PDA

View Full Version : Greenwood was statistically our best LB in 2005...by FAR


GP
05-22-2006, 01:40 PM
At the player stats on nfl.com, if I sorted the LB stats for the AFC correctly, he was 14th (in the AFC only) with 112 total tackles (solo, assist, and sacks all combined) and then Polk was 22nd in the AFC.

Greenwood was perhaps our best LB last season, which is sad. And even sadder is that Polk was the NEXT best (statistically speaking) but still several slots down from Greenwood's spot at 14. And that's just in the AFC, that's not even combining AFC and NFC together. Talk about having a pretty average LB crew. Ouch.

And for all the UT homers who still have a huge man crush on Derrick Johnson, he's one notch above Polk at 21st on the AFC LB list. Not exactly the Pro Bowl caliber LB that we always hear about from the man crushers. "Oh why, oh why did we pass up Derrick Johnson?!"

link: http://www.nfl.com/stats/playersort/...14&_3:col_2=15

Grid
05-22-2006, 01:42 PM
is that ranking for all the stats though? Cause I mean... I dont remember Greenwood getting alot of tackles for a loss.. or sacks.. or anything of that nature. Getting tackles is great.. but if every tackle you get is 3-5 yards past the line of scrimmage, that isnt gonna stop an offense.

I think Greenwood is a great athlete, but an average LB. Id prefer him to be depth for us..and id prefer us to start a more aggressive LB in his place.

Cincinnatikid
05-22-2006, 02:03 PM
At the player stats on nfl.com, if I sorted the LB stats for the AFC correctly, he was 14th (in the AFC only) with 112 total tackles (solo, assist, and sacks all combined) and then Polk was 22nd in the AFC.

Greenwood was perhaps our best LB last season, which is sad. And even sadder is that Polk was the NEXT best (statistically speaking) but still several slots down from Greenwood's spot at 14. And that's just in the AFC, that's not even combining AFC and NFC together. Talk about having a pretty average LB crew. Ouch.

And for all the UT homers who still have a huge man crush on Derrick Johnson, he's one notch above Polk at 21st on the AFC LB list. Not exactly the Pro Bowl caliber LB that we always hear about from the man crushers. "Oh why, oh why did we pass up Derrick Johnson?!"

link: http://www.nfl.com/stats/playersort/...14&_3:col_2=15

I have no man crush, but Derrick Johnson also played OLB in a 4-3 which is a bit different than a guy playing ILB in a 3-4. In the 3-4 Polk and Greenwood should have more tackles than any type of OLB. You can not compare them on the same level. If anything you can compare only the MLB to ILB.

Sarg01
05-22-2006, 02:52 PM
Greenwood was a lock to be our leading tackler. His position demanded it. 3-4 ILBs fly up the tackle charts. They're supposed to make the stops.

On any given run play there's going to be a tackle, a fumble, a run out-of-bounds or a TD. Tackles aren't terribly telling, its how far upfield they are. Our defense was so pitiful precisely because Greenwood made all those stops ... upfield instead of near the line of scrimmage.

HeartofHouston
05-22-2006, 02:55 PM
I'm not giving up on greenwood just yet I mean give the guy a chance. He was a small 4-3 OLB playing INSIDE on 3-4 Defense. He was put completly out of his natural element.. not saying that he shouldnt have adapted better but I'm just saying give him a shot lets put him back at his natural position and see what happens then we can have the trade/cut Greenwood conversation..

Hervoyel
05-22-2006, 03:04 PM
And for all the UT homers who still have a huge man crush on Derrick Johnson, he's one notch above Polk at 21st on the AFC LB list. Not exactly the Pro Bowl caliber LB that we always hear about from the man crushers. "Oh why, oh why did we pass up Derrick Johnson?!"

Not long ago someone told me that they'd love to see the term "man crush" go away and that it was long past getting old. I agreed but kept using it because I thought now it's gotten so overused that it's crossed back over into funny (for a completely different reason).

Now I understand what that person was saying though. I'm getting so sick of reading the term "UT homer". I don't even like UT and I had no interest in seeing the Texans draft Vince Young BUT I was absolutely positive that Derrick Johnson was the pick to make when he fell to us at 13 and I still believe that. Now that we're in a 4-3 Derrick Johnson's absence here is even more glaring.

A couple of people on this thread have already posted solid reasons why your stats as they relate to a direct comparison of Johnson, Greenwood, and Polk aren't very meaningful. I see no reason to go over them again.

Suffice to say that when you compare a rookie linebacker to a veteran playing a different position you learn nothing about either one.

GP
05-22-2006, 04:13 PM
I use the stats provided.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/playersort/AFC/LB-TACKLES/2005/regular Then click in the column labeled CMB for total tackles.

There is zero way to compare "where" the tackles are made, etc. It's a nice thought, but it's kind of like inventing a machine that gives you unlimited home electricity for a couple of pennies a day: It doesn't exist.

Stats show that Johnson is not better than he's perceived to be. Period. What's even scarier is that Merriman, minus his sacks, is a pretty statistically weak player when you look at his tackle stats. He's heralded, and yet his teammate Donnie Edwards is up at the top of the list on total tackles. Hype has its power, I guess.

In my opinion, Derrick Johnson would have fared no better on this team than Greenwood or Polk. And to speculate that he would, and to argue it so fiercely, is ignoring the stats made available--And we have little to go on, when comparing, than the stats provided. Look at the other 13 LBs above Greenwood on that list and you will see LBs who are pretty much viewed as top-tier LBs in the AFC. So, I think the stats for total tackles is a pretty good indication of significance.

My thread is a two-parter: Greenwood was statisticaly the best LB on our team, and I added that looking at Derrick Johnson's stats doesn't exactly help some people's argument that we "passed" on a great LB. So shoot me for not coming up with a magical equation to show us all the "real" value of these LBs. Help me find it.

Lucky
05-22-2006, 04:25 PM
I guess what bothers me most about Greenwood is that in his 5 seasons as a starting NFL LB, he hasn't forced a turnover once. Not one interception, not one forced fumble. In 410 total career tackles, he hasn't stripped a ball carrier a single time? That's difficult to explain.

TheOgre
05-22-2006, 04:31 PM
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

GP
05-22-2006, 04:32 PM
I'm not hyping Greenwood, nor am I on some mission to say that he's awesome. Perhaps that's getting lost on some people.

In another thread, some people are speculating that he's going to be a June 1st cut. I can't foresee us doing it because of the stats. Demeco, like all other rookies, is just that: A rookie. He might do well. He might fare as well (or as average) as Derrick Johnson, too. And he might not do very well at all.

Greenwood's not great, but at the moment...and going off what was done by our other LBs last season...he's the best we have. We can talk potential all we want, but cutting him (with the LBs we have) doesn't seem viable to me.

Lucky
05-22-2006, 04:56 PM
...We can talk potential all we want, but cutting him (with the LBs we have) doesn't seem viable to me.
It's not viable. There's still $5.6 million of bonus left on his contract. The Texans can't take that kind of cap hit, even if most of it is pushed off to '07.

I'm not saying Greenwood is a horrible player. I'd just like to see him create some turnovers. Or one even.

aj.
05-22-2006, 05:55 PM
Jay Foreman was 12th in the NFL in tackles in 2003. That should put the relevance of that stat in perspective.

ILBs in the Capers/Fangio 3-4 were tackle hoarders by design.

Hulk75
05-22-2006, 06:37 PM
I have no man crush, but Derrick Johnson also played OLB in a 4-3 which is a bit different than a guy playing ILB in a 3-4. In the 3-4 Polk and Greenwood should have more tackles than any type of OLB. You can not compare them on the same level. If anything you can compare only the MLB to ILB.
Dont want to upset anyone but if we had Kubiak that year and we had our 4-3 in place we take Derrick Johnson, I think.

TK_Gamer
05-22-2006, 06:55 PM
i just love hearing sports fans talk about footbal management. cant take the cap hit? how do you know what cap hit they can take? lol, anyway, as far as i know, greenwood still performed up to his starting positon, you cant blame one guy on an 11 man defense over the course of a season. obviously they had other problems besides greenwoods takles for loss. better question to ask is how many tackles for loss did our defensive ends get? how many did seth payne get? now we are running a 4-3 lets see what happens.

LBC_Justin
05-22-2006, 06:56 PM
Dont want to upset anyone but if we had Kubiak that year and we had our 4-3 in place we take Derrick Johnson, I think.
Derrick Johnson had a decent year, and your right Kubiak probably would have taken him in the first round last year, but would anyone trade Travis Johnson and Eric Winston for Derrick Johnson. Kudos to Casserly, this move actually paid off.

After the cowboys got the guy we really wanted (Ware), the smart move was to tradedown if you aren't in love with any of the guys on the board.

aj.
05-22-2006, 07:01 PM
i just love hearing sports fans talk about footbal management. cant take the cap hit? how do you know what cap hit they can take? lol, .

Just because you may not understand caponomics doesn't mean others don't.

TK_Gamer
05-22-2006, 07:10 PM
ok so whats the texans cap hit this year? and whats the cap? and what does that have to do with a decision you have no control over? and how do any of us know what the texans can or cant afford? are you qualified to make those decisions? good grief get a life

aj.
05-22-2006, 07:13 PM
http://www.houstonprofootball.com/cap.html

It's unofficial but very close.

Like I said, some guys watch this stuff very closely and they know what they are doing. Stick around, you might learn something.

I have a great life, thank you, and the NFL is part of it.

TK_Gamer
05-22-2006, 07:20 PM
ok im gonna make this my last post on the subject, aj yer missing my point altogether. anyone can look up the numbers on the internet. im just saying management makes these decisions, many of them that all go together, those decisions you CANT look up on the web till they allready made them, so talking about cap issues when you dont have all the data is pointless, all im saying

TexanFan881
05-22-2006, 07:25 PM
Dont want to upset anyone but if we had Kubiak that year and we had our 4-3 in place we take Derrick Johnson, I think.

:drool: Imagine our front seven now

Mario Payne Smith Peek
Johnson Cowart Ryans

:wow:

stevo3883
05-22-2006, 07:26 PM
Derrick Johnson had a decent year, and your right Kubiak probably would have taken him in the first round last year, but would anyone trade Travis Johnson and Eric Winston for Derrick Johnson. Kudos to Casserly, this move actually paid off.
.

Ill take Derrick Johnson & one of our 3rd round tackles over Travis Johnson and both 3rd round tackles. at least the first deal leaves us with a starter immediately, instead of 2-3 years from now.

aj.
05-22-2006, 07:29 PM
ok im gonna make this my last post on the subject, aj yer missing my point altogether. anyone can look up the numbers on the internet. im just saying management makes these decisions, many of them that all go together, those decisions you CANT look up on the web till they allready made them, so talking about cap issues when you dont have all the data is pointless, all im saying

Likewise, you're missing my point altogether.

Yes, anyone can "look up numbers on the internet," but not everyone takes the time to research and accumulate every player's base salary, signing bonus, roster bonuses, incentives, etc., or understand how the bonus prorations, incentives, and accelerations apply to the cap, or understand how dead money works, or understand what the effects of a trade or a cut will have on the team's cap, or the June 1 rule, or the Top 51 rule, or understand how practice squad salaries and players on injured reserve affect cap, etc., etc., etc. all as a service to a) fans who want to know, and b) enlightement to other fans who throw out riduculous notions of trades or acquisitions without understanding the cap ramifications.

Like I said, there are a few people on this site and on other sites that know exactly what the cap ramifications of a Morlon Greenwood or Todd Wade cut are, or a Michael Bennett acquisition is on the Texans cap because they are fully up on the NFLPA labor agreement, understand how the cap works, and know what the Texans cap number is or will be relative to the league limit with every actual or planned transaction.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I used to produce the cap feature for that site. It's not easy and without access to league records it takes a little more effort than doing a few Google searches for a guy's salary and plugging it into a web page. That site is now maintained by Keith Weiland who is as meticulous as it comes in his contract research and is probably more aware of NFL cap rules and procedures than anyone not employed by an NFL team.

Hervoyel
05-22-2006, 07:40 PM
I'm not hyping Greenwood, nor am I on some mission to say that he's awesome. Perhaps that's getting lost on some people.

In another thread, some people are speculating that he's going to be a June 1st cut. I can't foresee us doing it because of the stats. Demeco, like all other rookies, is just that: A rookie. He might do well. He might fare as well (or as average) as Derrick Johnson, too. And he might not do very well at all.

Greenwood's not great, but at the moment...and going off what was done by our other LBs last season...he's the best we have. We can talk potential all we want, but cutting him (with the LBs we have) doesn't seem viable to me.

Was Jay Foreman the best we had in 2002? Of course not. He had 105 tackles but that's just because the entire defense was designed to funnel the tackles to Foreman and Sharper. In 2002 Foreman had 105 of them while Sharper had 95. That same year Kailee Wong only had 43 and Jeff Posey got 49.

Is Kailee Wong half the linebacker that Jay Foreman is? No, he's not. He played outside in the 3-4 and he did his job. Jay Foreman did his job and he got a lot of tackles. Jeff posey did his job and he got half the tackles but bunch of sacks. Prior to 2005 Morlon Greenwood had 29, 37, 50, and 66 tackles playing in the 4-3. He had almost a 20 tackle increase in his first year here adjusting to a new defense because that's what you get when you play there in the 3-4.

I hope Greenwood isn't a June 1st cut because I think he'll be a better player in the 4-3 than he was for us last year and I think that regardless of whether or not he matches his 82 tackle career high from 2005.

I personally also believe that Greenwood might be the best we have at the start of 2006. I hope that Wong can come back solid, Cowart has something left, and Shantee Orr can build on last season and contend for that "title". I hope by the end of the year DeMeco Ryans can push his way into the mix too.

Make no mistake though, DeMeco doesn't have to set the world on fire in his rookie season. Derrick Johnson didn't have to either. If DeMeco has a solid rookie season, seems to be getting it, and has made the adjustment to the speed of the pro game by the end of the year I think he'll have accomplished all that could be asked of him. He'll then go into his second season with something to build on. I apply all of this to Derrick Johnson as well.

UberDork
05-22-2006, 08:21 PM
So I threw the 2005 LBs stats into excel and weighted these items as such:

Tackles = 1 pt
Sacks = 5 pts
FFumble = 8 pts
Interception = 8 pts

Is that okay logic or should I weight them diffenetly?

Anyhow, when I did this Polk ranked 22nd and Greenwood ranked 28th. Weighting the stats gives a little more of an indication about a player's gamechanging ability, which is very important to being a premier LB in my opinion.

ojthecat
05-22-2006, 08:56 PM
So I threw the 2005 LBs stats into excel and weighted these items as such:

Tackles = 1 pt
Sacks = 5 pts
FFumble = 8 pts
Interception = 8 pts

Is that okay logic or should I weight them diffenetly?

Anyhow, when I did this Polk ranked 22nd and Greenwood ranked 28th. Weighting the stats gives a little more of an indication about a player's gamechanging ability, which is very important to being a premier LB in my opinion.

I would add a rank for fumbles recovered and lower the value of forced fumbles they should not equal the same as an interception because with an interception you always have a turnover not so with a forced fumble.

Great Ideal.

UberDork
05-22-2006, 09:02 PM
I would add a rank for fumbles recovered and lower the value of forced fumbles they should not equal the same as an interception because with an interception you always have a turnover not so with a forced fumble.

Great Ideal.

Now that you mention it. I agree there is no good way of telling if the FFumble is recovered by the defence. I will add in the Fumble Recovery and reduce FFumbles.

TwinSisters
05-23-2006, 12:03 AM
There is zero way to compare "where" the tackles are made, etc. It's a nice thought, but it's kind of like inventing a machine that gives you unlimited home electricity for a couple of pennies a day: It doesn't exist.


Good point.

The NFL needs to tighten up on the stats to put out something more useful then tackles. Very annoying.

:rant:

although then nobody would tackle a guy that broke the second tier, because it would ruin their average tackle per yard stat :)

gtexan02
05-23-2006, 12:08 AM
Just so everyone is clear, Greenwood may ahve actually been our WORST LB last year---BY FAR. I was watching and/or reading an analysis of the Texans defense, and Greenwood ranked statistically dead last in average yards given up per tackle and tackle percentage (how often you succeed once you've attempted the tackle) among LBs. I will look for the article. It was quite insightful

TheOgre
05-23-2006, 07:30 AM
In another thread, some people are speculating that he's going to be a June 1st cut.

He definitely shouldn't be a June 1 cut. If that was the point of your thread, I concur. However, to say that he is a good or even great player is an entirely different discussion.

TexanFan881
05-23-2006, 08:07 AM
This just shows that the stat of tackles doesn't mean anything. Greenwood defainitely wasn't our best LB last year :rolleyes: A June first cut shouldn't be in order as we still need him though and he could will hopefully be successful in the 4-3

Maddict5
05-23-2006, 08:21 AM
I would add a rank for fumbles recovered and lower the value of forced fumbles they should not equal the same as an interception because with an interception you always have a turnover not so with a forced fumble.

Great Ideal.

what about when they intercept it and start running it back, carrying it down by their hips with 1 hand:brickwall , like idiots and it gets stripped and the offence recovers..ive seen that 5 or 6 times this year without even watching all the game- i remember champ bailey doing it in the playoffs v the pats but he wrongfully got away with it, i saw it during the colts-chargers game aswell...

sorry for the pointless posts but it 1 of the things that annoys me the most about defensive players

GP
05-23-2006, 08:45 AM
OK, so at least one person is saying that "getting tackles" is not really a factor because the scheme is designed to funnel tackles to THAT player, in this case it was Greenwood. One year it was Foreman.

Is that Greenwood's fault?

If that's the case, then Greenwood was placed in his position because he's the best tackler of the LBs. If the scheme is designed to "funnel tckles to a certain player," then maybe the staff placed our team's best tackler at that position?

And isn't the whole point of football to evade tacklers, or to tackle the opposing player? I mean, I thought that was pretty much the point (other than scoring points, or not allowing the other team to score...which it seems are tied to the idea of tackling and evading tackles). Whether the tackle occurs at the line of scrimmage, behind the line, down the field, at the goal line, in the end zone for a safety, in the first quarter, in overtime, in the regular season, in the postseason, etc., a tackle is a tackle.

There is no conclusive way to argue this point other than to look at the stats kept by the NFL. And if Foreman had the most tackles, then he made the most tackles. He was around the ball carrier more, even if it was by scheme and the other LBs "ate up blockers" or whatever a person wants to claim.

Again, I'm not hyping Greenwood. Just saying that by the stats, he led our team in tackles and the next guy down is Polk.

thunderkyss
05-23-2006, 09:23 AM
Likewise, you're missing my point altogether.



You're both right...... logically, it doesn't make sense to cut Greenwood...... because of the effect on the cap........ by that same token, it didn't make sense to cut Walker before June 1st........ but....... I'm guessing Kubiak couldn't afford to lose the roster spot......... and the cap hit was the lesser of two evils. Right now, we don't know how Kubiak values the LB position.

OK, so at least one person is saying that "getting tackles" is not really a factor because the scheme is designed to funnel tackles to THAT player, in this case it was Greenwood. One year it was Foreman.

Is that Greenwood's fault?

If that's the case, then Greenwood was placed in his position because he's the best tackler of the LBs. If the scheme is designed to "funnel tckles to a certain player," then maybe the staff placed our team's best tackler at that position?

Again, I'm not hyping Greenwood. Just saying that by the stats, he led our team in tackles and the next guy down is Polk.

Or you can watch the games....... I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone. but it seems everyone else believes Greenwood was playing safety, and not LB, which is what his numbers show. 4-3, 3-4....... all defenses are designed to stop the run. In the 3-4, that is the primary responsibilty of the ILB. So if we were dead last, yeah as a team we were pretty bad, but the ILB is more responsible for that, than a DB.....

ON that list, Greenwood and Polk has more tackles than Teddy Bruschi & Akin Ayodele....... but I'd argue all day long on which of those are better...

At the same time, you can't just throw out the stat..... it's an accomplishment, and something I think should be rewarded. We put him in the 3-4 to make tackles........ he did his job.

But look at Pitts D..... both inside Lbs have multiple sacks, and over 100 tackles. Look at their OLBs..... Half the tackles, but 10 sacks each..... (http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/PIT)
That's the way it's supposed to be.

real
05-23-2006, 09:32 AM
I would add a rank for fumbles recovered and lower the value of forced fumbles they should not equal the same as an interception because with an interception you always have a turnover not so with a forced fumble.

Great Ideal.

And add pass deflections...2 points

aj.
05-23-2006, 11:47 AM
You're both right...... logically, it doesn't make sense to cut Greenwood...... because of the effect on the cap........

To clarify, I wasn't arguing whether it made sense to cut Greenwood or not. That was someone else.

I was arguing the point that there are a few people here and on hpf.com who understand the Texans cap well enough to make fairly accurate assessments about what decisions may or may not be possible when there are cap issues involved.

If you want my opinion on Greenwood, his $3.9 number this year is manageable and is not totally obscene as long as he plays well in the new system. I agree with the person who said he would be a difficult cut this year because of the $5.7 left - given that Todd Wade is also cut.

Greenwood becomes an easier and more likely cut next March because even post-June 1 this year, it will get difficult for them to deal with even more dead money given Walker's $7.3, Coleman's $2.5, and Wade's possible $6.7 that they will have to deal with over the next two years.

Walker was cut when he was so the Texans could gain a roster spot and get another body in here pre June 1 to participate in team activities. Under the old CBA, they would have had to wait until post June 1 this year to do the Walker cut and get the two year depreciation benefit of his dead money.

jerek
05-23-2006, 12:00 PM
Ill take Derrick Johnson & one of our 3rd round tackles over Travis Johnson and both 3rd round tackles. at least the first deal leaves us with a starter immediately, instead of 2-3 years from now.

I second the motion.

AJ and others have pretty well covered this:

I doubt if we cut Greenwood, simply for the cap hit we take.

DJ playing the 4-3 OLB is a different story than Greenwood playing the 3-4 ILB. Statistical comparisons bear some relevancy in contrasting the two players, but not overly much.

Greenwood's numbers were a product of his position more than anything else. He is an okay LB whom, as Lucky pointed out, appears to be lacking something -- call it instincts, heart, whatever -- that will ever establish him as anything more than functional.

Vinny
05-23-2006, 12:06 PM
OK, so at least one person is saying that "getting tackles" is not really a factor because the scheme is designed to funnel tackles to THAT player, in this case it was Greenwood. One year it was Foreman.

Is that Greenwood's fault?No, but it doesn't make Greenwood a great player any more than it made Jay Foreman a great player. In my opinion he has an average overall game as a linebacker and wasn't physical enough last year to make us any better than one of the worst run stopping teams in the NFL. It surely wasn't his fault alone...but he was part of that equation.

I agree with aj's points in this thread as well. There is an entire sub-set fan base that combs the cap and the ramifications of what bonus money and salary does to shaping a team over the long haul. As fans we don't know it all, and never will...but we can come to a message board and share some of the logical conclusions that come out from a deeper investigation than just what we see on the field. I'm certainly not a 'cap expert', but I follow it and study as much as I can grasp myself since it effects my thoughts on the team as a fan.

thunderkyss
05-23-2006, 12:12 PM
Walker was cut when he was so the Texans could gain a roster spot and get another body in here pre June 1 to participate in team activities. Under the old CBA, they would have had to wait until post June 1 this year to do the Walker cut and get the two year depreciation benefit of his dead money.

That's what I said.

GP
05-23-2006, 01:23 PM
No, but it doesn't make Greenwood a great player any more than it made Jay Foreman a great player. In my opinion he has an average overall game as a linebacker and wasn't physical enough last year to make us any better than one of the worst run stopping teams in the NFL. It surely wasn't his fault alone...but he was part of that equation.

I agree with aj's points in this thread as well. There is an entire sub-set fan base that combs the cap and the ramifications of what bonus money and salary does to shaping a team over the long haul. As fans we don't know it all, and never will...but we can come to a message board and share some of the logical conclusions that come out from a deeper investigation than just what we see on the field. I'm certainly not a 'cap expert', but I follow it and study as much as I can grasp myself since it effects my thoughts on the team as a fan.

We're on the same page.

I'm saying that out of all the LBs we had (and now HAVE) there's not really any LB better than the other, but statistically...Greenwood is catching flak that's not due. He had, as the numbers go, the most productive season out of our LBs.

Yes, he's not very "good," but technically...none of our LBs are.

However, they all have the potential to be better under a new regime.

Hopefully.