A Lesson in Patterson

Today's Daily News profile on defensive tackle Mike Patterson should -- but probably won't -- serve as a cautionary tale for the folks who comprise the baby-with-the-bathwater contingent. 

This time a year ago, Patterson would not have made many fan favorite lists.  As a former first-round draft choice and one part of a defensive tackle rotation that simply could not stop opposing teams from running up the middle, Patterson was a frequent target for fans' anger.  (If you'd like chapter and verse, I'd suggest you start here.)

Fast forward to today and even Dana Pennett O'Neill can find nice things to say about him.  However, she gets it wrong too, when she says this:

To call the Eagles porous against the run last season would be kind. They ranked 26th in the NFL, allowing 136.4 yards per game including an even uglier 4.5 yards per carry. There has been a concerted effort this season to change those numbers, and they have - the Eagles rank ninth in the league, giving up just 97.8 yards per game.

Much of the explanation for the change belongs to Patterson, of whom former USC quarterback and now NBC announcer Pat Haden once memorably said, "He's like hair in a sink. He just kind of clogs things up."

The emphasis is mine and here's the question.  If Patterson played on the line last year ... and he played on the line this year ... then how is he responsible for much of the change?  As the "constant" in this equation, wouldn't it be more likely that the things that were changed (Bunkley for Walker, notably) were more responsible for the difference?

Now I'm sure Patterson is a better player today than he used to be.  He's still in the young, up-and-coming phase of his career.  But the truth is that he played just fine last year.  It just didn't always look that way because of what was happening around him. 

The same thing is happening this year, where many fans are willing to fire sale the roster because they overrate the importance of wins and losses when evaluating the team's production.  Just as fans overrate the importance of an overall stat like rushing yards when evaluating a player's production.

Yes, at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is how many games you win.  Everyone knows that.  But when you're trying to truly understand what's going on with a team, wins and losses aren't always the best metric. 

It's just like cards.  If you've played much poker in your life, you know there are times when you do everything "right," but you still end up losing.  You have to learn to get over that fact or you won't last long as a poker player.

Football is different in that the element of luck is substantially less important, but it's still there.  One play can turn an entire game.  And while I think it's fair to argue that the Eagles may have a shortage of guys who have historically shown a higher likelihood of making one of those clutch plays -- there's a mouthful -- it's also true that they haven't really been that lucky this year. 

There may come a point when it's time to start over.  Given the performance of the Eagles in every statistic other than the most important one -- wins and losses -- that time isn't now.

(Except for the special teams, where it's time to fire the current group and overpay for a coordinator who can fix this mess.)

Comments

[Eagle Scout]

I agree Patterson may have had it easier this year with the addition of Bunkley and the emergence of Trent Cole as an elite DE, but the jump in numbers is significant. Patterson last year had a line of 51 tackes, 1.5 sacks. This year with 3 games to play, he's looking at 61 tackles and 3 sacks. Project that out and Patterson is looking at 75 tackles and 4 sacks (rounding up). Significant bump. Patterson looks much bigger this year as well, as evidenced by his fat ass on that fumble recovery.

Good work as always here at the Iggles Blog.