paraphrase last year's article, they said 7-8 was average, 9 is bad, Jason Webster was a brutal 10, and "Hole in the Zone" ranked slightly ahead of the former Colt who signed w/ the Saints last year (forget his name at the moment).

Champ Bailey was first by a lot in this category, and he was undoubtably a big part of the Broncos defensive success in '05 despite zero pass-rush to speak of. Of course that does not mean I would take a DB over a pass-rusher of equal ability.