Saturday Night Sack Fest!!!
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 27, 2010 11:18 PM PDT
in News
Email
PrintThe Raiders are leading the league in Sacks with 12:
Kamerion Wimbley - 4
Matt Shaughnessy - 2
Lamarr Houston - 2
Trevor Scott, Thomas Howard, Tommy Kelly, Chris Cooper all have 1 each.
Another interesting statistic is 3rd down conversions: Oakland is 10 of 29 and Chicago and Dallas combined have a total of 5 out of 30 attempts. Admittedly, 1 out of 3 isn't too impressive, but our opponents' numbers, 1 out of 6, indicate (for those who don't trust their own eyes) that we do have a formidable Defense (preseason or not).
Offensively, our time of possession is okay too, 31.14 to 28.45. We are slightly behind in turnovers (-1) and are averaging 7 penalties / game.
On both sides of the ball, catastrophic blunder plays haven't yet been eradicated.
All said, If we can continue on the course we're on while reducing the penalties and eliminating bonehead-plays, we'll be just fine.
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The sack numbers are great
and the best part of it is almost all of them have come from the defensive line position. Do you or anyone else happen to know a site that breaks plays down where we can see team statistics on plays where they blitz?
The turnovers are a little alarming, in that the coaches have been busting on this defense to create them and they aren’t. I realize it’s preseason, I am just hoping it is a trend that changes.
Hey you guys!
*note
all of Wimbley’s were as a down lineman. I am almost positive Scott’s was. Howard’s I have no idea, but even if it wasn’t that is only one out of 12 that was from a LB. Good sign indeed.
The other thing is, that most of these came against the opposing 1st string. 9 or 10 out of 12 of them I believe. Awesome! The other’s team QB must go down and he must go down hard.
Hey you guys!
by Rich Langford on Aug 27, 2010 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions
SFs line is their weakest element and I fully expect Oakland to continue this trend of getting to the QB
Then teams will have to dedicate resources for pass protection and we have the choice to match their reinforcements and continue the hyper-pressure or to have more DBs in coverage. I like the adding more pressure option, upping the stakes, option better.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 27, 2010 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Force them into mistakes. I like it.
And not all out blitzes, just one extra guy. The Raiders have so many guys that can rush the QB, that if Marshall gets creative the opposing QB’s will not know where to look.
Combine this with Nnam moving all over the field and it’ll be an entirely different pre-snap experience for opposing QB’s. Of course, this will only be possible if they stop the run.
As your stats point out, this D looks to be deadly on 3rd down.
Hey you guys!
by Rich Langford on Aug 27, 2010 11:56 PM PDT up reply actions
On 4th down, Raider D stopped them 50% (2 out of 4 of which 1 was in the blunder category)
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions
50 percent 4th down isn't bad.
I am not sure what the distances were, but if they were under 5 yards this is under the league average.
Here is a great article analyzing 4th down conversions and using those stats combined with expected points to say coaches don’t go for it enough.
Hey you guys!
by Rich Langford on Aug 28, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions
On the 4th down blunder, do you know what the safties were doing?
The only look I saw, I couldn’t tell. Seemed like a screwy D call to me.
Hey you guys!
by Rich Langford on Aug 28, 2010 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions
When Cutler reversed and rolled left, there was only a single receiver on that side and only a single DB
the corner Ware who advanced towards Cutler(!) then froze in no man’s land
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Right, but 4th down in that situation I am thinking you'd want more safety help
I am guessing it was a one deep safety look there and the deep was Huff, so where was Branch? It wasn’t a blitz, I don’t think. Branch probably got sucked down by a TE. I have no idea, but I do know if it was a reg season game and they left a rookie on an island like that on 4th down, I’d be pissed off.
Hey you guys!
by Rich Langford on Aug 28, 2010 12:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Asom1 moving around is pure genious in its simplicity. We're finally using our assets properly.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Voted the Missile, have a hunch Marshal is going to bring the safeties and drop the speedy LB Kam back
Maybe Tyvon will have his breakthrough game tomorrow and win the Weekly Sack Title.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 12:11 AM PDT reply actions
i said other...
And I honestly believe Kelly will lead the team with two sacks.
I Can See, TOTAL Frustration.......
On the faces of the Offense, OC’s, & Head Coaches, If the Raider’s Defense continue to mix it up !!!! 4-3, 3-4, 46, and a 5-2 looks, with the blitz !!!! And NEVER, EVER send the same man twice in a row, which would keep them guessing, and hopefully guessing wrong !!! When Wimbly’s in at the end position, he’s shown he can be a FUCKING BEAST !!! And it’s appearing that no matter who’s in on the front line, INCLUDING TOMMY KELLY ???( WOW ) Can all get after that azz !!! MY, MY, MY, how long has it been since we could say THAT !!!! Tic Toc, Tic Toc !!!
Adding that to the list of things to watch (btw. plays) 'frustration on OC's face'
Kelly isn’t on the Sack Comp list this week because he did well last week. But, if the list goes up for Thursday, Tommy will be on it b/c his games have always followed that up-down-up-down pattern.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Nice work! Your response on the 'will D cont. to stop the rush' cracked me up. No big plays, Baby! Just keep Dominating!!!
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions
The most important thing is to avoid injuries
The Rams lost their best receiver for the season last night, and another team suffered a major loss to one of their key players.
For all those fans who want a big victory, do not forget it is meaningless. Last year we lost Schilens and Miller in pre season and we never found a replacement for Miller.
As much as I would love to beat the 49ers, the loss of a key player or two is the most important thing to avoid.
What do you suggest? Football is by nature a dangerous activity and evidence will prove that an individual's plaing 100% all out
is safer than holding back. Unless your suggesting less playing time for the starters (?). But, it’s already determined – the starters will play through the 1-2 series of the 2nd Half. So, again, what can be done about it? Injuries happen; look at KC last night, they lost their MLB (neck) … don’t know how long he’ll be out and another guy. Shit happens … so we have to Deal and Pray.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
I see no reason to play starters
more than the first quarter. I absolutely agree that the game is violent but why risk your key players on an exhibition game?. For years LT didn’t play in any exhibition games and Peyton never plays more than the first quarter. Sure, I understand chemistry of receivers and QB and in the Raiders case they need that, but I didn’t understand Zack Miller playing in the 3rd quarter of last week’s game. I would not play McFadden more than two series tonight, and Bush would not play at all. I thought Murphy played too long against Chicago also. Why play Nnamdi tonight? It is pointless to risk an injury to a player who doesn’t need to play. I understand that you may lose the same player against Tennessee in the opener, that is football, that is the risk, but tonight? I am one who doesn’t agree with the old saw that players get hurt when they hold back. In practice players hold back all the time, and in early exhibitions you see players who hold back when in a game you know they would have lowered their shoulder, or delivered a big hit.
I am more interested in the after the game talk when Cable says no one was seriously injured.
Zach was in because Hugh's using new formations (like the double TE w/Meyers) and who knows what else they'll try
This is the time for experimentation for taking risks and seeing what works and what looked good on paper only to be hatched as monstrous. I believe the score is meaningless for the most part beyond when the starters are pulled (some believe meaningless altogether). But there are some valid measurable in preseason despite the set up – teams will always do certain basic things that can’t be other than a part of football, block, tackle, run routes/catch blah blah, and if these basics are not getting executed then that’s a red-flag going into the games that count.
Increased play does expose to increased risk of injury – no doubt about it. On the other hand, practicing individual and team execution is on the other side of the scale. Cable is aware of the balance and isn’t reckless, imo.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions
but you said the pre-saeason are scrimmages, not games
so in other words, you just look for reasons to wave your foam number one finger. BUT, when things disturb you, you look for contrived statistics to back your erroneous assertions.
How are my statements contradictory? Preseason serves an important f(x) it allows teams to adjust to 7 months of team inactivity
it also provides rehearsal of of new sets and plays as well as evaluating players. The progression over the 4 games is logical and rather set – the 3rd game will have most starters playing a half and some teams, like the Raiders, will have the starter returning to employ half-time adjustments (more reality practice). So, bottom line, if a player is already determined to be out there on the field he better be going 100% b/c holding back is positively the most dangerous course of action.
S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Aug 28, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
You're equivocating
It’s a fallacy. If you are smart, you’ll avoid fallacies.
by Spirals galore on Aug 28, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I just want to say
I believe I said Wimbley was going to be the man this year and I still am sticking by it.
When you least expect it there I am waiting below to take you out......if your lucky.
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Aug 28, 2010 4:53 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
