Well, if Rodgers actually asked to re-sign Cobb?

[HardRightEdge]

Right so who is an "elite cover corner" with all the rules and changes making it almost impossible sometimes to play man to man? My point was more that the Cards are not going to cut Peterson and I have my own issues with Peterson. I was using him as a point of reference of what "so called experts" call an elite corner and giving up 8 TD's. I would rather have Shields at an average of 9.7 mill a year compared to Peterson at 14 mill. 9.7 sounds a lot better then 14 which should further show Shields contract was not a bad deal.

l wouldn't trade Shields straight up for Peterson even if the money was the same.

I try to resist judging players I've not seen play at least a few times unless there's some compelling statistical basis for doing so. Revis, Haden and Sherman are elite corners.

 

[brandon2348]

l wouldn't trade Shields straight up for Peterson even if the money was the same.

Exactly so when I hear people saying we can get out of the Shields deal in two years it blows my mind. Unless some personal issue came up or major career threatening injury why would you want out. He is 27 and locked in for 9.7 on average for four years and the prices are just going to go up. It think it's a hell of a deal.

 

[brandon2348]

l
I try to resist judging players I've not seen play at least a few times unless there's some compelling statistical basis for doing so. Revis, Haden and Sherman are elite corners.

That's fine. Even if someone were to see Shields as "second tier" the deal is still good based on what his value could be in the future. I am pretty sure that if TT could go back in time he would still pull the trigger on the Shields deal.

Julis Jones makes a lot of guys look "less then perfect". IMO Shields will be fine.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Exactly so when I hear people saying we can get out of the Shields deal in two years it blows my mind.

There was one guy who was arguing that but I'm not going to bother looking back to see who it was. There was also a guy in one of the other threads who was talking about some blown Shields coverage in the week after his concussion when in fact Sheilds was all over the guy even if his head wasn't turned to the ball.

Maybe those two posters are the same guy and he has a ******* for Shields or he expects island corners to never give up down field catches.

 

[HardRightEdge]

That's fine. Even if someone were to see Shields as "second tier" the deal is still good based on what his value could be in the future. I am pretty sure that if TT could go back in time he would still pull the trigger on the Shields deal.

Julis Jones makes a lot of guys look "less then perfect". IMO Shields will be fine.

I see him as second tier. Before they signed him, I thought $8 mil per year was about right. The deal seemed to follow the thinking behind the Burnett contract...more than he should get based on performance but for a player who might have more upside. In the end I wouldn't quibble over a differential that amounts to a vet rotational player salary.

 

[brandon2348]

There was one guy who was arguing that but I'm not going to bother looking back to see who it was. There was also a guy in one of the other threads who was talking about some blown Shields coverage in the week after his concussion when if fact Sheilds was all over the guy even if his head wasn't turned to the ball.

Maybe that's the same guy who has a ******* for Shields or who expects island corners to never give up downfield catches.

Like I posted way earlier before all the "Shields Panic" or him being "overrated" that some seem to think, Sammie is one of the last guys I am worried about here on the stretch run. I expect him to be a factor tomorrow. Well see what happens.

 

[HardRightEdge]

While we're on the subject, how do you measure a cover corner's performance statistically?

- First and foremost, you look at whether guys don't get open on him and opposing QBs are afraid to throw at him. That is measured by targets per snap. It's not the guy who gets the most INTs who's doing the best job; it's the guy opponents won't throw at who's among the elite players, thereby minimizing opportunities for INTs.

- Next, I'd look at QB rating against...how the guy does when the ball is in fact thrown at him.

PFF compiles this data but you have to pay to get it.

There are problems with these stats, though. A guy who consistently works underneath in safety-high double coverage is bound to look better than a guy who's charged with taking away 1/3 of the field, all other things being equal. Also, a guy who consistently covers the #2 wideout is bound to do better than a guy who consistently covers the #1, all other things being equal.

I think it was 2013, could have been 2012, when Shields was one of the least thrown-at corners in the league. Then again, he was consistently covering the #2 receiver.

There's the level-of-competition issue. For example, the NFC North has a bunch of very good-to-elite wide outs. In the NFC West, not so much. Division games count for 38% of the schedule...that can result in a significant statistical skew.

The target and QB rating stats are certainly better than nothing, but they're not a be all and end all. You have to couple that the stats with knowledge of what the guy is asked to do and an eye test of how he plays against who he plays.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Like I posted way earlier before all the "Shields Panic" or him being "overrated" that some seem to think, Sammie is one of the last guys I am worried about here on the stretch run. I expect him to be a factor tomorrow. Well see what happens.

It's a "panic" when one or two guys think something? I take as an interesting topic of conversation.

 

[brandon2348]

While we're on the subject, how do you measure a cover corner's performance statistically?

- First and foremost, you look at whether guys don't get open on him and opposing QBs are afraid to throw at him. That is measured by targets per snap. It's not the guy who gets the most INTs who's doing the best job; it's the guy opponents won't throw at who's among the elite players, thereby minimizing opportunities for INTs.

- Next, I'd look at QB rating against...how the guy does when the ball is in fact thrown at him.

PFF compiles this data but you have to pay to get it.

There are problems with these stats. A guy who consistently works underneath in safety-high double coverage is bound to look better than a guy who's charged with taking away 1/3 of the field, all other things being equal. Also, a guy who consistently covers the #2 wideout is bound to do better than a guy who consistently covers the #1, all other things being equal.

I think it was 2013, could have been 2012, when Shields was one of the least thrown-at corners in the league. Then again, he was consistently covering the #2 receiver.

There's the level-of-competition issue. The NFC North has a bunch of very good-to-elite wide outs. In the NFC West, not so much. Division games count for 38% of the schedule...that can result in a significant statistical skew.


The target and QB rating stats are certainly better than nothing, but they're not a be all and end all. You have to couple that knowledge of what the guy is asked to do and an eye test of how he plays against who he plays.

You had me at "first and foremost". lol

I couldn't agree more it is a very difficult thing to measure statistically because there are so many variables to factor in and it gets very frustrating when "stat guys" start throwing stats at me regarding this subject.

The "eye test" is everything. I know this because I played football in college and I was a defensive back actually which doesn't make me an expert but I will say it's completely different playing 8-9 yards off the ball in a deep third then going good old fashioned down and dirty man to man.

For example sitting back off Calvin Johnson knowing your only responsibility is to not let him get behind you in a deep 3rd is far different then lining up closer knowing "you go where he goes" and nobody is behind you. One mistake or one mis-step and your "toast".

This is why I respect so much what Sam Shields does and is asked to do. Might be the scariest place on the field.

 

[brandon2348]

It's a "panic" when one or two guys think something? I take as an interesting topic of conversation.

panic might of been the wrong word.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

l wouldn't trade Shields straight up for Peterson even if the money was the same.

I try to resist judging players I've not seen play at least a few times unless there's some compelling statistical basis for doing so. Revis, Haden and Sherman are elite corners.

If the money was the same, every GM would and should take Peterson over Shields. I'm a Shields guy, you can check, I've supported the Packers re-signing him from the beginning. However,Peterson is just as good in man coverage, much bigger and Peterson is a game changing player on special teams.

 

[brandon2348]

If the money was the same, every GM would and should take Peterson over Shields. I'm a Shields guy, you can check, I've supported the Packers re-signing him from the beginning. However,Peterson is just as good in man coverage, much bigger and Peterson is a game changing player on special teams.

Let's be evenly critical then. When is the last time Peterson had a special teams TD? And what about the potential "game changing" pick 6 he dropped against the Seahawks?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While we're on the subject, how do you measure a cover corner's performance statistically?

- First and foremost, you look at whether guys don't get open on him and opposing QBs are afraid to throw at him. That is measured by targets per snap. It's not the guy who gets the most INTs who's doing the best job; it's the guy opponents won't throw at who's among the elite players, thereby minimizing opportunities for INTs.

- Next, I'd look at QB rating against...how the guy does when the ball is in fact thrown at him.

PFF compiles this data but you have to pay to get it.

There are problems with these stats, though. A guy who consistently works underneath in safety-high double coverage is bound to look better than a guy who's charged with taking away 1/3 of the field, all other things being equal. Also, a guy who consistently covers the #2 wideout is bound to do better than a guy who consistently covers the #1, all other things being equal.

I think it was 2013, could have been 2012, when Shields was one of the least thrown-at corners in the league. Then again, he was consistently covering the #2 receiver.

There's the level-of-competition issue. For example, the NFC North has a bunch of very good-to-elite wide outs. In the NFC West, not so much. Division games count for 38% of the schedule...that can result in a significant statistical skew.

The target and QB rating stats are certainly better than nothing, but they're not a be all and end all. You have to couple that the stats with knowledge of what the guy is asked to do and an eye test of how he plays against who he plays.

I agree that those stats aren't telling the entire story about a cornerback's performance but they're a pretty good indicator IMO.

So let's take a closer look at the ones you suggested: Sherman and Revis lead the league in cover snaps per target and cover snaps per reception as well as being 2nd and 5th respectively in yards per cover snaps.

Shields on the other hand is ranked 45th, 20th and 55th respectively this season.

In combination with Shields being ranked 65th in opponents passer rating I think it's generous to call him a second-tier CB this season.

 

[adambr2]

Did anyone ever actually call Shields overrated? The only thing I argued is that his contract isn't a 'bargain' relative to similar players at his position.

Also you are making it sound as if Shields is left out on an island by himself every game. He does often get safety help over the top, and the Packers do mix in some zone coverages.

Likewise, the Seahawks do run a mix of both zone and man coverages, they're not just sitting back in cover 3 every play.

I can't stand Richard Sherman, but he's very good. To say that the Davon Houses of the world could just show up and do what he does is really understating his abilities. The Seahawks are not stupid, and they wouldn't have invested 14M a year in him if they honestly believed an average replacement corner could just show up and perform at his level.

 

[PackerDNA]

Look, I like Shields, and he'll play well in stretches and come up with big plays. But he makes too many poor decisions and gets burned too many times. Bottom line; not an elite CB and never will be, but we could do worse.

 

[brandon2348]

The Seahawks are not stupid, and they wouldn't have invested 14M a year in him if they honestly believed an average replacement corner could just show up and perform at his level.

They paid Percy Harvin 20 million dollars. I don't know if that qualifies for "Genius".

And draft picks. lol. "First Round"

 

[PackerDNA]

They paid Percy Harvin 20 million dollars. I don't know if that qualifies for "Genius".

Heh.
Then again, the Packers paid a pretty penny for Jones and Hawk. Unlike the Seahawks, who realized they'd made a mistake and got rid of Harvin, it's several seasons later and Hawk and Jones are still on the field in green and gold.
No one's perfect.

 

[HardRightEdge]

If the money was the same, every GM would and should take Peterson over Shields. I'm a Shields guy, you can check, I've supported the Packers re-signing him from the beginning. However,Peterson is just as good in man coverage, much bigger and Peterson is a game changing player on special teams.

This is a partial illustration of what I was talking about.

- Peterson is a whopping 1 1/2 inches taller than Shields, while Shields measured 1" better in the vertical jump in their respective Combine/Pro Day measurements. Also, despite Peterson outweighing Shields by 35 lbs., they both logged 15 bench reps pre-draft.

- Peterson has not done any punt returning this season. That might have to do with average return dropping to 8.4 and 6.0 in 2012 and 2013, respectively.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I agree that those stats aren't telling the entire story about a cornerback's performance but they're a pretty good indicator IMO.

So let's take a closer look at the ones you suggested: Sherman and Revis lead the league in cover snaps per target and cover snaps per reception as well as being 2nd and 5th respectively in yards per cover snaps.

Shields on the other hand is ranked 45th, 20th and 55th respectively this season.

In combination with Shields being ranked 65th in opponents passer rating I think it's generous to call him a second-tier CB this season.

While this has not been Shields best season, I would not have thought his rankings in those areas would have been that low.

I'm wondering if those stats include safeties, nickel corners and/or dime corners who frequently cover TEs, RBs and #3 and #4 receivers. For example, we can recall Hayward's impressive stats from his rookie year built mostly on his play as in zone nickel; this season he's been relegated to part-time nickel and mostly dime.

I'm wondering if those kinds of guys can be culled from the stats if they haven't been already.

Excluding sacks and QB runs, which I'd assume are not included in those stats, the league has averaged 525 pass attempts through week 16, or 35 passing attempts per game. After weeding out safeties, if that has not already been done, I'd look to weed out anybody not on the field for at least 65% of passing attempts, or 23 pass attempts per game. That should clear out the nickel and dime corners along with other part timers with low statistical significance.

 

[adambr2]

They paid Percy Harvin 20 million dollars. I don't know if that qualifies for "Genius".

And draft picks. lol. "First Round"

And we offered BJ Raji 20M guaranteed. No GM is perfect, but to suggest John Schneider isn't doing a hell of a good job is crazy.

 

[brandon2348]

And we offered BJ Raji 20M guaranteed. No GM is perfect, but to suggest John Schneider isn't doing a hell of a good job is crazy.

Well see. I don't think he has been quite the "draft boy wonder" everyone keeps saying he is the last couple years. He just extended Averil which could be questionable. He might be a guy that walked into a casino and had some "beginners luck" if you ask me. Time will tell.

Oh yeah, he has also had the "Fed's" investigating his teams locker room. Real top-notch.

He ain't no TT that's for sure and I am thankful for that.

 

[adambr2]

Well see. I don't think he has been quite the "draft boy wonder" everyone keeps saying he is the last couple years. He just extended Averil which could be questionable. He might be a guy that walked into a casino and had some "beginners luck" if you ask me. Time will tell.

Oh yeah, he has also had the "Fed's" investigating his teams locker room. Real top-notch.

He ain't no TT that's for sure and I am thankful for that.

And they found nothing, so I really don't get your point.

If you are really going to attribute the drafting of Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas, Okung, Wilson, etc etc to beginners luck, there is really no point in continuing the debate because there is no arguing with you.

Trust me I hate the Seahawks but I'm not blind to the fact that they assembled a damn good team and didn't win a Super Bowl on 'luck.'

 

[brandon2348]

And they found nothing, so I really don't get your point.

If you are really going to attribute the drafting of Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas, Okung, Wilson, etc etc to beginners luck, there is really no point in continuing the debate because there is no arguing with you.

Trust me I hate the Seahawks but I'm not blind to the fact that they assembled a damn good team and didn't win a Super Bowl on 'luck.'

I am simply stating facts. He had a couple good drafts and I stated that. Who has he drafted in the last couple years that's anything special? 20 picks and I don't see it. 11 of the guys aren't even in the organization any longer. You know what happens when you bet on long shots all day at the horse track right? Hmm maybe that's why when they had a few injuries they had problems or were signing guys off the street?

Then you slide the Harvin trade where they paid him over 20 million dollars and gave up three draft picks under the rug and try to run to the "Raji offer". This was a trade not an "offer" that got taken off the table. So essentially you could say there is 3 more draft picks out of the organization on top of the 11 so now were at 14 in two years and guess what. Harvin isn't on the roster anymore. How is that maintaining and developing a roster successfully?

How many players have they had suspended for breaking the league substance abuse policy in the last 3 years?

If TT or the Packers had any of the three results above in the last 3 years the *****ing and complaining would be through the roof.

They won a Super Bowl finally and that's great but this ain't no "dynasty in the making". Welcome to 1 and done and Pete Carroll will leave that place like he has left every other place which is "purgatory". The only thing keeping these clowns afloat is the fact they don't have the big 100 mill QB deal that's gonna come here real soon and put them on a even playing field that will make there error's very glaring. Things will catch up and they wont look like such "genius's" that I don't believe they are. Opportunist's yes. Genius's no.

I understand we want a championship and we are going to get it here real soon despite what a lot of the "Seahawk Scardy Cats" think. Maybe then some people will give TT and MM the props they deserves.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While this has not been Shields best season, I would not have thought his rankings in those areas would have been that low.

I'm wondering if those stats include safeties, nickel corners and/or dime corners who frequently cover TEs, RBs and #3 and #4 receivers. For example, we can recall Hayward's impressive stats from his rookie year built mostly on his play as in zone nickel; this season he's been relegated to part-time nickel and mostly dime.

I'm wondering if those kinds of guys can be culled from the stats if they haven't been already.

Excluding sacks and QB runs, which I'd assume are not included in those stats, the league has averaged 525 pass attempts through week 16, or 35 passing attempts per game. After weeding out safeties, if that has not already been done, I'd look to weed out anybody not on the field for at least 65% of passing attempts, or 23 pass attempts per game. That should clear out the nickel and dime corners along with other part timers with low statistical significance.

Safeties aren´t included in these rankings. Taking only cornerbacks into consideration who have been in coverage for 60% of a team´s snaps Shields is ranked 37th in cover snaps per target, 43rd in yards per cover snap and 17th in cover snaps per reception.

 

[Terry Ott]

Cobb may need to take a look at Jennings playing in his prime for a jerky team like Minnesota. The elite teams have less motivation to spend big than the "outside-looking-in" teams do. Rodgers has several more years (barring injury) to be the QB who makes Cobb one of the truly legendary Packers by the time he hangs it up. How much value that has to Cobb is a function of his values and personality. We'll see that pretty clearly before too long.