Viewing 12 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • chace1986

      Participant
      Post count: 210

      Interesting article over at PFF.Alterraun Verner: Approximating RevisSam Monson |  April 10, 2014 Value is often a fluctuating concept within the NFL. While we can all agree that quarterback is the league’s most important, and therefore the most valuable, component on a 53-man roster the 32 teams take a wide variety of approaches to the value of the remaining parts.Quarterbacks influence the game more than any of the other players, regardless of the offense that they are placed in. Elite passers can paper over almost any cracks and still drag a team into the playoffs. On the flipside, even the most talented rosters in the league struggle to contend against the better teams if they don’t have a viable quarterback.For other positions the impact any single player can have is often dictated and limited by scheme. Darrelle Revis was the focal point of the Rex Ryan defense in New York as they built that system around him and he allowed them to do everything else they did in coverage.The Bucs traded their first round pick a year ago and a conditional pick that became the 104th overall selection (early in the fourth round) this year for Revis, intending to do something similar in Tampa Bay. After a year of Revis getting back to full speed following a knee injury, the franchise cleaned house and a new regime came in with a completely different schematic approach to the game. Revis went from being a prized asset worth $16 million in the old defense to an overpriced luxury in Lovie Smith’s zone based scheme.SchemingWhile it’s certainly true that a corner can have a huge impact in a Lovie Smith defense (see Tillman, Charles), Smith simply doesn’t value that impact at the dollar-figure Revis was due. He also expects to be able to approach a similar production level with other players, and knows he would, to a degree, be wasting the talents that make Revis so valuable in other schemes.revis-insetThere’s no doubt that Revis could excel in the new Bucs defense. Last season — returning from a major knee injury and some way short of 100% — he was PFF’s top graded corner overall, in a scheme that ended up not dissimilar to the one that will be installed this offseason.Unlike many top cover corners recently, Revis has always played the run well and has been a very physical presence. He is in many ways the perfect zone corner for that defense, but because the scheme is far less flexible than some man-coverage schemes it doesn’t value corners as highly.The Jets would use Revis to track an opponent’s best receiver wherever he lined up. Teams were forced to sacrifice their best weapon in the passing game (which they hate doing) if they wanted to avoid throwing at Revis. In a zone scheme it is far less likely that he would be tracking receivers, because depending on the coverage he will be passing the guy off to another zone anyway. If you want to avoid Revis in that scheme just diagnose the coverage and wait until the receiver running the route clears Revis’ zone.The value placed on the impact of a corner in that type of scheme is significantly lower than the money Revis was due and so the Bucs quite correctly cut him loose. It isn’t that he couldn’t do it. It’s that they could get someone who could do it more or less as well for less than half the price, say the $6.5 million per year that they gave to Alterraun Verner.Approximating RevisVerner isn’t Revis in that he isn’t the kind of shutdown corner Revis can be in a scheme that employs a lot of man coverage. However, in a zone-heavy scheme he is a pretty close approximation. With both players playing a mix of man and zone in 2013 Verner actually allowed a lower percentage of targets into his coverage to be caught, allowed half as many touchdowns and broke up more than twice as many passes.2014-04-09_16-12-07.pngWhen you look at how often each was in coverage and thrown at, only Revis, Richard Sherman and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie were in coverage for more snaps than Verner between each catch surrendered.Verner excels in the kind of scheme that Lovie Smith will be employing in Tampa Bay and costs a fraction of the money that Revis was due. The difference between the two players within that scheme is negligible. Though he might not hold up if asked to lock down a receiver all day in man coverage, Verner is comfortable, aggressive and very capable.Take this play against the Seahawks in Week 6:Verner.jpgThe Seahawks try and convert a 3rd-and-3 by targeting Verner on a slant route intended for Golden Tate. Verner reads Tate’s route well and drives hard on the slant, arriving in time to break it up and force a punt. This was the second time in the game that the Seahawks went to that well and both times Verner rejected it with a pass defensed.2014-04-09_15-22-39.pngThis wasn’t a rare occurrence either. No other corner broke up more passes than the 19 Verner was able to either pick off or get his hands to in defending them. Part of the job description for a corner in Lovie Smith’s defense is to make plays on the ball and that is an area where Verner might actually have the beating of Revis.Value Right NowWhen you consider the trade cost of acquiring Revis in the first place, cutting him after a season essentially serving as his rehab program seems crazy. Yet the new regime in Tampa Bay is right to ignore that aspect. All they are concerned about is the value of Revis right now within Lovie Smith’s defense. In that aspect Revis just isn’t worth the money that he is in another scheme, and for a fraction of the cost they were able to secure a player who can do the same kind of job.Alterraun Verner isn’t close to the player Darrelle Revis is in the abstract, but within the specific scheme the Bucs are running in 2014 and beyond he is a near facsimile. It might seem like a cheap move, but the Bucs saved around $10 million a year without noticeably downgrading at the position within their defense. Like it or not, that’s smart.https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/04/10/alterraun-verner-approximating-revis/

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 975

      Good read actually.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 4140

      Yeah – nice one.We get Verner, Johnson and Fletcher for the price of Revis.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1784

      Good article. I think it’s funny when guys talk about the trade as a bad one. Some have even gone to call it the worst in franchise history or one of them. We got a pro bowl player for a year and then after a year got a player with equal value, a pass rusher, a tackle, and center. We got better as a team.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 8044

      Good article. I think it's funny when guys talk about the trade as a bad one. Some have even gone to call it the worst in franchise history or one of them. We got a pro bowl player for a year and then after a year got a player with equal value, a pass rusher, a tackle, and center. We got better as a team.

      im not sure your logic is sound.  we could have gotten the other players without surrendering a 1st and a 4th.  it was an awful trade. 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 312

      Good article. I think it's funny when guys talk about the trade as a bad one. Some have even gone to call it the worst in franchise history or one of them. We got a pro bowl player for a year and then after a year got a player with equal value, a pass rusher, a tackle, and center. We got better as a team.

      But we lost a 1st and 4th rounder, which is why it's a bad one. I understand with the new regime he didn't fit and it was best to cut our losses, but, as the article states, essentially renting a player for a rehab year at that price is not a good trade.Getting those players and signing Revis are independent events and those players could've all been had whether we signed Revis and released him or not.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2601

      Good article. I think it's funny when guys talk about the trade as a bad one. Some have even gone to call it the worst in franchise history or one of them. We got a pro bowl player for a year and then after a year got a player with equal value, a pass rusher, a tackle, and center. We got better as a team.

      So you wanna trade a 1st round pick to rent a top defensive player every year?

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 8044

      So you wanna trade a 1st round pick to rent a top defensive player every year?

      if it puts us in the Super Bowl yes.  if it leads to a sub .500 season then no.

      Please wait…

    • fredreg

      Participant
      Post count: 30

      verner good..i think he plays man cover well and probly do bump n run, I don’t think he is strong as revis tho..I think verner is probly quicker and just as fast as revis probly faster…I’m thinkn verner’s gonna be put on an island a lot as he can stick with his receiver and make quick adjusts…

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1784

      Good article. I think it's funny when guys talk about the trade as a bad one. Some have even gone to call it the worst in franchise history or one of them. We got a pro bowl player for a year and then after a year got a player with equal value, a pass rusher, a tackle, and center. We got better as a team.

      im not sure your logic is sound.  we could have gotten the other players without surrendering a 1st and a 4th.  it was an awful trade.

      It wasn't an awful trade. Lovie would never had made the trade to begin with because he didn't need to. If Schiano was still here Revis would still be here too. But it didn't work out that way. Consider it an unfortunate set of events that things didn't work out with Schiano and fortunate that Lovie saw the value in releasing Revis and using the cap money to sign players we need. We still have cap space and we met our needs. I'm also not so sure that Schiano would have made the most with the two draft choices we gave up. The trade was not a bad one. It only looks bad because we gave up first rounder and Revis is no longer on the team. I look at it as we don't need to pay a player 16 million dollars when we can spend it on other greater needs because the series of events didn't work out.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 11506

      In summary : CROWN OUR ASS !!!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 8044

      It wasn't an awful trade. Lovie would never had made the trade to begin with because he didn't need to. If Schiano was still here Revis would still be here too. But it didn't work out that way. Consider it an unfortunate set of events that things didn't work out with Schiano and fortunate that Lovie saw the value in releasing Revis and using the cap money to sign players we need. We still have cap space and we met our needs. I'm also not so sure that Schiano would have made the most with the two draft choices we gave up. The trade was not a bad one. It only looks bad because we gave up first rounder and Revis is no longer on the team. I look at it as we don't need to pay a player 16 million dollars when we can spend it on other greater needs because the series of events didn't work out.

      just so we don’t derail the thread how about this… In 2013 the trade was not considered awful. In 2014 the trade is considered awful. In 2015 the trade will be considered awful. Same with 2016, awful. And then from 2017 to the end of time the trade will be considered awful.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 5438

      In retrospect, of course the trade was awful.

      Please wait…

Viewing 12 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.