Jump to content
diamondbull424

Don 'Wink' Martindale promoted to DC

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Danand said:

This is what he does in every single topic. How can you be surprised? Tim Williams could be a non factor and a liability in an entire game, and the guy would pounce on his point that one time Tim Williams got a sack. Its what he does.

It's pretty clear that he would rather the Ravens lose and be right about a particular player/coach/unit than the Ravens win and  a player/coach/unit prove him wrong. Painfully clear tbh. It's like he thrives on his particular opinion of the team and not the team's success itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

We've played 6 of the top 10 scoring offenses in the league...including the Saints, Chiefs, and Steelers twice. We're holding teams to an average of 8 points LESS than what they've scored against the rest of their schedule.

That's how it's been even under Pees lol I guess if you really want to make the argument that the 4th down conversion against the Chiefs was the outlier, you could considering how the defense performed against Pittsburgh. The Saints generally had their way up and down the field against our team, just couldn't finish in the red zone (and red zone defense was what Pees' unit was known for).

17 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

It seems to me that you've already predetermined that this defense will be the same as last year's (you have since Wink was hired, honestly) and instead of actually watching what's going on right in front of your eyes and adjusting your perception to the realities of this season accordingly, you're just doubling down and waiting for 1-2 instances throughout the season to prove your original (and wrong) perception of the 2018 Baltimore Ravens defense. 

But I'm genuinely asking what's different? Statistically speaking, there's not much change there. Are we a better unit late in games? The Chiefs game indicates we're not, and until we beat Cleveland there's nothing to really give us the benefit of the doubt in that regard. Are we better at pressuring QB's? I don't have the stats but as of last year we were the best pressure blitzing team in the NFL, can't imagine we're any better this year. The main difference I see is that simply put - players are playing better. Marlon is a year further into the league and is coming out of his shell, Peanut has transformed his game and Za'Darius is playing for a contract.

17 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

"Yeah we're doing all of these things  much better this year than last year through 95% of the season....but what if they don't at some point!".

What are "all of these things", though?! You keep saying that as if you have any tangible proof of what we're doing better this year vs. previous years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray Reed said:

It's pretty clear that he would rather the Ravens lose and be right about a particular player/coach/unit than the Ravens win and  a player/coach/unit prove him wrong. Painfully clear tbh. It's like he thrives on his particular opinion of the team and not the team's success itself. 

No matter how many times you people say this, it's not going to magically be true. The entire premise of my opinion here is that until we beat Cleveland this weekend, there's really nothing different about Martindale's defense vs. Pees's defenses, because one of the main defining factors was (and still is) "If we get into a must-win game, how will the defense respond?", and we're about to find out. If we seal the deal, then I'm comfortable saying this is a different unit than Pees', but until that point, there's nothing else that really sets Martindale apart from Pees, IMHO. Martindale has had a few great performances (notably LAC), as did Pees. Martindale has had some stinkers, as had Pees. Statistically, things also aren't much different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude...

We're giving up less points than last year. Less total yards. Better 3rd down. Against a MUCH harder offensive schedule.

What tangible proof do YOU have that this defense ISNT different? Just because you say so? Because "the saints moved up and down the field" even though we held them to 24 points? Because Kansas City hit a crazy play to give them 24 points in regulation IN arrowhead?

Youre the one who has nothing but preconceived notions and these weird personal vendettas to prove that this defense ISNT much better than last year's.

 

edit: and what are you talking about with must win defensive performances dude. we've been in must win games FOR 7 WEEKS and we completely shut down the falcons, chargers, bucs, etc. They've already proven they can step up when we need them to win a big game. One game out of 16 isn't going to change that. 

Your personal vendettas don't get to choose 1 game to say an entire defensive season wasn't different than a previous year's just because you want to be right all the time.

Edited by Ray Reed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're really gonna sit here and say "the only reason our defense is playing better is because the players are playing better" like 

a.) that has nothing to do with coaching and

b.) you wouldn't be blaming the coaching staff if the players WERENT developing and playing better

lol you're wild man. enjoy the last game (we know you won't if the defense holds late in the 4th quarter and Tim Williams and Bowser and Michael Huff and whoever else you're/you've been obsessed with isn't on the field for it)

Edited by Ray Reed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

It's pretty clear that he would rather the Ravens lose and be right about a particular player/coach/unit than the Ravens win and  a player/coach/unit prove him wrong. Painfully clear tbh. It's like he thrives on his particular opinion of the team and not the team's success itself. 

Pretty much this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

Dude...

We're giving up less points than last year. Less total yards. Better 3rd down. Against a MUCH harder offensive schedule.

Wouldn't it have been easier to say this in your first response? Would've saved a lot of time.

24 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

What tangible proof do YOU have that this defense ISNT different? Just because you say so? Because "the saints moved up and down the field" even though we held them to 24 points? Because Kansas City hit a crazy play to give them 24 points in regulation IN arrowhead?

Saints did move the ball up and down the field, and I mentioned they just couldn't convert in the red zone against us, and then I mentioned that red zone defense has always been a schematic strength of the Pees-era. We're pretty similar to the Pees-era in terms of blitz percentage, personnel usage, pressure percentage. We've actually declined this year in our sack rankings, despite having the massacre in Tennessee, and also in our takeaways where we were #1 last year and #30 this year. I'm sure there are more areas if I wanted to go deeper.

But, aside from that, the only area most people cared about going into this season was "How would the defense perform in a late-season scenario where they need to hold a lead?", and we're about to figure out that out. That's basically the entire reason Martindale was promoted and Pees was "fired", so an entire crutch of my argument hasn't even happened yet and I've already said if we do end up beating Cleveland and making a statement, that to me is the defining moment.

24 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

Youre the one who has nothing but preconceived notions and these weird personal vendettas to prove that this defense ISNT much better than last year's.

edit: and what are you talking about with must win defensive performances dude. we've been in must win games FOR 7 WEEKS and we completely shut down the falcons, chargers, bucs, etc. They've already proven they can step up when we need them to win a big game. One game out of 16 isn't going to change that. 

Your personal vendettas don't get to choose 1 game to say an entire defensive season wasn't different than a previous year's just because you want to be right all the time.

I'm not talking about must win defensive performances, I'm talking specifically about late-game scenarios. Are you forgetting the tremendous defensive performances against the Chiefs, Raiders and Bengals (2nd time)? 

15 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

You're really gonna sit here and say "the only reason our defense is playing better is because the players are playing better" like 

a.) that has nothing to do with coaching and

I know it has nothing to do with coaching, it has everything to do with guys being more healthy and some guys taking steps forward (like Marlon), or guys playing for FA contracts (like Za'Darius).

15 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

b.) you wouldn't be blaming the coaching staff if the players WERENT developing and playing better

I would be, and I have been.

15 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

lol you're wild man. enjoy the last game (we know you won't if the defense holds late in the 4th quarter and Tim Williams and Bowser and Michael Huff and whoever else you're/you've been obsessed with isn't on the field for it)

Y'all need to ******* chill with this personal attack bull****. Just because I said if we blow another late lead Martindale's defense will be regarded in the same realm as Pees you guys gotta go launching personal attacks and saying I'm not a fan and would rather this team fail? GTFOH. It's pathetic. I can deal with you refuting my opinions like you did at the top of this reply with the stats and I appreciate those kinds of retorts because some times I am wrong. But this garbage about me wanting this team to fail or whatever other nonsense you guys spew needs to ******* stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys need to chill out.

@Danand if you don't stop with the frequent attacks against one specific poster you'll be looking at a formal warning and a potential talk with Webby. 

And @AFlaccoSeagulls you really need to think about whether it's worth the trouble to keep re-hashing the same arguments over and over again

We get it - you two don't agree.  But its getting pretty tiresome to read

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You LITERALLY  just said "i know it has nothing to do with coaching" when talking about the defense playing WELL and "i would be and have been" when talking about blaming coaching when the defense ISNT playing well! 

What in gods name dude 🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Wouldn't it have been easier to say this in your first response? Would've saved a lot of time.

Saints did move the ball up and down the field, and I mentioned they just couldn't convert in the red zone against us, and then I mentioned that red zone defense has always been a schematic strength of the Pees-era. We're pretty similar to the Pees-era in terms of blitz percentage, personnel usage, pressure percentage. We've actually declined this year in our sack rankings, despite having the massacre in Tennessee, and also in our takeaways where we were #1 last year and #30 this year. I'm sure there are more areas if I wanted to go deeper.

But, aside from that, the only area most people cared about going into this season was "How would the defense perform in a late-season scenario where they need to hold a lead?", and we're about to figure out that out. That's basically the entire reason Martindale was promoted and Pees was "fired", so an entire crutch of my argument hasn't even happened yet and I've already said if we do end up beating Cleveland and making a statement, that to me is the defining moment.

I'm not talking about must win defensive performances, I'm talking specifically about late-game scenarios. Are you forgetting the tremendous defensive performances against the Chiefs, Raiders and Bengals (2nd time)? 

I know it has nothing to do with coaching, it has everything to do with guys being more healthy and some guys taking steps forward (like Marlon), or guys playing for FA contracts (like Za'Darius).

I would be, and I have been.

Y'all need to ******* chill with this personal attack bull****. Just because I said if we blow another late lead Martindale's defense will be regarded in the same realm as Pees you guys gotta go launching personal attacks and saying I'm not a fan and would rather this team fail? GTFOH. It's pathetic. I can deal with you refuting my opinions like you did at the top of this reply with the stats and I appreciate those kinds of retorts because some times I am wrong. But this garbage about me wanting this team to fail or whatever other nonsense you guys spew needs to ******* stop.

like dude...you realize what this looks like right lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray Reed said:

You LITERALLY  just said "i know it has nothing to do with coaching" when talking about the defense playing WELL and "i would be and have been" when talking about blaming coaching when the defense ISNT playing well! 

What in gods name dude 🤣🤣

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying, so let me clarify.

I don't think certain players playing better has anything to do with coaching (Marlon and Z are two specific examples - even Peanut). I think Marlon is just another year more comfortable in the scheme, Z is playing for a contract and Peanut was being pushed by Kenny Young. Those are my opinions, but I can certainly see the other side of the coin where the argument can be made that simplifying the scheme helped those guys flourish this year.

Where I've been critical of the coaching is where it's direclty related to scheme and/or personnel usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying, so let me clarify.

I don't think certain players playing better has anything to do with coaching (Marlon and Z are two specific examples - even Peanut). I think Marlon is just another year more comfortable in the scheme, Z is playing for a contract and Peanut was being pushed by Kenny Young. Those are my opinions, but I can certainly see the other side of the coin where the argument can be made that simplifying the scheme helped those guys flourish this year.

Where I've been critical of the coaching is where it's direclty related to scheme and/or personnel usage.

That's fair but i disagree prettt strongly. I don't think you can be put in a position to succeed (i.e. being pushed by a young guy, getting more rest on reps, being more comfortable in a scheme, etc.) and completely dismiss the coaching foresight and influence in THOSE situations, while simultaneously blaming the underperformance of players when they're NOT being put in a position to succeed at the highest level (the antethisis of above), and blame THAT on coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

That's fair but i disagree prettt strongly. I don't think you can be put in a position to succeed (i.e. being pushed by a young guy, getting more rest on reps, being more comfortable in a scheme, etc.) and completely dismiss the coaching foresight and influence in THOSE situations, while simultaneously blaming the underperformance of players when they're NOT being put in a position to succeed at the highest level (the antethisis of above), and blame THAT on coaching.

I don't think the two things I specifically mentioned are connected. The two things you just mentioned, however, are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, drd23 said:

You guys need to chill out.

@Danand if you don't stop with the frequent attacks against one specific poster you'll be looking at a formal warning and a potential talk with Webby. 

And @AFlaccoSeagulls you really need to think about whether it's worth the trouble to keep re-hashing the same arguments over and over again

We get it - you two don't agree.  But its getting pretty tiresome to read

I haven't commended on a single of his posts for quite some time. How come it is attacks? I point out how he makes his arguments just as Ray Reed did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ray Reed said:

That's fair but i disagree prettt strongly. I don't think you can be put in a position to succeed (i.e. being pushed by a young guy, getting more rest on reps, being more comfortable in a scheme, etc.) and completely dismiss the coaching foresight and influence in THOSE situations, while simultaneously blaming the underperformance of players when they're NOT being put in a position to succeed at the highest level (the antethisis of above), and blame THAT on coaching.

I see his point (I believe). What he is saying is that we were critical of Pees for the lack of clutch factor those defenses had and not that those defenses couldn’t execute the scheme on a high level.

Last season we may have played trash QBs, but we still performed very well for the past few seasons on defense. The defensive foresight of guys that could develop cannot therefore be wholly attributed to Wink because Pees was at the helm when we drafted much of our defensive talent.

I would also agree with @AFlaccoSeagulls in the regard that regardless of whether Pees was the DC or Wink, we likely would have seen huge production gains from Marlon Humphrey because he was one of the youngest defenders drafted that year and he’s now coming into his second season. His advancement was highly likely. Zadarius Smith’s step forward in relation to his contract season is also something we’ve seen before with guys like Pernel McPhee, Paul Kruger, etc. What’s more we see this pattern across the league with other individuals. So it’s not unreasonable to think that would have been the case with Zadarius as well.

Also the point about this defense being healthy to close out the season is factual as well. We haven’t dealt with as many huge injuries and our depth is stronger in the event that we do. In past seasons we didn’t have a veteran DL like Brent Urban, but usually rookies forced to step in. We didn’t have all our corners playing and healthy (Young and Smith down). This year we’re finally healthy and thus that alone would’ve given us statistical gains as well.

 

Now where I disagree is that Mahomes “carved up our our defense” (or whatever term was used). He made a few big plays in big moments, but just as a WR can make a great catch against great defense, so were some of the throws Mahomes had to make to beat our defense (in the events that he beat them). Mahomes needed a superhuman effort to have a average Joe kind of performance (by 2018 pocket passer standards). He was clearly stifled and my fantasy team is proof of that indicator. I believe he only put up 17 points for me that game where he’s usually 25-40 points in output. And I remember because I believed so heavily in Lamar Jackson that I benched Mahomes for Jackson and they both scored about like 16.5 points.

I will agree that Baker and Brees did well against our defense. Same with AJ Green. But even when the defense couldn’t dominate those QBs like the others, they “reverted” to how the defense looked under Pees (bend but don’t break) to hold Baker to only 12 points and Brees to only 24 points.

Which brings me to my final point. This defense HAS been better than in past seasons. And not just from health and opportunity, but from aggressiveness. While our pressure “percentages” are similar to past years, we pressure more often. That doesn’t always result in sacks, but it results in getting good QBs out of rhythm. A big part of our defense stepping forward has also been the job that Eric Weddle has done with disguising our defensive coverages until the last second. Now schematically that doesn’t make Wink any different than Pees. However the fact that he TRUSTS his defensive leaders enough to utilize their strengths to improve the collective result has allowed this defense to make its greatest improvements. Just think about how worthless Weddle would be this year if it were just about his direct impact on a football game vs including his indirect ability to put other position groups in a position to succeed.

Whats more we know that Wink has switched the green dot helmet back and forth from Mosley to Weddle based off of the opponent play speed, likely an adjustment made after the Saints started shredding us in the second half.

Another difference from a Pees defense has been our defense’s ability to adjust in the second half. Under Pees we would generally start strong and as the game progressed they would figure us out and exploit those advantages for the entire second half. Generally with Wink that happens only in the third quarter, but by the 4th quarter we’ve already fixed the leak and tightened up so as to allow the least amount of 4th quarter points in the league.

So all in all this defense is certainly better for many reasons. BUT @Ray Reed to @AFlaccoSeagulls‘s point, would that make the fan base and their perception of this defense FEEL any better knowing that a better unit, still couldn’t get the job done when it counted most? Let’s not kid ourselves, it wouldn’t. It would feel no different than with Pees. Because at the end of the day, they proved to be unclutch, when they least could’ve afforded to.

Edited by diamondbull424

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×