Ellis... 3-4 DE sack king?

[Clove]

No, you aren't. They are two completely different defenses.

A 4-2 defense actually. You have 4 down linemen, and 2 LB's/ 5 DB's. But I didn't mean it was the exact same thing, just the same in that 4 guys put their hands down and rush the passer. Turning Ware into DE at that point.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I'll tell ya Rich, to me, I think he has figured it out. I just don't think he likes what he's learned.

See, I don't think Ellis has figured it out. By getting him less snaps, it's made him:

1. a more effective player
2. Added a couple of years to his career.

Furthermore, by getting him into the 3-4, if Dallas wanted to trade/cut him, they just added to Ellis' value because he can edge rush in the 4-3 and play as a 3-4 DE. Not many players out there that can do that.

Instead, he complained that he wasn't going to get the money and now that it appears that he will get his roster bonus, he's complaining about the scheme and playing time.

Jerry and Bill did more than hold their share of the deal on this one.

Rich........

 

[junk]

Yeah but the nickel requires 4 men to put their hands down on the ground. Forcing the line to have assignments on each person individually. You are basically running a 4-3 when you go into nickel, leaving you one on one with the Tackle only.

When you're playing an exclusive 3-4, you rub noses with the Guard all the time. You are double teamed alot, but when you kick to a nickel, it's one on one with the tackle.

Ellis is a 4-3 dlineman, and that is a fact. When he was asked to play the 3-4, he was swallowed up like a fish in a whale. That's why he was pulled for Canty. Plus, when he was in a 3-4 allignment, he did not get his sacks. No way Ellis fights thru a tackle and a guard to get a sack.

My point is, if you were to put Jason Taylor from the dolphins (sack guru) in a 3-4, he would not succeed until they moved into the nickel. That makes Ellis a situational DE, and we can get someone like that in the draft who would make alot less like Darryl Tapp.

Thanks for the insight.

I'll repeat. The 4-3 is not nickel. They are distinctly different. A 4-3 defensive front is much different than a nickel front and the responsibilities are different as well.

How do you explain your "fact" that Ellis is a 4-3 lineman when he successfully played 3-4 all year? When rumblings are coming out now that Ellis apparently graded out quite well as a 3-4 end and that the run defense slipped when Canty took over as the starter.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

In any case, with Ellis' cap friendly contract, I don't think he's going anywhere.

if Jerry has any say, Ellis stays

 

[AdamJT13]

I just re-watched all 10 plays on which Ellis got at least half a sack (six solos and four halves).

-- All six of his solo sacks and two of his half-sacks came when we had four down linemen (Ware had a hand down on all of them). Two of his half-sacks came when we had three down linemen, plus at least one stand-up rusher.

-- He beat double-teams for one full sack (right tackle and running back) and one half-sack (left tackle and left guard).

-- All of his solo sacks and three of his half-sacks came when the opponent was in the shotgun (the other came on a third-and-1).

-- Four of his solo sacks and all four of his half-sacks came on third downs. (Only one of those was less than third-and-5, and five came on at least third-and-10.) He had no sacks on first downs and two solo sacks on second-and-10 (both late in the fourth quarter of blowout wins).

Also, Ellis played only 49 percent of our defensive snaps in 2005, compared to 87 percent in 2004.

 

[junk]

I just re-watched all 10 plays on which Ellis got at least half a sack (six solos and four halves).

-- All six of his solo sacks and two of his half-sacks came when we had four down linemen (Ware had a hand down on all of them). Two of his half-sacks came when we had three down linemen, plus at least one stand-up rusher.

-- He beat double-teams for one full sack (right tackle and running back) and one half-sack (left tackle and left guard).

-- All of his solo sacks and three of his half-sacks came when the opponent was in the shotgun (the other came on a third-and-1).

-- Four of his solo sacks and all four of his half-sacks came on third downs. (Only one of those was less than third-and-5, and five came on at least third-and-10.) He had no sacks on first downs and two solo sacks on second-and-10 (both late in the fourth quarter of blowout wins).

Also, Ellis played only 49 percent of our defensive snaps in 2005, compared to 87 percent in 2004.

What exactly do you do that gives you the freedom to compile this kind of information?

Are you a robot?

 

[joseephuss]

What exactly do you do that gives you the freedom to compile this kind of information?

Are you a robot?

He is the HAL 9000. Don't piss him off.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

See, I don't think Ellis has figured it out. By getting him less snaps, it's made him:

1. a more effective player
2. Added a couple of years to his career.

Furthermore, by getting him into the 3-4, if Dallas wanted to trade/cut him, they just added to Ellis' value because he can edge rush in the 4-3 and play as a 3-4 DE. Not many players out there that can do that.

Instead, he complained that he wasn't going to get the money and now that it appears that he will get his roster bonus, he's complaining about the scheme and playing time.

Jerry and Bill did more than hold their share of the deal on this one.

Rich........

I can't really agree with you on this Rich. I mean, he may get his money but then again, there's nothing out there that confirms this. All that's been said is that it's workable. What does that mean? I don't know.

As far as playing time, he's way less productive IMO. Tackles are down and sacks are less then what he had the year before. I know it's only 1 sack but it's a realative thing. Ellis has really never had the kind of talent on the Dline that could give him one on one opportunity consistantly. From his point of view, he's still young. If he could play on a Dline with talent, he could easily get 10+ sacks. In Dallas, I doubt he will ever get that many. The DL is young and the road for him will continue to get shorter. He has a chance to get another big contract if he is traded or cut. That's what he sees and he's not wrong.

 

[AdamJT13]

What exactly do you do that gives you the freedom to compile this kind of information?

I have all of our games recorded. It takes only a few minutes to go watch all 10 of Ellis' sack plays and write down what happened.

 

[joseephuss]

I can't really agree with you on this Rich. I mean, he may get his money but then again, there's nothing out there that confirms this. All that's been said is that it's workable. What does that mean? I don't know.

As far as playing time, he's way less productive IMO. Tackles are down and sacks are less then what he had the year before. I know it's only 1 sack but it's a realative thing. Ellis has really never had the kind of talent on the Dline that could give him one on one opportunity consistantly. From his point of view, he's still young. If he could play on a Dline with talent, he could easily get 10+ sacks. In Dallas, I doubt he will ever get that many. The DL is young and the road for him will continue to get shorter. He has a chance to get another big contract if he is traded or cut. That's what he sees and he's not wrong.

Playing much less than last season will have an affect on the total amount of tackles and sacks that Ellis can get. Plus, 3-4 ends make less tackles than 4-3 ends due to the different responsibilities of the positions. He had more opportunities to make tackles playing the left end in the 4-3 as opposed to the right end in the 3-4. It is a relative thing and his 8 sacks this season are more impressive than his 9 sacks last season based on the much fewer opportunities that he had this year.

 

[Alexander]

What exactly do you do that gives you the freedom to compile this kind of information?

Are you a robot?

:laugh2:

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Playing much less than last season will have an affect on the total amount of tackles and sacks that Ellis can get. Plus, 3-4 ends make less tackles than 4-3 ends due to the different responsibilities of the positions. He had more opportunities to make tackles playing the left end in the 4-3 as opposed to the right end in the 3-4. It is a relative thing and his 8 sacks this season are more impressive than his 9 sacks last season based on the much fewer opportunities that he had this year.

I agree with your sack assesment. Imagine how that might translate into a 43 defense with talent around him? This, to me, is who Ellis views it.

 

[junk]

I have all of our games recorded. It takes only a few minutes to go watch all 10 of Ellis' sack plays and write down what happened.

Sure, but you have to figure out which games Ellis got his sacks in. Takes a minute or two on the Internet. Then you have to find them during the game on Tivo or tape. Usually takes a couple of viewings to properly ascertain what happened.

Anyway, my point was simply that it isn't a trivial task that most of us wouldn't have the time to do during a normal day.

However, I hope you didn't take my joke wrong. I certainly do appreciate the information you feed us. I just had a mental image of this number crunching robot wearing a big blue cowboy hat. AdamJT2000 - providing your everyday statistical Cowboys needs. :laugh2:

 

[Rack]

See, I don't think Ellis has figured it out. By getting him less snaps, it's made him:

1. a more effective player
2. Added a couple of years to his career.

Furthermore, by getting him into the 3-4, if Dallas wanted to trade/cut him, they just added to Ellis' value because he can edge rush in the 4-3 and play as a 3-4 DE. Not many players out there that can do that.

Instead, he complained that he wasn't going to get the money and now that it appears that he will get his roster bonus, he's complaining about the scheme and playing time.

Jerry and Bill did more than hold their share of the deal on this one.

Rich........

I don't recall Ellis ever complaining about money. All I've ever heard him complain about is playing time. And I don't know about you, but I like when a player actually WANTS to play football.

 

[dbair1967]

See, I don't think Ellis has figured it out. By getting him less snaps, it's made him:

1. a more effective player
2. Added a couple of years to his career.

Furthermore, by getting him into the 3-4, if Dallas wanted to trade/cut him, they just added to Ellis' value because he can edge rush in the 4-3 and play as a 3-4 DE. Not many players out there that can do that.

Instead, he complained that he wasn't going to get the money and now that it appears that he will get his roster bonus, he's complaining about the scheme and playing time.

Jerry and Bill did more than hold their share of the deal on this one.

Rich........

Ellis never complained about money...what he said was that he might want to restrecuture his deal and get a little more signing bonus this time because then he'd likely get more playing time...

he DID sign a WAY under market value deal a couple yrs back to stay here

as for your other comments, Parcells blew it with Ellis last yr, Ellis didnt blow anything here...the guy has been one of the most hard working, consistent, producitve players this team has had for several years...he's in his prime, and how was he rewarded? by basically being benched...

whereas players who were absolutely horrible like Tucker and Petitti were trotted out there play after play, week after week and rewarded for their mediocrity

the guy was the best DE on the team last yr, just as he has been for the rest of his career here...you dont bench good players, you find ways to use them...the best coaches are the ones who maximize the talent they have, not figure out ways to de-emphasize it

David

 

[Rack]

Ellis never complained about money...what he said was that he might want to restrecuture his deal and get a little more signing bonus this time because then he'd likely get more playing time...

he DID sign a WAY under market value deal a couple yrs back to stay here

as for your other comments, Parcells blew it with Ellis last yr, Ellis didnt blow anything here...the guy has been one of the most hard working, consistent, producitve players this team has had for several years...he's in his prime, and how was he rewarded? by basically being benched...

whereas players who were absolutely horrible like Tucker and Petitti were trotted out there play after play, week after week and rewarded for their mediocrity

the guy was the best DE on the team last yr, just as he has been for the rest of his career here...you dont bench good players, you find ways to use them...the best coaches are the ones who maximize the talent they have, not figure out ways to de-emphasize it

David

I agree with everything you said, even that bolded part. But I think you're trying to say Parcells didn't maximize Ellis' productivity. I disagree. He made Ellis more productive while playing about 38% less snaps then the year before. IMO, that means he used him for what he does best.


Fact is the other guys are better suited for the 3-4, and Ellis is better suited for what he did. Parcells used him accordingly. Playing Ellis more snaps in the 3-4 would not have been maximizing his talent.

 

[dbair1967]

I agree with everything you said, even that bolded part. But I think you're trying to say Parcells didn't maximize Ellis' productivity. I disagree. He made Ellis more productive while playing about 38% less snaps then the year before. IMO, that means he used him for what he does best.
.

then why was he hardly on the field for the better part of 4 or 5 games the last part of the season...one game was something ridiculous like only 8 or10 plays

David

 

[Rack]

then why was he hardly on the field for the better part of 4 or 5 games the last part of the season...one game was something ridiculous like only 8 or10 plays

David

Cuz we probably ran more 3-4 those games.


Parcells made it where Ellis was just as productive while playing a lot less plays. If that's not maximizing talent then I don't know what is.

Canty and Spears are the better 3-4 DEs. If we're running the 3-4, I want them out there more. Unless we come out in the 3-4 on 3rd and 6 or something. Then I'd want Ellis in there.


Are you on the "I hate Parcells" bandwagon now?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Cuz we probably ran more 3-4 those games.


Parcells made it where Ellis was just as productive while playing a lot less plays. If that's not maximizing talent then I don't know what is.

Canty and Spears are the better 3-4 DEs. If we're running the 3-4, I want them out there more. Unless we come out in the 3-4 on 3rd and 6 or something. Then I'd want Ellis in there.


Are you on the "I hate Parcells" bandwagon now?

I'm not certain I agree with this. I think that from a pass rushing prospective, it's true. He was able to put him in situations where he was as productive, plus or minus. However, I do believe that as a whole, our defense suffered towords the end. We couldn't defend the pass or the run. I think that the absence of Ellis contributed to this. Yes, he got the same numbers out of him but I'm not certain I would say that he maxumised Ellis to his full potential.

 

[joseephuss]

I'm not certain I agree with this. I think that from a pass rushing prospective, it's true. He was able to put him in situations where he was as productive, plus or minus. However, I do believe that as a whole, our defense suffered towords the end. We couldn't defend the pass or the run. I think that the absence of Ellis contributed to this. Yes, he got the same numbers out of him but I'm not certain I would say that he maxumised Ellis to his full potential.

Maxmizing Ellis means trading him at this point. I am a big Ellis supporter and if he is not going to see playing time as exhibited by the last few games of the season, then trading him makes the most sense for the team. Spears and Canty are the young guys that can and will be called on to fill the Ellis role. Get something for Ellis to fill other needs.