Sherman Peterson Tweet

[Uhsplit]

Just for the record I still think Revis is still the best corner in the league

No sweat. We are all entitled to our opinion. Cheers.

 

[Uhsplit]

I will say that Revis is still a very good CB, but he is certainly not the best anymore. His first 5-6 games in Tampa Bay he was very average. As the year progressed he played a lot better, but still not to the great level that we are used to with Revis as the best in the game.

Patrick Peterson, I like his potential and respect his talent, but his fundamentals, instincts, and ball skills are slightly behind Shermans. People are too enamored with physical and athletic abilities. Sherman is a smart CB. It sounds cliche, but separation is the preparation.

The reason why the TD to INT ratio is so drastically different is because when Patrick Peterson tries to bait a WR he relies too much on his athletic abilities. He puts himself in a 50/50 situation where if the QB makes the perfect throw or the WR makes a play, he's in a bad position and is likely to give up a TD

When Sherman baits a player it's because he has seen something on tape and knows exactly how that play will turn out if he positions himself in a certain spot on the field. One prime example is the Houston game.


If PP becomes more fundamentally sound and emphasizes "making the right play" rather than trying to "make the big play" all the time, he will have a chance to be as good as Sherman. But as of right now, there's no debate. Sherman is the best.

LL, spot on observation. I am envious how well you put that into words.

 

[Uhsplit]

I have a serious couple of questions to ask you guys since you guys watch Hawks games every Sunday. I know that there will be some homerism involved, but I would like you to try to be as objective as possible. For the record, I feel that Sherman is better then PP.

1. Do you think that Sherman's status as arguably the best CB in the NFL has been influenced in ANY way by the fact that the S play, both underneath with Kam or over the tip?

2. If so, how much in terms of a percentage do you feel is attributed to the LOB as a whole collectively raising the value of Sherman?

3. How much of a bump do you give PP for the fact that he locks horns with #1's all game long whereas often times, RS is simply on a side?

dred, good to see you and great Q's. I love to study Seahawk opponents.
Now, down to business. IMO...
1) Not really. They all work very well together, but I have seen enough of Sherm 1 on 1 to say I think he is the best CB in the NFL.
2) Well, they all raise each other evenly, it seems. They all stand out at certain times during a game. It is very even on all four of the LOB to me.
3) None. In that scene, Byron Maxwell covers our opponents #1 WR most of the time. Why does he not get smoked? Investigate yourself. Hint: It is not just the safety's.

 

[Screamin12th]

Although I agree with your assessment on some, it contradicts itself with others. First, you said that the S rarely help Sherman. But then you called Maxwell a VERY good CB, which wouldn't necessarily line up if your the stats attached to your S happens primarily over the #2. There is shared responsibility, is there not? I'm mostly playing devil's advocate although I have seen RS get safety help both short and long more then rarely.

Now you didn't address whether or not you give PP a credit bump for always guarding the other team's #1. That also plays to what percentage of snaps RS lined up across from the other team's #1. I don't know and am not willing to go through 16+ games of film to get that percentage, just an observation.

Like I said, I still believe RS is better then PP, I just don't think it is as distant a 2nd place for PP as many RS/Hawk fans.

I can not give PP a Credit bump, Sure he guards the other teams #1 a lot but he also gets burned a lot. QB's have a what 90 Rating passing against him. That's not good. He had what? 12 PD but gave up 7 TD so a 2-1 ratio basically, that's not great. PP gets credit for being athletic with massive potential but he is not producing yet. He was paid more for potential where as Sherman was paid for production. Sherman has like a 40 QB rating against 16 PD to 1 TD 16-1 ratio, It's not even close.

PP has had 1 year out of 3 at Sherman's level. Sherman on the other hand has produced at that level EVERY year and many forget that he was not the starter till something like the 5th or 6th game his first year. In 2012 his first full year people tested him and all he did was have 24 PD's and 8 INT's. They stopped testing him in 2013 and he still put up 16 PD and 8 INT's. Sherman is there at the top of his game and tops in the NFL, PP is not there yet but he has the skill and ability to do so, but will he? that's the true question. So far he has had 1 year on Sherman's level and regressed last season.

 

[Logicallylethal]

Patrick Peterson: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

Peterson’s 2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 260
Failed coverages: 79
Shutdowns: 27
In Position: 154
Success rate for the season: 69.6%



Richard Sherman: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 238
Failed coverages: 52
Shutdowns: 35
In Position: 151
Sherman’s success rate for the season: 78.2%



But but but but Sherman never covers #1 WRs and Peterson covers the #1 WRs 199 % of the time


Sherman's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 5/5 (100%)
Nate Washington 9/10 (90%)
Chris Givens 7/8 (88%)
Andre Johnson 8/12 (67%)
Vincent Jackson 4/6 (67%)
Michael Crabtree 3/6 (50%)
Cecil Shorts 2/4 (50%)
Demaryius Thomas 4/4 (100%)
Larry Fitzgerald 6/10 (60%)
Total 48/65 (73.85%)

Peterson's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 6/7 (86%)
Nate Washington 5/7 (71%)
Chris Givens 8/13 (62%)
Andre Johnson 18/23 (78%)
Vincent Jackson 9/16 (56%)
Michael Crabtree 5/8 (63%)
Cecil Shorts 7/8 (88%)
Desean Jackson 10/13 (77%)
Steve Smith 11/17 (65%)
Calvin Johnson 11/17 (65%)
Total 90/129 (69.77%)


But but but but but Peterson is so versatile. He even covers WRs in the slot and surely does it better than Sherman

Sherman in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 23
Failed coverages in the slot: 7
Success Rate in the slot: 70%

Peterson in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 43
Failed coverages in the slot: 18
Success Rate in the slot: 58%




Any other questions or hypotheticals?

 

[bksballer89]

Patrick Peterson: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

Peterson’s 2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 260
Failed coverages: 79
Shutdowns: 27
In Position: 154
Success rate for the season: 69.6%



Richard Sherman: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 238
Failed coverages: 52
Shutdowns: 35
In Position: 151
Sherman’s success rate for the season: 78.2%



But but but but Sherman never covers #1 WRs and Peterson covers the #1 WRs 199 % of the time


Sherman's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 5/5 (100%)
Nate Washington 9/10 (90%)
Chris Givens 7/8 (88%)
Andre Johnson 8/12 (67%)
Vincent Jackson 4/6 (67%)
Michael Crabtree 3/6 (50%)
Cecil Shorts 2/4 (50%)
Demaryius Thomas 4/4 (100%)
Larry Fitzgerald 6/10 (60%)
Total 48/65 (73.85%)

Peterson's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 6/7 (86%)
Nate Washington 5/7 (71%)
Chris Givens 8/13 (62%)
Andre Johnson 18/23 (78%)
Vincent Jackson 9/16 (56%)
Michael Crabtree 5/8 (63%)
Cecil Shorts 7/8 (88%)
Desean Jackson 10/13 (77%)
Steve Smith 11/17 (65%)
Calvin Johnson 11/17 (65%)
Total 90/129 (69.77%)


But but but but but Peterson is so versatile. He even covers WRs in the slot and surely does it better than Sherman

Sherman in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 23
Failed coverages in the slot: 7
Success Rate in the slot: 70%

Peterson in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 43
Failed coverages in the slot: 18
Success Rate in the slot: 58%




Any other questions or hypotheticals?

These numbers actually help PP. There's really not much of a difference when you examine the numbers. Only difference being is when in the slot but I think it has a lot to do with PP being involved in 20+ plays in the slot compared to Sherman as that is 20 more times to screw up

Their success rate against #1 isn't much of a drop off and actually really impressive considering the fact that he faced 64 more attempts vs #1 and the % difference is only 4.

 

[bksballer89]

Do you realize how impressive it is to hold Andre to 5 catches on 23 targets?

And who ever said Sherman doesn't cover #1 WR? What people said is that he doesn't cover them for the entire game which is obviously true as you can see by the # of targets #1 WR's got vs PP because he follows them everywhere compared to Sherman who is mainly on one side of the field so they only go up against Sherman when on his side of the field so obviously Sherman does cover #1 WR's at times but he just doesn't do it for the entire game as PP does.

 

[Logicallylethal]

These numbers actually help PP. There's really not much of a difference when you examine the numbers. Only difference being is when in the slot but I think it has a lot to do with PP being involved in 20+ plays in the slot compared to Sherman as that is 20 more times to screw up

Their success rate against #1 isn't much of a drop off and actually really impressive considering the fact that he faced 64 more attempts vs #1 and the % difference is only 4.

But at the end of the day Sherman beats Peterson in every statistic no matter how you spin it. Yes it's close in some categories and it should be. Both are elite corners in the game.

Both are in their third year in the league, but Sherman is just more fundamentally sound. His technique and footwork is better than Peterson's.

You ever watch Peterson try to jam a receiver? He's very poor playing at the line. He's also not as fluid as Sherman is. He is faster straight line, but Sherman makes up for that with his length and anticipation.

Here's an example of Peterson trying to jam a receiver

 

[bksballer89]

At the end of day I still believe what I said is true which is that there's not much of a difference/separation between Sherman, Revis, Haden, and Peterson. I think those are hands down the best corners in the league and all 4 are tremendous man to man shutdown corners. If I had to pick one to shutdown any WR in the league man to man as I said earlier give me Revis but I do think all 4 belong in the same tier

 

[Logicallylethal]

Do you realize how impressive it is to hold Andre to 5 catches on 23 targets?

And who ever said Sherman doesn't cover #1 WR? What people said is that he doesn't cover them for the entire game which is obviously true as you can see by the # of targets #1 WR's got vs PP because he follows them everywhere compared to Sherman who is mainly on one side of the field so they only go up against Sherman when on his side of the field so obviously Sherman does cover #1 WR's at times but he just doesn't do it for the entire game as PP does.

Look this argument that someone is better simply because they follow a wr only holds water if the other cb doesn't do well against number one wrs

Sherman does do well against #1 wrs. Matter fact, he has a higher success rate than Peterson does.


No one here is knocking Peterson. He is very talented. Sherman is just better.

 

[bksballer89]

I never once said Peterson is better. I just said he is probably going to be challenged more and any corner would be challenged more against top WR's if you're on them for every single play. It doesn't mean you're better, it just mean that you will be targeted more because you're covering the QB's favorite target in most cases unless that team has a great TE as New Orleans & New England does.

If I had to rank the top 4 in order just based on my preference it would look like this actually:

Revis
Sherman
Haden
Peterson

 

[Screamin12th]

Bksballer89 I will say this, Peterson is the better Athlete but what separates them is how Smart Sherman is in his reads, he also is very long which allows just like a WR a much large catch radius and even larger deflection Radius. the fact that PP is just a little more Athletic helps him get more attention than he should not to mention he was supposed to be the next Great CB coming out of College.

The thing that PP has going for him is he is 24 years old. He has time to learn it like Sherman and get on his intellect. He wont get those long lanky legs and arms that give Sherman the size advantage And Sherman has been very durable, you hardly ever see him go down hurt.

I wouldn't kick PP of the Hawks and he would easily be the #2 on this team But will he ever catch Sherman or will Sherman just reach the end of his career before PP catches him? Don't know the answer to that. PP has the ability to be something better than great, thing is will he ever get there? Sherman will still improve for the next 2 years at the least also.

 

[BamaCards1]

Most the arguments I'm seeing are just ludicrous. Tell you how I feel. I'd take either one of them and be happy. Though I do have a slight edge for PP only because he talks less, besides that either one of them I'd be happy having on my team. Sorry, having a SB ring means nothing in this discussion.

 

[bksballer89]

That is true. SB is a team accomplishment so it's not relevant when you're comparing players. The only position where it may be relevant is at QB because you have more control over what happened than any other position

 

[WizardHawk]

Do you realize how impressive it is to hold Andre to 5 catches on 23 targets?

And who ever said Sherman doesn't cover #1 WR? What people said is that he doesn't cover them for the entire game which is obviously true as you can see by the # of targets #1 WR's got vs PP because he follows them everywhere compared to Sherman who is mainly on one side of the field so they only go up against Sherman when on his side of the field so obviously Sherman does cover #1 WR's at times but he just doesn't do it for the entire game as PP does.

Sherman destroyed boldin the game he shadowed him so he CAN do it, they just don't ask him to.

And once again, if the Seahawks defense was the best in the league, and likely the best of at least the last decade, then why on earth would anyone want that to change? I don't care who Sherman covers as long as that defense holds the other team and they did that better than any other last year.

If #1 receivers were torching them for large yards when not facing Sherman and it was leading to losses then I think everyone would be yelling for it.

That isn't happening.

Seriously, I think the game Sherman shadowed Boldin he ended up with like 7y for the game. He was so in his head that game. That alone would make him more dangerous than Peterson. He adds another dimension of in your face.

 

[BamaCards1]

If it aint broke don't fix it. No reason for Sherman to play the way PP does because the Hawks defense works as it is.

 

[SonnyCID]

All this talk about shadowing receivers and asking Sherm to do it more is just stupid. A flanker spot is generally where the #1 receiver is in a base offense, and if a team can beat you with their base offense, they will. Having Sherman over there all the time makes teams move the #1 receiver because he's not getting shit for production on Sherman's side. These moves just shows their hand about where they want to go with the ball. And when the Seahawks know where you're going with the ball, there is a good chance their going to end up with it.

 

[cezero]

...Though I do have a slight edge for PP only because he talks less

nobody cares

try talking football instead of shit that doesn't matter

 

[bksballer89]

If it aint broke don't fix it. No reason for Sherman to play the way PP does because the Hawks defense works as it is.

I agree with this. No reason for Seattle to change the way they use Sherman just to please the media

 

[octagondd]

Patrick Peterson: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

Peterson’s 2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 260
Failed coverages: 79
Shutdowns: 27
In Position: 154
Success rate for the season: 69.6%



Richard Sherman: The Numbers, The Tape, The Verdict 2014 | Pre Snap Reads

2013 NFL Season Total:
Total qualifying plays: 238
Failed coverages: 52
Shutdowns: 35
In Position: 151
Sherman’s success rate for the season: 78.2%



But but but but Sherman never covers #1 WRs and Peterson covers the #1 WRs 199 % of the time


Sherman's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 5/5 (100%)
Nate Washington 9/10 (90%)
Chris Givens 7/8 (88%)
Andre Johnson 8/12 (67%)
Vincent Jackson 4/6 (67%)
Michael Crabtree 3/6 (50%)
Cecil Shorts 2/4 (50%)
Demaryius Thomas 4/4 (100%)
Larry Fitzgerald 6/10 (60%)
Total 48/65 (73.85%)

Peterson's success rates vs WR1

Marques Colston 6/7 (86%)
Nate Washington 5/7 (71%)
Chris Givens 8/13 (62%)
Andre Johnson 18/23 (78%)
Vincent Jackson 9/16 (56%)
Michael Crabtree 5/8 (63%)
Cecil Shorts 7/8 (88%)
Desean Jackson 10/13 (77%)
Steve Smith 11/17 (65%)
Calvin Johnson 11/17 (65%)
Total 90/129 (69.77%)


But but but but but Peterson is so versatile. He even covers WRs in the slot and surely does it better than Sherman

Sherman in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 23
Failed coverages in the slot: 7
Success Rate in the slot: 70%

Peterson in the slot

Qualifying Plays in the slot: 43
Failed coverages in the slot: 18
Success Rate in the slot: 58%




Any other questions or hypotheticals?

I have a serious problem here. This list has Michael Crabtree as a WR1 but I am pretty sure team's don't put mediocre receivers at WR1.

But seriously, what are the TD, PD(Tip), INT numbers against the #1's?