Productivity from a Defensive Tackle Standpoint

[KDawg]

Just a quick question...

What do you view as a successful defensive tackle? Is it personal stats? Is it team stats? Is it general play? Is it sacks?

How would YOU define a good year for a defensive tackle? Be it in the 3-4 or the 4-3. Just looking for opinions on the subject

[KDawg]

I find it strange with the amount of people here that always have an opinion on DT play that no one seems up to the task of simply defining what solid DT production entails.

[authentic]

what i usually look at are how effective he is against the rush up the middle. But most importantly how productive the LBs and DEs are when he's in the game. IMO, stats really aren't an issue, since a great tackle will constantly see double teams. :2cents:

[MattFancy]

For a DT, I look at how productive the DEs are. Haynesworth was constantly double teamed and some times triple teamed last year. His job was to take on the double teams and get pressure up the middle so the ends could collapse the pocket. Considering Carter and Orakpo combined for 22 sacks, I'd say Haynesworth did a pretty damn good job.

DTs are meant to take up space and get pressure up the middle. They may get the occasional sack or tackle, but that's not what their main job is. Haynesworth takes on blockers to make life easier for the DEs and Fletcher.

[KDawg]

Interesting responses so far, keep 'em coming. I'll share my thoughts in a bit.

It's still baffling that so few people care to comment on this topic but are all over other threads about a particular player.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

pass rush wise, if the QB doesnt have a pocket to step into, the DT is doing his job. maybe its my lack of knowledge on the subject, but all the talk i heard about "containment" with blache and williams made me sick. if its a passing down, you get at the QB, period. if its a stunt or a straight rush up the middle, your job should be to kill the QB.

running downs are a little easier to see IMO, if the RB has nowhere to go or literally runs into a massive pile of humans, the DTs are doing a good job. you can see sometimes when a RB has to reroute himself, this is obviously because the projected hole has been clogged due to the DTs good play.

and as someone pointed out, in haynesworth's case at least, if you have great DT play it can really help your DEs. obviously this isnt the case all the time, but when you have a dominant guy like haynesworth garnering the attention that he does, you end up with less guys blocking for the DEs, making their pass rushing job easier.

obviously there is way more to the DT position, but at face value, thats how i see it.

[rookieskin]

I think it all depends on the style of D that you are playing.

I would love to see a style of D that entails the DT's and DE's getting to the QB or RB as quickly as possible and taking him to the ground hard, causing turnovers, disruptions, and overall mayhem every single play.

If the opposing teams adjust by trowing right away and that results in int's and no sack's I guess I can live with that....??

[authentic]

Well since i have a feeling that this thread is "3-4 related", then I will site some of the best NT in the past few years.

-Sam Adams (retired)

-Jamal Williams

-Vince Wolfork

-Casey Hampton

-Kris Jenkins

-Haloti Ngata

Obviously this is not an exhaustive list. Point being they are highly regarded as some of the best NT in the game. Yet when you look at thier career stats, they don't have those gaudy numbers, especially in the sacks department. However, thier success is noted by how the other players around them have benefited. This is why i wouldn't mind seeing Big Al on the inside. I know he wants to rush the passer, but as far as i can see I don't really see anyone outside of Jamal Williams that would be better suited at that position. Just look at RAk's and Carter's stats last season, even in the 4-3.

[fansince62]

I find it strange with the amount of people here that always have an opinion on DT play that no one seems up to the task of simply defining what solid DT production entails.

perhaps they aren't as clever as you are! you know...this was an interesting lead post/idea until I had to read the usual self validating *rap quoted above.

please.....I have tracked your posts because they generally are pretty thoughtful. but this stuff is simply childish...and promotes the very whiplashing on this board you and so many others claim to detest.

out of the ordinary? well......

it's a false question. you need to define the system/scheme the DT is operating in first.

[Forehead]

As far as I'm concerned, I remember the Baltimore Ravens of the 2000-2001 timeframe, when they had Sirigusa and Sam Adams in the middle. I don't recall them making many tackles or getting many sacks.

What I do remember is that no one could run up the middle on them. That Ray Lewis was free to run around and destroy people. And that without them, the D-Ends probably wouldn't have made nearly as many plays, but because of those two D-Tackles, I can name Rob Burnett and Mike McCrary from that team.

That's really all I want from my D-Tackles to consider them good. Clog it up, let the MLB and the other LB's do their thing, help the D-Ends get sacks by not giving the opposing QB a pocket to step up in.

Which is why, as much as I appreciate Haynesworth's ability to take on two defenders and still be disruptive, I would have never paid 100 million for him.

[KDawg]

Well since i have a feeling that this thread is "3-4 related", then I will site some of the best NT in the past few years.

-Sam Adams (retired)

-Jamal Williams

-Vince Wolfork

-Casey Hampton

-Kris Jenkins

-Haloti Ngata

Obviously this is not an exhaustive list. Point being they are highly regarded as some of the best NT in the game. Yet when you look at thier career stats, they don't have those gaudy numbers, especially in the sacks department. However, thier success is noted by how the other players around them have benefited. This is why i wouldn't mind seeing Big Al on the inside. I know he wants to rush the passer, but as far as i can see I don't really see anyone outside of Jamal Williams that would be better suited at that position. Just look at RAk's and Carter's stats last season, even in the 4-3.

It's not necessarily 3-4 related, but it's intertwined, I guess you could say

[KDawg]

perhaps they aren't as clever as you are! you know...this was an interesting lead post/idea until I had to read the usual self validating *rap quoted above.

please.....I have tracked your posts because they generally are pretty thoughtful. but this stuff is simply childish...and promotes the very whiplashing on this board you and so many others claim to detest.

out of the ordinary? well......

it's a false question. you need to define the system/scheme the DT is operating in first.

Erm, what?

Clever.

Self-validating? That isn't me, brother.

It has no childish undertones to it. It's simply a question based on things I've read. I want to know what everyone thinks is important for a defensive tackle.

Nice potshots, though, however unwarranted they are

[AngloSackSon]

Not to get moved off the ball or off your gap on running plays, and to collapse the pocket on passing plays. Everything else, such as getting into the backfield and doubling back pursuit on cutbacks is gravy.

Sacks are not a great indicator.

[fansince62]

pass rush wise, if the QB doesnt have a pocket to step into, the DT is doing his job. maybe its my lack of knowledge on the subject, but all the talk i heard about "containment" with blache and williams made me sick. if its a passing down, you get at the QB, period. if its a stunt or a straight rush up the middle, your job should be to kill the QB.

running downs are a little easier to see IMO, if the RB has nowhere to go or literally runs into a massive pile of humans, the DTs are doing a good job. you can see sometimes when a RB has to reroute himself, this is obviously because the projected hole has been clogged due to the DTs good play.

and as someone pointed out, in haynesworth's case at least, if you have great DT play it can really help your DEs. obviously this isnt the case all the time, but when you have a dominant guy like haynesworth garnering the attention that he does, you end up with less guys blocking for the DEs, making their pass rushing job easier.

obviously there is way more to the DT position, but at face value, thats how i see it.

the question can't be answered until we know Haslet's particular flavor. it has been suggested that he favors an aggressive, attacking defense. these sorts of defense's are usually predicated on disrupting an offense's rhythm through unrelenting pressure and unpredictability (i.e., masking how the defense is actually set up on any given play). The DT role in this sort of defense can still vary depending upon the talent: most often they are space hoggers who liberate the LBs to move freely in space. but the top tier can also penetrate - not just hold their ground occupying blockers. if Haslet really wants to run an attacking defense...I'd press for the max and look for the following:

- size and stamina

- huge strength for bull rush

- quickness off the snap (very quick first 3 steps) for stunts

not many of these types around.

[KDawg]

So so far the general consensus is that a defensive tackle needs to be able to:

-Plug his gap(s)

-Draw double/triple teams

-Help free up the Backers/Ends

-Occasionally get to the QB in passing situations (more likely in an aggressive scheme)

These are all common... Despite if it's an odd/even front. And I agree with all of these.

It's also been said here that sacks are NOT an indicator of success for a defensive tackle.

So with all of that said, why, or why do you not view Albert Haynesworth a success in our system from last season.

There isn't necessarily a right and wrong answer here.

[authentic]

As far as I'm concerned, I remember the Baltimore Ravens of the 2000-2001 timeframe, when they had Sirigusa and Sam Adams in the middle. I don't recall them making many tackles or getting many sacks.

What I do remember is that no one could run up the middle on them. That Ray Lewis was free to run around and destroy people. And that without them, the D-Ends probably wouldn't have made nearly as many plays, but because of those two D-Tackles, I can name Rob Burnett and Mike McCrary from that team.

That's really all I want from my D-Tackles to consider them good. Clog it up, let the MLB and the other LB's do their thing, help the D-Ends get sacks by not giving the opposing QB a pocket to step up in.

Which is why, as much as I appreciate Haynesworth's ability to take on two defenders and still be disruptive, I would have never paid 100 million for him.

Funny you mention that. I remember before the Ravens drafted Ngata, Ray was crying to the media of not having his "Scottie Pippen" (a great NT) since he was the "Michael Jordan" . It got so ugly that he was close to demanding a trade because of this. I about 100% certain this is why they drafted Ngata in '06 - was to keep Ray happy. It also goes to show how much the LBs value the DTs.

[KDawg]

the question can't be answered until we know Haslet's particular flavor. it has been suggested that he favors an aggressive, attacking defense. these sorts of defense's are usually predicated on disrupting an offense's rhythm through unrelenting pressure and unpredictability (i.e., masking how the defense is actually set up on any given play). The DT role in this sort of defense can still vary depending upon the talent: most often they are space hoggers who liberate the LBs to move freely in space. but the top tier can also penetrate - not just hold their ground occupying blockers. if Haslet really wants to run an attacking defense...I'd press for the max and look for the following:

- size and stamina

- huge strength for bull rush

- quickness off the snap (very quick first 3 steps) for stunts

not many of these types around.

Nice to see you've actually decided to join the conversation rather than throw potshots around.

The DTs role doesn't change much from system to system. There are certain times when their job ISN'T to do what they normally do, but most of the time they are occupying offensive linemen. On stunts and such, their responsibilities change.

Sure, there are two-gap tackles and one gap tackles and all of the stuff in between, but I was talking in general when I started this thread. Looking for a common theme.

The three qualities you listed fit very well with the topic at hand and are for sure valued.

Good contribution to the thread and a well thought out post.

[fansince62]

Erm, what?

Clever.

Self-validating? That isn't me, brother.

It has no childish undertones to it. It's simply a question based on things I've read. I want to know what everyone thinks is important for a defensive tackle.

Nice potshots, though, however unwarranted they are

whatever.

the idea is a good one. the follow-on post added nothing and was a veiled probe at other posters you find wanting.

again...I think your OP is a good one. the follow-on? eh. doesn't add anything. what's the point in stating "You guys argue about everything and have produced some standards to judge by...but in this instance you're a bunch of boobs who make claims about your DT flavor of the day without defining what a flavor is?"

anywho.....time to press. I do look for your posts because they are thoughtful. I think the second post is beneath you. enough from me.

[Forehead]

So with all of that said, why, or why do you not view Albert Haynesworth a success in our system from last season.

There isn't necessarily a right and wrong answer here.

I do not, mostly because of the contract. Haynesworth is a very good player, but for someone that has a 100 million (41 million guaranteed) dollar guaranteed contract, I expect better than to be collapsing from exhaustion every other game.

Haynesworth takes on double teams....great, a number of D-Tackles can do that. Haynesworth gets sacks....while I admit this is a nice luxury to have from the D-Tackle spot, I don't consider it a necessity.

I don't blame him for taking the money, but for that kind of cash, I'm basically expecting him to sprout wings and fly over the O-line at the snap. And I'm damn sure expecting him to show up in shape. Basically, he can't succeed from the D-Tackle spot at that amount of money. That kind of contract should be reserved for QB's only, maybe franchise Left Tackles, and even then I'm not so sure.

[KDawg]

whatever.

the idea is a good one. the follow-on post added nothing and was a veiled probe at other posters you find wanting.

again...I think your OP is a good one. the follow-on? eh. doesn't add anything. what's the point in stating "You guys argue about everything and have produced some standards to judge by...but in this instance you're a bunch of boobs who make claims about your DT flavor of the day without defining what a flavor is?"

anywho.....time to press. I do look for your posts because they are thoughtful. I think the second post is beneath you. enough from me.

The follow-on post was a bump as the thread was nearly off of page one not long after I posted it. Although I don't feel the need to explain things, I think it's important that you know why I posted that.

If you truly followed my posts you'd know how incorrect your assumption was. I don't think I'm better than anyone here. I may be slightly more studied than the average ES poster when it comes to football, but certainly not better.

I've read a variety of opinions on DT play... Ranging from "If they aren't getting sacks they aren't good" all the way to "his only job is to free everyone else up, he could get 0 tackles and still be successful"

That's the point behind this whole thing.

I'm not trying to correct ANYONE here. I'm moreso looking to see what everyone's thoughts are. Perhaps to write a Chalk Talk up. Or perhaps just to see the general consensus and to, most importantly, talk football.

I do not, mostly because of the contract. Haynesworth is a very good player, but for someone that has a 100 million (41 million guaranteed) dollar guaranteed contract, I expect better than to be collapsing from exhaustion every other game.

Haynesworth takes on double teams....great, a number of D-Tackles can do that. Haynesworth gets sacks....while I admit this is a nice luxury to have from the D-Tackle spot, I don't consider it a necessity.

I don't blame him for taking the money, but for that kind of cash, I'm basically expecting him to sprout wings and fly over the O-line at the snap. And I'm damn sure expecting him to show up in shape. Basically, he can't succeed from the D-Tackle spot at that amount of money. That kind of contract should be reserved for QB's only, maybe franchise Left Tackles, and even then I'm not so sure.

Ok, so take the contract out of the equation. I know that's a big thing to ask, but pretend he's signed to a moderately fair deal. Would you approve?

[MattFancy]

I think Haynesworth was successful. People can say all they want that he wasn't out there all the time and would sit out plays, blah blah blah. The dude was constantly going against 2 people every single play. Anyone would get worn down facing that. I agree his conditioning could've been better, but he still would've been taking breathers every so often.

His job was to help improve our pass rush. Considering we had 2 guys get double digit sacks, I'd say he did his job.

[Forehead]

Ok, so take the contract out of the equation. I know that's a big thing to ask, but pretend he's signed to a moderately fair deal. Would you approve?

Then yes, because he does what he's supposed to, he can take on two defenders at a time, be disruptive, and you can't argue with the fact that both Orakpo and Carter got over 10 sacks each. However, you could plug in Kevin Williams, Haloti Ngata or another above average D-Tackle and get similar results. I don't think they've getting paid nearly as much.

But yes, contract out of it I'm relatively happy, with the exception of him not being in shape and having to take plays off every other game. That shouldn't be happening, being in shape is part of the damn job. At 50 million (20 million guaranteed) I'm less pissed off about it, but I'm still annoyed.

[KDawg]

I think Haynesworth was successful. People can say all they want that he wasn't out there all the time and would sit out plays, blah blah blah. The dude was constantly going against 2 people every single play. Anyone would get worn down facing that. I agree his conditioning could've been better, but he still would've been taking breathers every so often.

His job was to help improve our pass rush. Considering we had 2 guys get double digit sacks, I'd say he did his job.

I agree fully. His conditioning, quite frankly, sucked. He needs to be in MUCH better shape. But, he was constantly facing multiple offensive players which will wear someone down, especially someone not in great shape (like Haynesworth).

He absolutely did his job, in my opinion. Our sack totals sky rocketed (some of that, obviously in thanks to the pass rushing skills of Orakpo) and he was a large part of the reason why.

So, here's another question, ES, what can Haynesworth do to make himself viewed as being productive from the vast majority of our fanbase? What do you think? Get in better shape? Get more sacks/tackles? Anything you think, please post.

I really like the direction this thread is going, so let's keep pushing it

[Sellersfan]

pass rush wise, if the QB doesnt have a pocket to step into, the DT is doing his job. maybe its my lack of knowledge on the subject, but all the talk i heard about "containment" with blache and williams made me sick. if its a passing down, you get at the QB, period. if its a stunt or a straight rush up the middle, your job should be to kill the QB.

running downs are a little easier to see IMO, if the RB has nowhere to go or literally runs into a massive pile of humans, the DTs are doing a good job. you can see sometimes when a RB has to reroute himself, this is obviously because the projected hole has been clogged due to the DTs good play.

and as someone pointed out, in haynesworth's case at least, if you have great DT play it can really help your DEs. obviously this isnt the case all the time, but when you have a dominant guy like haynesworth garnering the attention that he does, you end up with less guys blocking for the DEs, making their pass rushing job easier.

obviously there is way more to the DT position, but at face value, thats how i see it.

Agree 100%!

[KDawg]

Then yes, because he does what he's supposed to, he can take on two defenders at a time, be disruptive, and you can't argue with the fact that both Orakpo and Carter got over 10 sacks each. However, you could plug in Kevin Williams, Haloti Ngata or another above average D-Tackle and get similar results. I don't think they've getting paid nearly as much.

But yes, contract out of it I'm relatively happy, with the exception of him not being in shape and having to take plays off every other game. That shouldn't be happening, being in shape is part of the damn job. At 50 million (20 million guaranteed) I'm less pissed off about it, but I'm still annoyed.

Okay, cool.

Next question for you, specifically, does the contract bother you as much now now that we're uncapped AND the reason for the overpaying (Vinny Cerrato) is gone? Does it seem like a better deal?