defiantgiant

Ha ha, yeah, maybe that was a little premature. Still, I agree with you that our FS of the future (if Graham stays at corner) might not be on the roster right now. I'm a little higher on Steltz than you are, from the sound of it, and I do think he can eventually beat out Payne for the SS job, so at least there's that. But really, the way our secondary is shaping up, we're either going to be putting a LOT of the onus on the defensive line and the linebackers, or we're going to see a repeat of last year's defense. A couple of question marks at this time of year are to be expected, but not every single position in the backfield. It's making me a little nervous.

I read this too, and I wonder if the coaches didn't teach this because of the way the linebackers and safeties were used last season. With 2 or even 3 LBs right up in the gaps and the safeties 20 yards from the line of scrimmage, the corners were really hung out to dry. If you don't have any help in coverage, I can see why it would be preferable to turn and run with the receiver: at least you can make the tackle after the catch, even if doing so means that you don't have a chance to make a play on the ball. From how Bowman describes it, it really sounds like this was just another way that our whole defensive performance (or lack thereof) last season trickled down from the defensive line. The d-line couldn't get pressure or stop the run, which meant that the linebackers had to leave their coverage zones and help the line, which meant that the safeties had to play ridiculously deep to prevent big plays, which meant that the corners had to bail almost immediately, rather than get themselves in position to break up a pass. That's a recipe for a terrible pass defense, which is exactly what we had.

Yeah, exactly. He weighed in at 323, and his listed weight is variously reported as 309 or 312. He only needs to drop 11-14 pounds...for a guy his size, that's not much. Look at what Mike Williams on the Redskins has done. Back in January, he was at least 450 pounds. When the Skins signed him at the end of April, he weighed 404. As of last week, he was down to 342. Williams lost over a hundred pounds in seven months - there's no reason in the world why Harrison can't lose 10 or 12. As far as a reason, Harrison had his knee scoped between OTAs and training camp, and that apparently hurt his conditioning regimen. Also, Harrison referred to some family problems he's been dealing with; I don't know what effect that would have had, if any. In any case, the guy just needs to get his conditioning back up, lose a dozen pounds, and get back on the field. If anything, I'm glad that they failed him on his physical and put him on the NFI list. Last season, it seemed like a lot of guys made it through camp with suspect conditioning and then were showing it on the field during games. Harrison should have no problem getting back to his playing weight in pretty short order, and the NFI thing sends the message that the coaching staff is serious about conditioning and commitment.

Yeah, given the circumstances, I like moving Graham back to corner. Maybe Chicago's just running Zack Bowman with the #1s in camp/preseason to see what they've got before turning the job back over to Graham. Graham's a known quantity, after all, and he didn't look half bad as a starter last season. I really do think that we should have left Manning at nickel and put Steltz as the FS. If we have to choose between the two, I would much rather have a slow guy with good instincts than an athletic guy who takes himself out of position all the time. At the VERY least, Manning needs to move back to nickel after the first time he gets burnt for a TD. Steltz reminds me of Hunter Hillenmeyer - he's not overwhelming athletically, but he's assignment-sound and doesn't make mistakes. If the pass rush can get back to what it used to be, that could be enough, at least temporarily. At the end of the day, though, I think we're going to have to go back to the draft for a corner or a free safety. Which one we need will probably depend on where Graham ends up. Steltz, Payne, Manning, and Bullocks all have problems in coverage; the first two because of their limited athleticism, and the last two because of questionable instincts/recognition. If Graham stays at corner, then we don't have any free safeties who can cover. If Graham eventually switches back to safety, he could be the answer there, but then we'll need another body at corner (especially with Tillman getting hurt more frequently and Vasher still a question mark.) At the risk of the Vanderbilt connection getting even more ridiculous, I wouldn't mind at all if the Bears drafted Myron Lewis next year. He was DJ Moore's counterpart at Vandy, and the two of them remind me a LOT of Vasher/Tillman in 2005-2006: Moore's the ballhawk and Lewis is the tackling/size corner (he goes 6'2" 205 lbs.) Lewis could play FS if Graham stays at corner, or he and DJ Moore could pair up again if Graham eventually goes back to safety. One other thing: Lewis has made 25 straight starts for Vanderbilt. As far as I know, he's never missed a game due to injury. We could use some of that in the secondary.

Yeah, I think even in a best-case scenario, Steltz would be a Mike Brown-type free safety. Not 2001 Mike Brown, I'm talking about 2008 Mike Brown. He doesn't seem to make mental mistakes like Danieal Manning, but he also doesn't really have enough range for the position. Like Brown last season, I'd worry that Steltz might know exactly where he needs to be to make a play, only to find that his feet can't get him there fast enough. Also, the guy's a fourth-round pick: if he can push Kevin Payne for the starting SS job, that's more than enough value for where he was drafted. Yeah, I agree. I really liked Graham for a conversion to free safety: he tackles well enough to do it, and he's definitely much better in coverage than our other safety candidates. But Graham himself said that he didn't play the position much in college, and that he thought of himself as a corner. I think he was really starting from square 1 at FS, which was fine when we had plenty of depth at corner. With Tillman out indefinitely, we don't have the luxury of taking a quality contributor and starting him over at a new position. I don't know of many teams that'd be willing to trade away a starting-caliber FS: we'd probably need to give up a lot to get one. I wish the Rams hadn't franchised OJ Atogwe: he'd be my first pick if I were out looking for a free safety. Aside from Tinoisamoa, Atogwe was the only bright spot on the Rams' defense. In his past two seasons, he's had 13 picks and 17 passes broken up, to go along with 160 total tackles. He also hasn't missed a game since he got the starting job.

I thought I'd start a new thread for this, since it's not clear how much of it is related to Tillman's injury and how much is not. Here are the changes in the secondary so far: - Danieal Manning is back at FS... - ...but Craig Steltz will replace him in the nickel package. On obvious passing downs, Manning will move to nickel back (although Jeff Dickerson suggests that Corey Graham might get some snaps there as well.) - In the base package, Steltz is the backup SS behind Kevin Payne. - Corey Graham is back at corner... - ...but Zack Bowman is the starter at left corner in Tillman's absence. So, unless I'm wrong, our secondary depth chart looks like this in the base package: LCB: Bowman/Graham FS: Manning/Steltz SS: Payne/Steltz RCB: Vasher/DJ Moore ...and like this in the nickel package: LCB: Bowman/Graham FS: Steltz/Graham? SS: Payne/Bullocks? NB: Manning/Graham RCB: Vasher/DJ Moore This is obviously a lot of shaking up, and a lot of weird situational personnel groups. It's odd to have three of your defensive backs (Graham, Steltz, and Manning) all playing multiple positions. On top of that, it's weird to pull your starting FS on passing downs, then put in a guy whose normal position is backup SS. It's also kind of weird that Graham, who started more games at corner last season than anyone not named Peanut, doesn't appear to have a starting job in either package. Personally, I'd much rather see Graham and Vasher at corner, Steltz and Payne at safety, and Manning as the full-time nickel back. Would it be a perfect group? No, definitely not. But listen to what the players have to say about where they fit best: Steltz has stated that he feels comfortable at free safety, Graham has said that he's better at corner than at safety, and Danieal Manning says that he "really, really like nickel." Until everything shakes out, I think the best course of action is just to put each guy at the position he knows how to play. What do you guys think?

Yeah, even if they got burned really bad on a blitz, they'd be blitzing again the next down. Jim Johnson defenses were always fun to watch, except when the Bears were playing them.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. The Lions just traded for Orien Harris, a guy who has just one NFL start in three seasons. Detroit is his SEVENTH team since he came into the league in 2006. He's put up all of 14 tackles in 3 years, of which only 4 were unassisted. If the Lions thought Orien Harris was worth Ronald Curry, I have to think they'd give up a conditional late-rounder for Dvoracek (provided, as you pointed out, that they didn't think the Bears were just going to cut him.) As for Anthony Adams, I think if the Bears were willing to give him up for some reason, he'd bring a lot more than a 6th from Detroit. He's miles better than any DT that they've got: he's relatively injury-free, not too old, has plenty of starting experience, and he's pretty good against the run.

According to ESPN and the Bears' website, Danieal Manning is now the starting FS after Peanut's back surgery. When the Bears use the nickel package, however, Manning will move to nickel corner and Steltz will replace him at FS. Lovie says it's just an effort to get all their best players on the field, but I think this means that Corey Graham is probably moving back to corner. I wouldn't mind picking him up if we're going to PUP Tillman. McAlister's probably only good for 6 games anyway; we could play him through week 5, then release him and take Tillman off the list after the bye week. That said, the Bears have had much better luck with their young/rookie corners than most teams, and Jerry Angelo has a great track record when it comes to picking good defensive backs in the middle-to-late rounds. If they do move Graham back to corner, I'd feel OK about our young guys. Graham's not as good in coverage as Tillman, but he looked to be improving some last year, and he's about as good a tackler as Peanut is (which is saying something.) At the very least, Graham's a known quantity at corner: his play last season gives you a pretty good idea of what to expect. He's not going to be a shutdown cover man, but he doesn't have any glaring liabilities, and he's really pretty good against the run. If Vasher or Bowman can step up, we could have a decent pair of corners even without Tillman.

To be clear: I don't think any team in the league other than Detroit would be willing to trade for Dusty. But for all the improvements the Lions have made elsewhere on the defense, their interior defensive line still looks like an expansion squad. They've got maybe the worst group of DTs I've ever seen, and the position is critical to what Jim Schwartz says he wants to do on defense. I really do think we could swing a trade, if only because of how bad Detroit is at DT. The only two real veterans they have are every bit as injury-prone and ineffective as Dusty, and much much older. The rest of the guys have practically no starting experience between them. I mean, Detroit's starting DTs (Chuck Darby and Grady Jackson) are 69 years old between the two of them. Both of them have bad knees. Both of them have missed time for injuries the last couple of seasons. Grady Jackson is still facing a possible 4-game suspension. Darby was never very good, and Jackson's play has fallen off a cliff the past couple of years. That's a bad, bad situation. Detroit actually has some decent talent at DE, but if they don't make some additions at DT somehow, their d-line is going to be a BIG liability.

I think that's right. However, if they can't get Tillman off the PUP list by September 5th, he'll have to miss the first six weeks of the season regardless of recovery time. That'll be pretty bad. The Falcons, Seahawks, and Packers could give us a lot of trouble without Peanut. Even the Lions could be a problem: who're we going to put on Calvin Johnson? Corey Graham isn't the cover corner that Tillman is; meanwhile, Vasher's 7 inches shorter and 60 pounds lighter than Johnson. I like all of our young corners, but losing Tillman sucks. This secondary was already a problem, and now literally every position is a question mark. Vasher needs to return to form and stay healthy, Kevin Payne needs to learn to tackle and stay healthy, and both Graham and Steltz need to prove that they're starting-caliber players. I'm not saying our guys can't do it, because I think they have a lot of potential. I'm just saying that we don't have a single known quantity in the secondary. That makes me nervous.

I don't think Dusty's as good a candidate for a rebound season as the rest of the d-line. His problem has never been effort or technique, that I've seen. He just doesn't have the anchor to be stout against the run, and we play him as a nose tackle. I think Dusty might be a lot better suited to being a 3-technique, even though he probably wouldn't be spectacular at that spot. As much as I usually hate it when Bears players go to other teams in the division (see also: Bernard Berrian) I think we should try to deal Dusty to the Lions. We could probably get better value for him than he's worth, as the Lions have very little at DT, to the point where they're picking up waiver wire/practice squad guys to try to fill the position. They've got Grady Jackson and Chuck Darby (who are both in their 30s with significant recurring injury problems,) then a bunch of young guys with little to no starting experience behind them. As bad as he is, Dusty could get a lot of playing time in Detroit, maybe even a starting job. Trading him for a conditional pick based on playing time would make sense, given his injury history: I'm thinking a 5th-7th rounder that could escalate up to a 3rd-4th if he starts for most of the season. With the Lions' situation at the position, the Bears could end up getting decent compensation in a scenario like that.

I don't have the quarter-by-quarter stats, unfortunately, but I agree with you about our D-line wearing down. Between the amount of time the defense spent on the field and the relatively thin rotation at DT, the d-line just couldn't stay effective for a whole game last year. It's going to be an issue that the coaching staff will need to address, going forward: even if Tommie can get over his knee problems enough to contribute in games, his conditioning is always going to be a problem, since they constantly hold him out of midweek practices now. Basically, I agree with your take on the defense: we need to add quality contributors to the d-line, ensure that the offense spends more time on the field, or both. I'm pretty satisfied that Angelo's added interior d-linemen who can contribute. I'm excited for both Gilbert and Harrison, and I think the two of them plus Harris and Anthony Adams will be more than enough to have a good rotation on the inside. The offense worries me a little more. As much as I like our offense's potential, I can't say for sure that we have the pieces to run down the clock like we did 3-4 years ago. Look at it this way: when the Bears' defense was firing on all cylinders in 2005 and 2006, we had a good-to-very-good run-blocking offensive line and a heavy two-back rotation in the running game. We ran the ball 488 times in 2005 and 503 times in 2006 (8th and 5th in the NFL for rushing attempts, respectively.) That's a recipe for eating up a lot of clock and giving your defense time to rest. For a high-effort, turnover-driven defense like ours, it's vital that guys get to rest for a long time between series. Even with Forte's heroics last year, the Bears only ran the ball 434 times, good for 15th in the league. To get back to where we were in 2006, we need to add around 70 carries to that number. Maybe Kevin Jones will step up and give us 100 carries next season, but it's certainly not a given. And our offensive line, while it has some interesting young pieces, isn't the road-grading group that we had in 05-06. I'm holding out hope that our offense can keep the defense on the bench, but I don't think we'll know what we have until a few games into the season.

I just saw this linked on another message board, thought I'd repost it here: ProFootballFocus.com They have every single game of the last two seasons broken down snap-by-snap. They'll tell you who was on the field for any given snap in any game, where they lined up, and how they did that game. I'd be lying if I said I understood their player ratings yet, but it's really cool to be able to see what package the Bears put on the field for every snap. A couple of things I noticed immediately: - The Bears flip-flopped their defensive tackles a lot more than I expected. In a lot of games, Tommie Harris was getting nearly equal snaps at the left and right defensive tackle spots. - On the other hand, we almost never switched our CBs. No matchup corners here. Even after Vasher went down and we were starting Corey Graham, Tillman stayed on the left side no matter where the other team's best WR was lined up. - Matt Forte was in on EVERY play. No, I'm serious. It's unbelievable. I'm surprised he's still alive, given how much he was on the field. Anyway, check it out. It's very cool in terms of watching who was matched up on whom, who lined up where, etc.

Well, I basically included Moss because I'm not sure what kind of WR Hester's ultimately going to be. From what I've seen, Lee Evans is a purely downfield, outside-the-numbers receiver: he's about as well-rounded as Bernard Berrian, which is not very. By contrast, Moss is a much more complete receiver: he's less of a deep threat, but he's better than Evans at going over the middle and better on short slants/drags/etc, which he can then turn into some big plays. I'm just not sure which guy Hester's going to resemble more. I've seen a little bit of both, thus far.

I can see a Lee Evans-Devin Hester comparison. Evans and Hester both: - are smaller guys (under 6'0" and under 200 lbs.) - have great speed - aren't great at getting off a jam - aren't great red-zone threats - typically line up at flanker - play on teams that are built around the run - are the only real threat at WR on their respective teams (until this offseason for Evans). However, you could also say all those things about Santana Moss, and he had a very different stat line from what Evans had: Evans 2008: 102 targets, 63 catches (61.8%) for 1017 yards (16.1 YPC) and 3 TDs Moss 2008: 138 targets, 79 catches (57.2%) for 1044 yards (13.2 YPC) and 6 TDs I like your fewer catches/higher YPC prediction, and I could definitely be convinced that Hester's 2009 would look something like Lee Evans' 2008. I'd hope that Hester would get into the end zone more often than Evans did, but other than that, I could see it. I wonder, however, if his season won't look a little more like Santana Moss' 2008. I think ultimately, Hester will probably fall somewhere between the two. It'll be interesting to see, though. As long as he puts up at least 900-1000 yards and a handful of scores, I'll be happy, regardless of how he does it. If he were to put up numbers like Greg Jennings, though, I don't know what I'd do: Jennings 2008: 125 targets, 80 catches (64%) for 1292 yards (16.2 YPC) and 9 TDs Jennings got just about the same number of targets that I'm predicting Hester will get this season. If Hester can do as much with his as Jennings did with his, Darryl Drake's going to have a job for a very, very long time.

Not to mention that they burned through their entire depth chart at receiver. They lost Deon Branch, Nate Burleson, Bobby Engram, Ben Obomanu and Logan Payne. Last season for the Seahawks was the only time I can remember when a team's starting QB and #1 through #5 receivers all went down with injuries. That would destroy any team's season.

Yeah, plus it's not an either-or proposition regarding whether Harris can play. It's not the case that he'll either go back to being the old Tommie or we'll replace him with Gilbert. It could very well be the case that periodically spelling Harris (presumably with Gilbert) is enough to get good production out of him and avoid reinjuring his knee. It's not like d-linemen, even franchise guys like Harris, need to be on the field for every snap: look at what the Giants do with their d-line. The one spot on the team where the Bears have a lot of quality depth and talent is the defensive line. If we can implement a rotation like the Giants', I wouldn't mind seeing Harris on the bench sometimes. Especially if that means that Tommie can come in fresh in the fourth quarter and help the defense put some games away for a change.

Nfo, that all sounds very reasonable, with one exception: The thing to remember is that among receivers with significant playing time, YPC is very tightly grouped. A 14 is pretty high, a 12 is just OK, and a 10 is pretty low. As such, a one-yard bump is very significant. For example, among players with at least 30 receptions in 2008, Hester's 13.0 YPC put him at 43rd in the league. If he'd had a one-yard increase up to 14.0, that would have moved him all the way up to 29th, right around where Reggie Wayne was. If Hester had a YPC of 16-17, that's another story entirely. Only 11 guys in the NFL managed a 16.0 or better on at least 30 catches. A YPC of 17.0 would put Hester right under Calvin Johnson, and significantly above guys like Marques Colston, Greg Jennings, and Lee Evans. That's a lot to expect from Hester, even if you think (as I do) that he's due for a big step forward. Even a 16 would put Hester above legitimate deep-threat receivers like Roddy White, Braylon Edwards, and Nate Washington. Larry Fitz, Randy Moss, and Santonio Holmes are all pretty serious big-play threats, and none of them even got to 15.0 YPC last season. So while I agree that Hester's going to be a lot better, I just don't see him having a YPC that high. I'm thinking he'll be closer to Reggie-Wayne-good than to Calvin-Johnson-good.

It might not even be Cutler who's responsible for Marshall and Royal's success, to be honest. I think we'll find out this season whether Jay elevates his receivers' play or vice versa. I really hope it's the former. Regardless of how it turns out, though, I think Marshall and Royal owe their success more to Shanahan calling a million passes per game, such that they each got an overwhelming number of passes going their way. Hell, Shanahan called Eddie Royal's number 129 times last year. That's more than a lot of teams' #1s, and totally ridiculous for a rookie #2 receiver. All that said, I'll be happy with Cutler if he can do two things, neither of which is related to Marshall or Denver: 1.) Hit Devin Hester on all those deep passes Kyle Orton underthrew/overthrew/otherwise missed last year. 2.) Get Earl Bennett to put up numbers anywhere close to what he did at Vanderbilt. If Jay can do that, and I think he can, then I'm happy.

Emphasis mine. I think you hit the nail on the head here. The reason the Bears' scheme was so successful in 05-06, aside from fewer injuries and better execution, was that Rivera wasn't a total Tampa-2 devotee and knew when to throw in a new wrinkle. The Tampa-2 has some glaring weaknesses (read: TE on an 8-yard slant) that need to be camouflaged in order for it to be successful. Rivera got that done by deviating from Lovie's scheme at exactly the right moments. If teams can count on you to do the same thing every down, regardless of how effective it is or how well you execute, they're going to find a way to beat you. A good defense in the NFL needs to be both efficient and unpredictable. I hope Lovie and Rod can make that happen this season. As for my predictions, here we go: Pass Attempts: Jay Cutler, 540 Completions: Jay Cutler, 345 Passing Yards: Jay Cutler, 3940 Passing TDs: Jay Cutler, 24 Passing INTs: Jay Cutler, 14 Passer Rating: Jay Cutler, 89.4 Receptions: Greg Olsen, 78 Receiving Yards: Devin Hester, 1008 Receiving TDs: Greg Olsen, 7 Carries: Matt Forte, 305 Rushing Yards: Matt Forte, 1312 Rushing TDs: Matt Forte, 10 Tackles: Lance Briggs, 135 Sacks: Alex Brown, 11 Interceptions: Charles Tillman, 5 Forced Fumbles: Charles Tillman, 4 Some thoughts: - Part of my calculation for Hester is that I don't think he'll get thrown at more than 120 times or so. I'm predicting significant, but not huge, increases in both his catch rate and yards-per-catch. I'm thinking 60% and 14 YPC, respectively (that's up from 55% and 13 YPC in 2008.) So his stat line would look something like 72 catches, 1008 yards, 5 TDs. - On that same note, I think Cutler will go to Earl Bennett around 85 times (not very scientific - I just took the ratio of Cutler's throws to Marshall:Royal, which is about 1.41:1, then applied that to Hester:Bennett.) Hopefully, that'll make Bennett's stat line something like 55 receptions for 665 yards and 5 TDs. I'd be very happy with that stat line in his first year as a starter. - I think Urlacher's going to rebound, just not all the way to 2006 levels. That was a ridiculous year for him, even by his own standards. I think he should end up with 120-130 tackles on the season. - Same goes for Ogunleye: I see him bouncing back to 7-8 sacks or so, but not back to his 10 from 2005. For one thing, he'll lose too much playing time to Idonije, who's moving to LE full-time. I think those two could be in a 60/40 or even 50/50 rotation. Gilbert could steal some reps, too. Alex Brown, on the other hand, should benefit just as much from Marinelli and won't lose as many snaps to Mark Anderson/Henry Melton. Given how many non-sack QB hits he had last season (when all the QBs we played were taking 3-step drops,) I think he's the best candidate for double digits. - Speaking of Mark Anderson, I think he plays well enough to stay on the team and solidify his spot as a nickel rusher. I'm thinking he logs at least 6 sacks, maybe even 7 or 8. Not like his rookie season, but good enough. - Lastly, I just don't believe that Vasher will step up. Tillman, sure: if his shoulders are fixed, I think he'll play better than last season. But post-2005, Vasher has looked bad even when he was healthy enough to play. I think he might play just well enough to hold off Zack Bowman, but I think this could be Vasher's last season as a Bear.

Yeah, I think you're exactly right. The biggest stumbling block for most young QBs seems to be making progressive reads and doing so quickly. If you're starting a rookie QB or a young guy with no starting experience, you need to limit his reads, give him more time to make them, or (if possible) both. Certainly the Pats gave Cassel less time, but they also asked him to make more complicated reads: I think the superior weapons around Cassel arguably made his performance MORE impressive, rather than less. In a way, I think the Ravens and Falcons benefited from each only having one really good WR. That "lack of weapons" meant that Ryan and Flacco could get away with locking in on their respective #1 guys (Roddy White in Atlanta and Derrick Mason in Baltimore) if they were struggling to progress through their reads, since their teams' passing attacks probably would have been feeding those two guys the ball anyway. Sure, Michael Jenkins and Mark Clayton aren't terrible, but neither team loses TOO much if the QB goes straight from his #1 read to a checkdown pass to the running back or whoever's acting as the last read. The Patriots' system, meanwhile, features both Welker and Moss heavily. That means their QB needs to progress through his reads on both guys before checking down. Since both guys are elite talents and crucial to the Pats' offense working, forcing the ball to just one of them is worse for the Pats than it would be for the Falcons or Ravens. The Pats gave Cassel two elite talents to work with, but that meant he was responsible for distributing the ball to both of them. This is another way in which I think he'll have an easier situation in Kansas City: like Atlanta and Baltimore last year, KC has a clear-cut #1 guy (Dwayne Bowe) and just-OK guys at #2 and #3. Consequently, it won't hurt them too much if Cassel occasionally forces the ball to Bowe or dumps off to Larry Johnson instead of making his reads on Mark Bradley/Bobby Engram. That should take some of the pressure off Cassel and allow him to develop his decision-making more comfortably.

Honestly, I think Marshall's not that incredible ON the field, either. His stats look great until you find out how many times Cutler threw to him. I mean, these are impressive numbers: Marshall 2007: 102 receptions, 1325 yards, 7 TDs Marshall 2008: 104 receptions, 1265 yards, 6 TDs ...but Marshall led the league in targets both seasons, with 170 in 2007 and 182 in 2008. So between 2007 and 2008, Cutler threw to Marshall on 352 passes. That's massive - no other receiver in the league comes close. Over that span, Larry Fitz is in 2nd place with 321 targets, and TJ Houshmandzadeh is 3rd with 305. No other #1 receiver in the league, even ones who were absolutely the go-to guys on their respective teams (guys like T.O., Derrick Mason, Roddy White, and Braylon Edwards,) managed to break 300 targets. Any reasonably capable receiver would look good when thrown to that often. Let's assume for a minute that in 2009, Devin Hester fails to improve at ALL on a per-target basis: I mean that he doesn't get open any more often, he doesn't catch the ball more often, he doesn't put up more average yards or scores per pass that goes his way, nothing. Even if that were the case, Hester would STILL put up good-looking numbers if Cutler threw to him as often as he did to Marshall. Judging from Hester's 2008 per-target production, if you threw him 352 passes, he'd have 195 catches for 2544 yards and 11 TDs. If we assume that the targets in Hester's hypothetical two seasons break down the same way Marshall's 2007-2008 did, that means we'd see the following: Hester 2009: 94 receptions, 1229 yards, 5 TDs Hester 2010: 101 receptions, 1315 yards, 6 TDs Not too shabby, huh? On the same number of attempts, Hester would put up numbers very comparable to Marshall's. I think that's reasonable evidence that a lot of people (especially in the sports media) are both underestimating Hester and dramatically overestimating Marshall. Needless to say, I doubt the Bears will nearly double Hester's workload for 2009 (he was only thrown at 92 times in 2008.) All I'm trying to say is this: on a per-target basis, which I think is one of the better ways to gauge a receiver's performance, Marshall just isn't that special. He's pretty good, but no better than a lot of starting guys. In my mind, he's just an above-average receiver who's benefited tremendously from a huge number of passes going his way.

Yeah, this is exactly it: Cassel did very respectably with bad, bad protection. That's not an easy thing for a first-time starter to do. And while the Pats' run game wasn't exactly bad by any means, it wasn't nearly as strong as Baltimore's or Atlanta's: those two were top 5 in the league, easily. So both Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco had much better ground games to take the pressure off, and they both had MUCH better protection, to boot. I think what Cassel did was pretty impressive, and I think the Pats' adjustments over the course of the season provide a pretty clear roadmap for how the Chiefs can get the best possible performance out of him. I'll be surprised if he's not at least in the middle of the pack among starting QBs next year.

Yeah, even when Joyner's stats are favorable to Bears players, they raise some questions in my mind. For one, he doesn't seem to be differentiating between the various ways an offensive lineman can win at the point of attack. What I mean is that there's no valuation (that I can see) placed on different types of blocks in Joyner's analysis: a pancake is the same as a stand-up is the same as a cut-block. The different ways that an o-lineman can get his guy blocked have significantly different effects on the success of the run game. By way of a for-instance, Garza cut-blocked a LOT last season. It seemed like every time they were running behind him, he was diving at somebody's legs. That's all well and good, except that a cut-block effectively takes both the defender AND the blocker out of the game: it's pretty hard to get down the field and make a second-level block when you're lying on the ground with a DT on top of you. By Joyner's metrics, however, a lineman who wins with cut-blocks 88% of the time is every bit as good as a lineman who ragdolls his man 88% of the time, and stays free to hustle down the field and make a second block. In terms of real-world impact, that's just not true. Still, there are two things on which I do unequivocally agree with Joyner: Josh Beekman was better last season than everyone thought, and John St. Clair is an AWFUL run-blocker. Even though Pace isn't the stellar player that he was 4-5 years ago, even a league-average tackle would be a big upgrade over St. Clair.