The starting oline only played the 1st quarter before giving way to the younger guys. It was more or less the same offensive line as last year but with Kreutz instead of Goodwin. Stinchcomb played although I thought he'd been dealing with some injuries in camp. I think everyone identified the Oline as being one of the goats from an otherwise pretty solid performance for the Saints (albeit in pre-season). It's hard to know sometimes why it seems the Oline is doing poorly and it can be one player, a number of players, bad scheming, or non-Oline positions creating many of the problems.
I had a look at the starters' performance and came out with the following grades:
Grades are pretty simple: + for a good play or where the lineman did his job, - for a bad play or where the lineman did not do his job. The grade is just the % of positive plays out of total plays. Some of these individual grades you might agree with, some you might not. It's my own take really based on what I consider to be a decent job by the various linemen. I don't have a playbook so I can't say for certain whether the right player got blocked but I have a decent understanding of oline blocking schemes and concepts and it's generally easy to see what should have happened. And also the film is difficult to work with - much easier with endzone copy, so some extenuating circumstances which affect grades get missed, i.e. RB trips a llineman, lineman gets run over - all you see is lineman getting run over.
All in all the Oline wasn't bad. Stinchcomb was not good. Not good at all. I'm going to chalk it up to pre-season and some sort of injury problem but he did not look very good. Bushrod caught some flak but he was pretty solid and gave up no pressure although he did have a false start. There were 16 plays in all of which two I couldn't grade due to the film being cut off, and there was a fumbled exchange (- for Kreutz) and penalty (- for Bushrod).
Kreutz was ok. He's pretty sound and looks quick and active. He seems to be to be more of a 'in the way' blocker than someone who either gets real (or even decent) push in the run game or is able to be very stout in pass blocking. He locks on well in run blocking and keeps his legs churning but he's not really powerful. He slows guys down in the pass game. It's still early days but I don't see him as being an upgrade over Goodwin. More or less the same level but different in style. I'm biased in Tennant's favour but I thought Tennant had the more dynamic performance tonight (but I didn't grade the second team.)
Below is the more detailed play by play analysis and grades:
Good analysis, I think if Stinchcomb doesn't step it up over the rest of the pre-season, then Strief will start the opener (barring a trade/FA pickup). I think the injury is still affecting Stinchcomb and at the very least Strief starting would give him more time to rest. Also, I thought Tennant played well upon coming into the lineup after the 1st string came out... which at least provides a little security should anything happen to Olin.
__________________
"There's a chance Drew Brees will take the Indianapolis defense over his knee and beat them so badly it'll violate several city penal codes"
Good analysis, I think if Stinchcomb doesn't step it up over the rest of the pre-season, then Strief will start the opener (barring a trade/FA pickup). I think the injury is still affecting Stinchcomb and at the very least Strief starting would give him more time to rest. Also, I thought Tennant played well upon coming into the lineup after the 1st string came out... which at least provides a little security should anything happen to Olin.
Watching Stinchomb in the SF game really worries me. He was playing like he was when he was injured last year...just a bit slow, light-weight. It's not good. He's not been this poor for the last 5-6 years and I hope he works through it. But the grade is very bad. Maybe I was harsh in my grades but he really concerns me. And I think all the tackles we brought in (Foster, Black and the FSU guy - forgot his name) are as much for Stinchcomb as for Charles Brown. Odd as it is to say that. And you're right about Strief, he's got an opportunity here to really push Stinchcomb and may end up winning out if Stinch continues like this.
And yeah, Tennant could be starting and we'd not be any worse off and, potentially, better off by the end of the year if he continues to develop.
The starting oline only played the 1st quarter before giving way to the younger guys. It was more or less the same offensive line as last year but with Kreutz instead of Goodwin. Stinchcomb played although I thought he'd been dealing with some injuries in camp. I think everyone identified the Oline as being one of the goats from an otherwise pretty solid performance for the Saints (albeit in pre-season). It's hard to know sometimes why it seems the Oline is doing poorly and it can be one player, a number of players, bad scheming, or non-Oline positions creating many of the problems.
I had a look at the starters' performance and came out with the following grades:
Grades are pretty simple: + for a good play or where the lineman did his job, - for a bad play or where the lineman did not do his job. The grade is just the % of positive plays out of total plays. Some of these individual grades you might agree with, some you might not. It's my own take really based on what I consider to be a decent job by the various linemen. I don't have a playbook so I can't say for certain whether the right player got blocked but I have a decent understanding of oline blocking schemes and concepts and it's generally easy to see what should have happened. And also the film is difficult to work with - much easier with endzone copy, so some extenuating circumstances which affect grades get missed, i.e. RB trips a llineman, lineman gets run over - all you see is lineman getting run over.
All in all the Oline wasn't bad. Stinchcomb was not good. Not good at all. I'm going to chalk it up to pre-season and some sort of injury problem but he did not look very good. Bushrod caught some flak but he was pretty solid and gave up no pressure although he did have a false start. There were 16 plays in all of which two I couldn't grade due to the film being cut off, and there was a fumbled exchange (- for Kreutz) and penalty (- for Bushrod).
Kreutz was ok. He's pretty sound and looks quick and active. He seems to be to be more of a 'in the way' blocker than someone who either gets real (or even decent) push in the run game or is able to be very stout in pass blocking. He locks on well in run blocking and keeps his legs churning but he's not really powerful. He slows guys down in the pass game. It's still early days but I don't see him as being an upgrade over Goodwin. More or less the same level but different in style. I'm biased in Tennant's favour but I thought Tennant had the more dynamic performance tonight (but I didn't grade the second team.)
Below is the more detailed play by play analysis and grades:
Thanks for the in depth look
Looks like we need help at right tackle.
Did anybody happen to notice which of our running backs and tight ends are able to block well?
Yea, 58%... so Brees is on the brink of death on about half the plays...
Hope he pulls together, or we get another solution at RT, it's crucial for Brees and the running game.
A 58% is awful. You just don't see grades that low very often. 90% and you get to go to the Oline coaches house for a home cooked meal, 80% you're in the clear, 70% expect a few snice comments at the Oline meeting, 60% expect to get crucified, below 60% you get benched.
He can play better and has usually played better. He's just had trouble since getting injured last year and based on yesterday, I don't see a dramatic improvement.
But it's pre-season and the best tackle we have will play at RT. I might take a look at Charles Brown later. He had some ups and downs but largely handled Aldon Smith ok. If he develops quickly and Stinchcomb continues to play poorly, he might get thrown into the competition.
But yeah, we can't have that sort of performance during the regular season.
Thanks, Belfast Saint. Tennant really impressed me last night. He was getting to the second level on run plays. He's a tenacious run blocker. I'm concerned both about Stinch and our lack of push in the middle. We had the same problems last year. Kreutz just isn't physical enough. I know a big part of being center is mental and Kreutz was brought in to handle the protections, a duty which I guess the coaches feel Tennant is not ready to assume yet, but I'd like a more physical presence at center. Was anybody impressed with Strief? He didn't exactly give me confidence that he's about to unseat Stinch.
Nice analysis. As much as I want to chalk it up to just a preseason game I just can't. Not after last year when I saw Alex Brown struggle to create pressure in preseason and then that carry over to the rest of the year.
I think what makes the problem worse is as bad as Stinch looked, Strief didn't look that much better. I think we have a real problem there especially when you consider we play of all people Clay Matthews week 1.
Nice analysis. As much as I want to chalk it up to just a preseason game I just can't. Not after last year when I saw Alex Brown struggle to create pressure in preseason and then that carry over to the rest of the year.
I think what makes the problem worse is as bad as Stinch looked, Strief didn't look that much better. I think we have a real problem there especially when you consider we play of all people Clay Matthews week 1.
That match up with Clay is terrifying to me. I just dont see how Stinch can handle him. Plus, we have to play Ray Edwards twice. Not good.
I hope that maybe we could trade some of our dline depth (I would love to keep them all, but I just dont see how we can when we have Rogers, Franklin, and Ellis) for a RT. Pipe dream, I know.
The starting oline only played the 1st quarter before giving way to the younger guys. It was more or less the same offensive line as last year but with Kreutz instead of Goodwin. Stinchcomb played although I thought he'd been dealing with some injuries in camp. I think everyone identified the Oline as being one of the goats from an otherwise pretty solid performance for the Saints (albeit in pre-season). It's hard to know sometimes why it seems the Oline is doing poorly and it can be one player, a number of players, bad scheming, or non-Oline positions creating many of the problems.
s:
Thanks for the detailed analysis Belfast Saint. Enjoyed reading this report which may give some insight into what the Monday post game locker or conference room discussions might be about.
-
Thanks for the in depth look
Linear Mode
