So you think Steve Mclendon was bad against the run in 2013 (Wrong)

[Psycho Ward 86]

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2013/12/so-you-think-steve-mclendon-was-bad-against-the-run-in-2013/

When Mclendon was on the field in 2013, opponents ran “up the middle” 47 times for 103 yards. That equates to 2.19 yards per rush and only one of those runs, a 14 yarder, went for more than 10 yards. Mclendon was credited with being in on 10 tackles on those runs as well.

While it is a bit unfair to Mclendon we will also look at all runs that went from left guard all the way to right guard when he was on the field and that includes the aforementioned runs up the middle. In total there were 112 such runs for 458 yards with 4 going for more than 10 yards. 3 of those runs I am sure you all remember as they went for 23, 55, and 60 yards respectively.

If you merely take out those 3 runs, you are left with 109 rushes for 320 yards and that equates to 2.94 yards per tote. None of those 3 runs were scored as going “up the middle.”

...Mclendon graded out as the Steelers best run defender in 2013 with a 5.7 grade. They credited him with 19 solo tackles and 9 assists with 15 stops. Last season, Casey Hampton was credited with 16 solo tackles, 5 assists and 11 stops and he played 144 more snaps than Mclendon played this season.


Im a bit surprised as im sure some others are, but this is a pleasant surprise. I feel like this loosens up the feeling of need to draft a NT like Louis Nix early.

[steelreserve]

If we can get a NT like Louis Nix, we still ought to (well, not LIKE Nix - there's only one guy like that in this draft as far as I can tell, so we'd have to actually get Nix himself). The numbers are a pleasant surprise, but they don't change what we already saw: McLendon is not a dominant nose tackle. There's a lot more to that than just rushing stats ... the really good ones are always beasting people out of the way and disrupting the play even though it's not directly related to the tackle, and I just didn't see a lot of that out of McLendon.

As far as the stats themselves go, let's not get too excited. We gave up 458 yards on 112 carries between the guards, which is just under 4.1 yards per carry. The NFL average for runs between the guards was 3.94 yards per carry, so we were a little below average:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Yeah, the stats look better if you take out the big plays, but of course they do because it's wishful thinking. Nobody ever went through a whole season without giving up a big play. You can't just say, "Well, if you just ignore all the times we fucked up the worst, and only count the small fuck-ups, we actually didn't make too many mistakes;" that's just fooling yourself. The fact is that big plays are going to happen, and everyone in the league has them in their stat lines. I mean, this used to come up all the time with Willie Parker, and it was the wrong way to look at it, and always led to a dumb argument.

"Well if you ignore the big plays, he hardly gets any yards!"

"LOL, if you ignore the big plays!"

When the whole time, the real issue was being horribly inconsistent.

Anyway. If you ask me, all this does is show we're not completely desperate. But we could stand to do a damn sight better, and we ought to try if the right guy is there for the right price.

[tube517]

Wasn't McClendon more of a DE than a true NT?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk

[Mojouw]

ILB play was wildly inconsistent for much of the year. That might have something to due with that inflated between the guards #. Here is the the thing with drafting a traditional 3-4 nose. You are going to have to get him high in the draft. Then once football starts, how often is he going to be on the field? Look how much the Steelers were in nickel or dime last season. I am all for the importance of a strong NT to the framework of a 3-4 defense. I am just not certain the opportunity cost (1st round pick?) is worth it. Heck the Packers drafted Raji pretty high a bit back and they can't stop anyone!

[GBMelBlount]

If we can get a NT like Louis Nix, we still ought to (well, not LIKE Nix - there's only one guy like that in this draft as far as I can tell, so we'd have to actually get Nix himself).

The numbers are a pleasant surprise, but they don't change what we already saw: McLendon is not a dominant nose tackle.

There's a lot more to that than just rushing stats ... the really good ones are always beasting people out of the way and disrupting the play even though it's not directly related to the tackle, and I just didn't see a lot of that out of McLendon.

As far as the stats themselves go, let's not get too excited. We gave up 458 yards on 112 carries between the guards, which is just under 4.1 yards per carry. The NFL average for runs between the guards was 3.94 yards per carry, so we were a little below average:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Yeah, the stats look better if you take out the big plays, but of course they do because it's wishful thinking. Nobody ever went through a whole season without giving up a big play. You can't just say, "Well, if you just ignore all the times we fucked up the worst, and only count the small fuck-ups, we actually didn't make too many mistakes;" that's just fooling yourself. The fact is that big plays are going to happen, and everyone in the league has them in their stat lines. I mean, this used to come up all the time with Willie Parker, and it was the wrong way to look at it, and always led to a dumb argument.

"Well if you ignore the big plays, he hardly gets any yards!"

"LOL, if you ignore the big plays!"

When the whole time, the real issue was being horribly inconsistent.

Anyway. If you ask me, all this does is show we're not completely desperate. But we could stand to do a damn sight better, and we ought to try if the right guy is there for the right price.

So McClendon is not a dominant beast...but how does he stack up against other NT's in the league?

Is he average or slightly better?...or is he below average?

If he is average or better then wouldn't you agree that unless NIX's grade is much better than the other defensive players available at positions of need that we DON'T pull the trigger on Nix?

[Dwinsgames]

So McClendon is not a dominant beast...but how does he stack up against other NT's in the league?

Is he average or slightly better?...or is he below average?

If he is average or better then wouldn't you agree that unless NIX's grade is much better than the other defensive players available at positions of need that we DON'T pull the trigger on Nix?

I wouldn't draft Nix at 15 , its to high IMO , he is a good player no question about it but he does not come without flaws either , he has not been as dominate in 2013 as he was in 2012 and this years crop of DTs is less than it was a year ago inflating his value IMO ....

he is not a top 15 talent but he could still be drafted as such because of the lack of other prospects filling that need league wide ..... if drafting at 15 you better get a top 15 talent and if you plan on drafting for need trade down to where that need is at target value to help supplement the rest of your draft

[Psycho Ward 86]

You can't just say, "Well, if you just ignore all the times we fucked up the worst, and only count the small fuck-ups, we actually didn't make too many mistakes;" that's just fooling yourself. The fact is that big plays are going to happen, and everyone in the league has them in their stat lines. I mean, this used to come up all the time with Willie Parker, and it was the wrong way to look at it, and always led to a dumb argument.

"Well if you ignore the big plays, he hardly gets any yards!"

"LOL, if you ignore the big plays!"


:lol:

[steelreserve]

So McClendon is not a dominant beast...but how does he stack up against other NT's in the league?

Is he average or slightly better?...or is he below average?

If he is average or better then wouldn't you agree that unless NIX's grade is much better than the other defensive players available at positions of need that we DON'T pull the trigger on Nix?

I don't know. McLendon's numbers are average, and for the "eye test" of his impact on the game, I'd say he's barely adequate at best, maybe slightly inadequate. Yes, that's just untrained seat-of-the-pants observation, but in terms of winning the battle at the line, it LOOKED like he was generally either neutral or losing a little ground.

Given the disproportionate importance of the NT position to our scheme, I'd say it is worth taking Nix if he's available. Put it this way - take the difference between an average NT and an excellent one, and compare it with the difference between an average LB and an excellent one, and I think the nose tackle has way more impact. We do also need more CB depth, but the main thing there is not to have any BAD corners; you can get by with two average ones.

Ordinarily, I'd guess this would be settled for us by Nix being selected in the top 10 while we sit there out of reach, which is what looked like was going to happen earlier in the year. But a lot of mock drafts have him sliding to the low first round or not in the first round at all; I guess while other players were continuing to play, people got all excited about them.

Not surprisingly, half the mock drafts I've seen also have Nix still on the board while we pass him up to draft (surprise) another offensive lineman. Who the hell knows. Except that if we do that again, I'll be about ready to go knock over all the garbage cans in the neighborhood.

[GBMelBlount]

I don't know. McLendon's numbers are average, and for the "eye test" of his impact on the game, I'd say he's barely adequate at best, maybe slightly inadequate. Yes, that's just untrained seat-of-the-pants observation, but in terms of winning the battle at the line, it LOOKED like he was generally either neutral or losing a little ground.

Given the disproportionate importance of the NT position to our scheme, I'd say it is worth taking Nix if he's available.

Put it this way - take the difference between an average NT and an excellent one, and compare it with the difference between an average LB and an excellent one, and I think the nose tackle has way more impact. We do also need more CB depth, but the main thing there is not to have any BAD corners; you can get by with two average ones.

Ordinarily, I'd guess this would be settled for us by Nix being selected in the top 10 while we sit there out of reach, which is what looked like was going to happen earlier in the year. But a lot of mock drafts have him sliding to the low first round or not in the first round at all; I guess while other players were continuing to play, people got all excited about them.

Not surprisingly, half the mock drafts I've seen also have Nix still on the board while we pass him up to draft (surprise) another offensive lineman. Who the hell knows. Except that if we do that again, I'll be about ready to go knock over all the garbage cans in the neighborhood.

THAT is a great point.

[Dwinsgames]

I don't know. McLendon's numbers are average, and for the "eye test" of his impact on the game, I'd say he's barely adequate at best, maybe slightly inadequate. Yes, that's just untrained seat-of-the-pants observation, but in terms of winning the battle at the line, it LOOKED like he was generally either neutral or losing a little ground.
.


Agree .....




Given the disproportionate importance of the NT position to our scheme, I'd say it is worth taking Nix if he's available. Put it this way - take the difference between an average NT and an excellent one, and compare it with the difference between an average LB and an excellent one, and I think the nose tackle has way more impact. We do also need more CB depth, but the main thing there is not to have any BAD corners; you can get by with two average ones.
.

Disagree on taking Nix ..... UNLESS...

Your ( the team ) believes the disparity of what used to be our base ( the 3-4 ) to what we now run as the norm ( nickle / dime ) is because the NT is failing to demand a double team and is being pushed around to some degree and in fixing the position we could move back towards our traditional 3-4 base on first and second down and even 3rd and less than 4 ....

if not , then Nix the Nix Idea all together

[steelreserve]

Disagree on taking Nix ..... UNLESS...

Your ( the team ) believes the disparity of what used to be our base ( the 3-4 ) to what we now run as the norm ( nickle / dime ) is because the NT is failing to demand a double team and is being pushed around to some degree and in fixing the position we could move back towards our traditional 3-4 base on first and second down and even 3rd and less than 4 ....

if not , then Nix the Nix Idea all together

What I believe is going on is that we're playing more nickel and dime as a reaction to the base 3-4 not working well. Why it isn't working is because we have an average to below-average defensive line ... that makes it harder on the linebackers, who don't get much pressure on the quarterback ... that stretches our aging DBs and we give up more passing yards ... which in turn makes us a little more reluctant to commit against the run. But it all starts with the line. Nose tackle is just one of the three positions there, but it's both the most impactful and the hardest to find good players for. Having the opportunity to possibly pick a good one is rare.

The one thing I honestly don't know is whether Nix is that guy or not. A year ago, I would've said he's the most can't-miss NT prospect since B.J. Raji, but I'm less sure now. The fact that he was playing hurt might explain why he was less dominant this year, but I didn't see enough of him to know. The 15th overall pick would be a gamble, hopefully just a regular gamble that comes with most draft picks - I don't see him as a project like, say, Dontari Poe, who went even higher. I would have to defer to the people who follow this for a living on this one.

At any rate, he's the only NT in this draft who I would actually consider as likely to help, not just a who-knows pick. Hard to say. It's been about 15 years since we addressed that position, so if we think the value is there, hopefully we do it.

[Dwinsgames]

What I believe is going on is that we're playing more nickel and dime as a reaction to the base 3-4 not working well. Why it isn't working is because we have an average to below-average defensive line ... that makes it harder on the linebackers, who don't get much pressure on the quarterback ... that stretches our aging DBs and we give up more passing yards ... which in turn makes us a little more reluctant to commit against the run. But it all starts with the line. Nose tackle is just one of the three positions there, but it's both the most impactful and the hardest to find good players for. Having the opportunity to possibly pick a good one is rare.

The one thing I honestly don't know is whether Nix is that guy or not. A year ago, I would've said he's the most can't-miss NT prospect since B.J. Raji, but I'm less sure now. The fact that he was playing hurt might explain why he was less dominant this year, but I didn't see enough of him to know. The 15th overall pick would be a gamble, hopefully just a regular gamble that comes with most draft picks - I don't see him as a project like, say, Dontari Poe, who went even higher. I would have to defer to the people who follow this for a living on this one.

At any rate, he's the only NT in this draft who I would actually consider as likely to help, not just a who-knows pick. Hard to say. It's been about 15 years since we addressed that position, so if we think the value is there, hopefully we do it.

sounds like you are saying the same thing I am trying to say ... Unless Nix is 100% the answer ( in your mind ) to solidifying the D-line and getting back to our traditional 3-4 base , you avoid him or at the very minimum trade back and take him later if he is still there supplementing the selection to some degree ...

I do not believe he is the answer ( sure I could be wrong ) but at the same time I do not see him as being close to the 15th best player in this draft ( double whammy ) ..... also keep in mind this is a weak D-line draft class to some degree ( it lacks in terms of quality DT's ) and that increases the value of the ones who can play on draft day ( artificial inflation to some degree ) ...

Now I am not saying he cant play because he can , I just do not think the amount of improvement we would see from him merits a mid first round selection .....

again just my opinion

[Mojouw]

What I believe is going on is that we're playing more nickel and dime as a reaction to the base 3-4 not working well. Why it isn't working is because we have an average to below-average defensive line ... that makes it harder on the linebackers, who don't get much pressure on the quarterback ... that stretches our aging DBs and we give up more passing yards ... which in turn makes us a little more reluctant to commit against the run. But it all starts with the line. Nose tackle is just one of the three positions there, but it's both the most impactful and the hardest to find good players for. Having the opportunity to possibly pick a good one is rare.

The one thing I honestly don't know is whether Nix is that guy or not. A year ago, I would've said he's the most can't-miss NT prospect since B.J. Raji, but I'm less sure now. The fact that he was playing hurt might explain why he was less dominant this year, but I didn't see enough of him to know. The 15th overall pick would be a gamble, hopefully just a regular gamble that comes with most draft picks - I don't see him as a project like, say, Dontari Poe, who went even higher. I would have to defer to the people who follow this for a living on this one.

At any rate, he's the only NT in this draft who I would actually consider as likely to help, not just a who-knows pick. Hard to say. It's been about 15 years since we addressed that position, so if we think the value is there, hopefully we do it.

That's the problem. Even if Nix is all everyone thinks he could be at the NT position and is the best NT prospect since Raji -- is that worth the 15th overall pick?

1. Raji had one dominant year (2010) and has played a declining % of Green Bay's defensive snaps each season since. Some of that is due to performance (or lack thereof) and some is due to an increase in the amount of defensive snaps the Packers are not in their base defense. If Capers is increasingly not going base 3-4 - why would Leabeau not be thinking the same? It is essentially the same defense between the two of them.

2. Raji was drafted 9th overall. Does anyone think that the Packers' return on investment was acceptable? Not saying that Raji is a bust, simply that if I get a guy at #9 overall, he better go to some Pro Bowls and otherwise require teams to game-plan around his impact. Raji has not been able to do that, most likely because of the position he plays. The Packers have essentially moved him to DE in order to see if he can return to disrupting the pocket. It hasn't worked. Also, their defense hasn't stopped the run in about 2-3 years now.

Basically, I am just trying to say -- as are others -- that the value of a NT (even a highly regarded draft prospect) and the 15th overall pick do not match up. In my mind, I can not come up with a justification for spending a first round pick on a player that is only going to be on the field for 60% of the defensive snaps. I mean I guess if I felt the guy was going to be some sort of defensive tackle cross between Hampton, Suh, and Ngata -- then I could see it.

[steelreserve]

sounds like you are saying the same thing I am trying to say ... Unless Nix is 100% the answer ( in your mind ) to solidifying the D-line and getting back to our traditional 3-4 base , you avoid him or at the very minimum trade back and take him later if he is still there supplementing the selection to some degree ...

I do not believe he is the answer ( sure I could be wrong ) but at the same time I do not see him as being close to the 15th best player in this draft ( double whammy ) ..... also keep in mind this is a weak D-line draft class to some degree ( it lacks in terms of quality DT's ) and that increases the value of the ones who can play on draft day ( artificial inflation to some degree ) ...

Now I am not saying he cant play because he can , I just do not think the amount of improvement we would see from him merits a mid first round selection .....

again just my opinion


That's what makes this a really tough one. In my mind, there's no denying that a good NT really helps make a 3-4 defense work. There's also no getting around the fact that you're rarely going to get one outside the top half of the first round, unless you're really lucky. Not necessarily because a NT is a top-10 or a top-15 value, but just because there are damn few good ones around and they go fast and probably over their "real" value compared to other positions.

What I keep coming back to is that I really don't like the way our defense has gone since Hampton started to decline. Mediocre against the run, suspect against the pass, and really no teeth to it. I think after Hampton slowed down, we were still able to fake it for a couple more years because we had other guys who could disrupt on their own like Harrison, Troy (when healthy) and A. Smith (also when healthy), but that weakness is really exposed now. Basically what you're left with is that yes, you're probably going to have to pay above value at that position, but it may be one of those things where you just have to swallow hard and do it once every 10-15 years if you want to keep running the 3-4.

Of course, the other option is to run a different defense so you can do without that one part that's as rare as a snow leopard. We're sort of doing that now with all the nickel and dime looks, but the problem is, that isn't working very well either. Green Bay is doing the same thing, and guess what, their defense also sucks. That seems less like innovation on our part than just shuffling people around to try and cover up our deficiencies. If you want to actually be good, either pick the 3-4 and get the right players for it (problem is, as I mentioned in other threads, those players are way overvalued now since the 3-4 has become a fad), or else change to a 4-3 or a real hybrid scheme and make it work. Running a half-assed 3-4 with thrown-together parts is one thing I will guarantee is not going to get good results.

This was a reply to your post, by the way, but it really was to both above - both good points, both on kind of the same subject. Tough choice to make here.

[Craic]

What I'm wondering going forward is whether the NT position can be evaluated the same as it was in years past in this scheme. Last summer the system was changed (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/06/steelers-defensive-ends-getting-new-assignment-this-season/); the DEs were now responsible for getting edge and getting sacks. In retrospect, the D line was responsible for 35% of the sacks this year (12/34). Last year, they had 27% of the sacks (10/37). Year before that they had 27 percent of the sacks as well (9.5/35). 2010 the line only had 17 percent of the sacks.

One of two things may be surmised from these stats. Either (1) the linebackers fell off so bad that the OL was the happy recipient of giveme sacks, or (2) there's been a change in the way the O line is supposed to play the scheme (that's not to say the LBs haven't fallen off as well). Looking back at our run situation, it may be that the weaknesses in a changing DL scheme are being exploited. Nevertheless, the question is whether we should still assess NTs by the same criteria as before, and whether they have the same level of importance in the Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 2.0 than in the older Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 1.0 (fire-blitz, zone blitz, I've heard it called both).

In the older scheme, the responsibility of the NT was to push the pocket and cover both "A" gaps on the run. Does this change now that the DEs are being pushed to be edge rushers as well? Does the NT have to keep an eye out for the B gap if the DE on that side gets the edge? I don't know, but I do have a feeling it's changed the way the NT position is being played.

[NCSteeler]

What I'm wondering going forward is whether the NT position can be evaluated the same as it was in years past in this scheme. Last summer the system was changed (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/06/steelers-defensive-ends-getting-new-assignment-this-season/); the DEs were now responsible for getting edge and getting sacks. In retrospect, the D line was responsible for 35% of the sacks this year (12/34). Last year, they had 27% of the sacks (10/37). Year before that they had 27 percent of the sacks as well (9.5/35). 2010 the line only had 17 percent of the sacks.

One of two things may be surmised from these stats. Either (1) the linebackers fell off so bad that the OL was the happy recipient of giveme sacks, or (2) there's been a change in the way the O line is supposed to play the scheme (that's not to say the LBs haven't fallen off as well). Looking back at our run situation, it may be that the weaknesses in a changing DL scheme are being exploited. Nevertheless, the question is whether we should still assess NTs by the same criteria as before, and whether they have the same level of importance in the Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 2.0 than in the older Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 1.0 (fire-blitz, zone blitz, I've heard it called both).

In the older scheme, the responsibility of the NT was to push the pocket and cover both "A" gaps on the run. Does this change now that the DEs are being pushed to be edge rushers as well? Does the NT have to keep an eye out for the B gap if the DE on that side gets the edge? I don't know, but I do have a feeling it's changed the way the NT position is being played.

For the worse. I see most of our D changes, more sub packages and DE rushing as a result of not having a dominate NT and in both cases our D line has played worse than in previous seasons.

For those thinking the "passing" game has left the NT behind and unused, thinking we are subbing because of the pass not because our NT is average. Through week 13 Poe played %95 of the snaps for KC. A good NT is good against the pass too, just like Hampton was.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/12/3/5169866/dontari-poe-kansas-city-chiefs-most-valuable-player

[steelreserve]

What I'm wondering going forward is whether the NT position can be evaluated the same as it was in years past in this scheme. Last summer the system was changed (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/06/steelers-defensive-ends-getting-new-assignment-this-season/); the DEs were now responsible for getting edge and getting sacks. In retrospect, the D line was responsible for 35% of the sacks this year (12/34). Last year, they had 27% of the sacks (10/37). Year before that they had 27 percent of the sacks as well (9.5/35). 2010 the line only had 17 percent of the sacks.

One of two things may be surmised from these stats. Either (1) the linebackers fell off so bad that the OL was the happy recipient of giveme sacks, or (2) there's been a change in the way the O line is supposed to play the scheme (that's not to say the LBs haven't fallen off as well). Looking back at our run situation, it may be that the weaknesses in a changing DL scheme are being exploited. Nevertheless, the question is whether we should still assess NTs by the same criteria as before, and whether they have the same level of importance in the Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 2.0 than in the older Dick Lebeau fire-blitz scheme 1.0 (fire-blitz, zone blitz, I've heard it called both).

There's a third possibility there too ..

2013 - 34 sacks
2012 - 37 sacks
2011 - 35 sacks
2010 - 48 sacks
2009 - 46 sacks
2008 - 51 sacks
2007 - 36 sacks
2006 - 39 sacks
2005 - 47 sacks

What it looks like to me is not that the D-Line is getting more pressure. It's that the D-Line is happening into about the same number of sacks as usual, but we're getting less pressure and fewer sacks overall, so the percentage looks higher. When the defense was lackluster and the team was struggling, we ended up in the mid-30s. In the years when we were contending and the defense was working, we tended to get about 40-50% more sacks per season, which probably means a corresponding amount more pressure. It would be no coincidence that the down years are also the ones where we seem to have trouble getting turnovers.

Anyway. What is the cause? Dropoff in linebacker talent? Dropoff in DL play? Change in the scheme? Who knows - we've really had all three at once. My gut tells me the line play is where it starts and it has a domino effect. Problem is, addressing it with two first-round draft picks hasn't helped, so would taking a NT and making it first-round across the board help any? I don't even know anymore.

[NCSteeler]

All the pundits and ex players will always come back to the saying, which seems true to me. "It starts in the trenches" O line or D line is what makes everything else fall into place, when this team was dominate , we had both.

[Dwinsgames]

All the pundits and ex players will always come back to the saying, which seems true to me. "It starts in the trenches" O line or D line is what makes everything else fall into place, when this team was dominate , we had both.

its all true ....

but the NT must command the double team and still at the very least hold his ground better yet still be semi disruptive ...

problem is it takes a special player to hand a 300 pound man and a very special player to handle TWO 300 pound men and still have his way .....

that is why it is rare to see / find a dominant NT ....