Ray Thompson

[kerouac9]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually

Originally posted by SECTION 11
I see where Jack's going with this. I think there is a tendancy to overvalue our own players sometimes. But in this particular case, you can't possibly argue that he wasn't our best playmaker at OLB last season.

Yeah, I can see that. But I think that the case that I'm trying to make is that EVERYONE on the defense needs to MAKE MORE PLAYS. When your "best playmaker at OLB" has three sacks, three passes defensed, no picks, and two tackles-for-loss in a season, that's sad. Really, really sad.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Originally posted by kerouac9
The Chicago game that we lost 28-3? Where he had five tackles and two sacks? Where Brock Forsey came off the bench to rush for 134 yards and Ray-Ray didn't have one tackle for loss?

Congratulations you went on ESPN.com and found the game stats. If you had watched the game instead of monitoring Vick's injury recovery, you'd know that the score was only 7-3 at the end of the third quarter and the biggest reason why we were able to hang around was Thompson's constant presence in the backfield, despite being on the field most of the game due to the offense's crappiness.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by MaoTosiFanClub
...the biggest reason why we were able to hang around was Thompson's constant presence in the backfield, despite being on the field most of the game due to the offense's crappiness.

So, you're talking about the "constant presence" when he was unable to notch a single tackle for loss. That one? I just wanted to be sure that we were talking about the same game.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Originally posted by kerouac9
So, you're talking about the "constant presence" when he was unable to notch a single tackle for loss. That one? I just wanted to be sure that we were talking about the same game.

Well, when you sack the QB, isn't he actually getting tackled for a loss? Hey Moneyball, being a stat dork like you might work in baseball, but it's a little different in football. Save your BS theories for your headset conversations with your online Madden buddies.

 

[JeffGollin]

I agree more with this post then the others that say he is overrated.
I'm kind of in the same frame of mind here.

True, Ray has made big plays in a few games (And, in addition to their worth on face value, it shows you how good he could be if he did it all the time - certainly it's something worth developing).

But Ray will at times fly around the field, overrun plays and miss tackles. And because he's not very big, he's gotten injured and has been unable to go more than you'd want.

It doesn't mean he sucks. It doesn't mean we should trade him. It just means there's a lot of room for inprovement (with, incidently, a nice upside).

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by MaoTosiFanClub
Well, when you sack the QB, isn't he actually getting tackled for a loss? Hey Moneyball, being a stat dork like you might work in baseball, but it's a little different in football. Save your BS theories for your headset conversations with your online Madden buddies.

I made my peace with Raynoch eight posts ago. You're the one belaboring this point. A sack is a TFL on the QB, not the guy that gutted the defense for 134 yards in essentially his first game. I guess I just figured that a "constant backfield presence" like Ray might have been able to wrap him up maybe once. But maybe he was in the backfield because he'd already overrun the play. I don't remember.

But name-calling does make a very, very compelling arguement. Way to back up your guy.

 

[lrk27]

Originally posted by kerouac9
So, you're talking about the "constant presence" when he was unable to notch a single tackle for loss. That one? I just wanted to be sure that we were talking about the same game.

Where do you get your stats from? Officially against Chicago, Thompson had 6 solo, 4 assisted, for 10 total tackles; 2 sacks for 11 yards; 2 QB hurries; 2 tackles for loss; 1 pass deflection. That's a pretty good day. That was also coming back off of an injury. Remember, two games before this he was taken off on a stretcher and the week before he left the game early due to the same neck injury. The Chicago game was the last of the year. When basing everything on stats, remember the injuries and that he only played in 12 games (probably closer to 10).

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by lrk27
Where do you get your stats from? Officially against Chicago, Thompson had 6 solo, 4 assisted, for 10 total tackles; 2 sacks for 11 yards; 2 QB hurries; 2 tackles for loss; 1 pass deflection. That's a pretty good day. That was also coming back off of an injury. Remember, two games before this he was taken off on a stretcher and the week before he left the game early due to the same neck injury. The Chicago game was the last of the year. When basing everything on stats, remember the injuries and that he only played in 12 games (probably closer to 10).

I got mine from ESPN.com, who I think gets theirs from STATS, Inc. I don't like AzCardinals.com stats, because I think they inflate them for "favored" players. This site has Raynoch only getting 4 tackles, 2 solo, and 2 sacks.

Wildman tracked Levar Fisher's stats from tape over the season, and his tally was substantially different from the one ESPN.com, NFL.com, or AzCardinals.com had. I dunno.

Even if you look at Ray-Ray's career stats, they're nothing to write home about. Either as a pass-rusher or a run-stopper, they're all right, but nothing to write home about.

EDIT: Where did you get your stats from? ESPN.com credits Ray-Ray with 5 tackles, 4 solo, and two sacks. That's it.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Kerouac, we're buds and all, but you're really down on Ray for no reason. He is a good player in this league, not a great player, but a guy I'll take 10/10 times.

You have to remember our defensive problems are systemic: Sure Ray doesn't have knockout numbers, but I doubt many linebackers would playing behind the bozos he has played behind at times.

It's the same with Shipp; good, not great player. Not a player to rag on, but also not a player to write a 30 page thread on either.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
Kerouac, we're buds and all, but you're really down on Ray for no reason. He is a good player in this league, not a great player, but a guy I'll take 10/10 times.

You have to remember our defensive problems are systemic: Sure Ray doesn't have knockout numbers, but I doubt many linebackers would playing behind the bozos he has played behind at times.

I totally agree. I'm not down on Ray as a player the way that I'm down on, say, Wakefield, or Ronnie Mac. I like Ray, and I think that he's a good member of this team. He has the coolest name on the roster. I just don't think that he's played to the level of unqualified ink that he's recieved. Kind of like the whole defense with the exception of Renaldo Hill, who I think played better than anyone expected him to in 2003.

You're absolutely right about the defensive problems being systemic. It'll be interesting to see how our defensive personnel will perform in make-or-break seasons for many of them (Fisher, Wilson, Bryant, Bell, KVB/Wakefield, to a lesser extent Hill, Thompson, McKinnon, even D. Jackson) while also trying to understand an execute a totally new scheme.

I'll let this drop now. Thanks for playing.

 

[HeavyB3]

If kerouac is basing his equations off Madden, then he would have said that Ray is one of our best players on defense. IN the latest Madden roster updates he was an 85 overall.

So...
Ronnie Mac- 90
Dexter Jackson 87
Raynoc Thompson 85
Adrian Wilson- 85
Then it falls apart

But thats according to madden. Personally though, I think Ray played very well and was really starting to come on before he got his supsension. Look for him to have a great year next year.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

As opposed to Wilson, Thompson IS always around the ball. I distinctly remember watching games this season, and Ray making tackle after tackle.

I was thinking to myself, "man, he must feel like he's the only cardinal defender out there"

However, it might be fair to say that he played better in 2002.

 

[JeffGollin]

As opposed to Wilson, Thompson IS always around the ball. I distinctly remember watching games this season, and Ray making tackle after tackle.
For what it's worth -

Individual Defense

Ronald McKinnon Tot:105, T: 80.0, Asst: 25, Sck: 2, FR: 1
Dexter Jackson Tot: 88, T: 75.0, Asst: 13, Sck: 0, FR: 0
David Barrett Tot: 79, T: 68.0, Asst: 11, Sck: 0, FR: 0
Adrian Wilson Tot:77, T: 68.0, Asst: 9, Sck: 0, FR: 0
Raynoch Thompson Tot: 63, T: 54.0, Asst: 9, Sck: 3, FR: 1
Levar Fisher Tot: 58, T: 52.0, Asst: 6, Sck: 1, FR: 1
Renaldo Hill Tot: 58, T: 47.0, Asst: 11, Sck: 2, FR: 0
Dennis Johnson Tot: 42, T: 27.0, Asst: 15, Sck: 3, FR: 0

Source: NFL.com

Seems to me that Adrian had 14 more total and unassisted tackles but Ray had 3 more sacks and 1 more fumble recovery.

Hurray for stats. Right? Well, one thing the above stats won't tell you is "tackles made or whiffed as a percentage of tackle opportunities presented.

A good example of stats run amok are interception totals. What happens if other teams throw in a direction away from your best CB. Based on his pick totals, everyone would be yelling: "Cut him! he sucks. He never makes plays!"

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
As opposed to Wilson, Thompson IS always around the ball. I distinctly remember watching games this season, and Ray making tackle after tackle.
For what it's worth -

Individual Defense

Ronald McKinnon Tot:105, T: 80.0, Asst: 25, Sck: 2, FR: 1
Dexter Jackson Tot: 88, T: 75.0, Asst: 13, Sck: 0, FR: 0
David Barrett Tot: 79, T: 68.0, Asst: 11, Sck: 0, FR: 0
Adrian Wilson Tot:77, T: 68.0, Asst: 9, Sck: 0, FR: 0
Raynoch Thompson Tot: 63, T: 54.0, Asst: 9, Sck: 3, FR: 1
Levar Fisher Tot: 58, T: 52.0, Asst: 6, Sck: 1, FR: 1
Renaldo Hill Tot: 58, T: 47.0, Asst: 11, Sck: 2, FR: 0
Dennis Johnson Tot: 42, T: 27.0, Asst: 15, Sck: 3, FR: 0

Source: NFL.com

Seems to me that Adrian had 14 more total and unassisted tackles but Ray had 3 more sacks and 1 more fumble recovery.

Hurray for stats. Right? Well, one thing the above stats won't tell you is "tackles made or whiffed as a percentage of tackle opportunities presented.

A good example of stats run amok are interception totals. What happens if other teams throw in a direction away from your best CB. Based on his pick totals, everyone would be yelling: "Cut him! he sucks. He never makes plays!"

It also doesnt mention Jeff that Ray-Ray played 4 less games than Adrian as well.

Remember Ray-Ray was suspened for games 13,14,15,and16

 

[CaptTurbo]

I myself never thought Thompson did enough to warrent the deal he got. When you have a defense that is ranked almost dead last in every catagory, saying 1 of the players is really good is a stretch.

A lot of people like Ronnie Mac. I personally thought he was awful all the years he was here. You can point to tackle numbers but someone has to tackle eventually. Even when its as rare as it has been on Coach Mac's teams

You will know when you have a star. Like Boldin. It wont even be a question if a player is a true star. Raynoch is not a star.

He may be a good LB when he is surrounded by real talent. You know that guy you add because he isnt good but he isnt that bad either? That is how I would classify Thompson.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by swd1974
I myself never thought Thompson did enough to warrent the deal he got.

He didn't exactly get a huge contract. It was worth around 3 million per year, which isn't a cap busting deal.

 

[Wildman©]

Final 2003 AZ Statistics

Name Pos. G/GS Solo Assists Total

Ronald McKinnon MLB 16/16 83 53 136
Dexter Jackson SS 16/16 69 36 105
Ray Thompson OLB 12/12 55 35 90
David Barrett CB 16/16 70 19 89
Levar Fisher OLB 16/15 56 31 87
Adrian Wilson FS 16/15 54 18 72
Renaldo Hill CB 14/13 47 17 64
Dennis Johnson DE 15/10 31 24 55
Russell Davis DT 15/15 23 13 36
James Darling LB 16/0 21 14 35
Fred Wakefield DE 10/5 19 14 33
Marcus Bell DT 13/10 21 11 32
Calvin Pace DE 16/16 21 11 32
Gerald Hayes LB 12/2 19 11 30
Wendell Bryant DT 12/5 14 13 27
Justin Lucas DB 11/0 17 6 23
Barron Tanner DT 14/2 14 9 23
Coby Rhinehart DB 16/3 16 6 22
LeVar Woods LB 16/3 16 6 22
Kenny King DE 11/1 12 9 21
Emmanuel McDaniel DB 16/1 13 4 17
Quentin Harris DB 16/1 4 1 5
Derrick Ransom DL 5/0 3 1 4

Final 2003 AZ Defensive Statistics
(Based upon coaches’ video evaluation)

 

[HookemCards]

The one thing I remember about Thompson's play and the defensive scheme in general, was that McGinnis used to pull him on third and longs. I didn't make sense to me at the time while watching a game, and then there was a discussion about it here on the board. I don't remember which game or games it was but sure it was more than an isolated incident. I really hope and think that alot of the problems with the defense was scheme related. I can't remember how many times we held on first and second down, and then Marmie/Mac would pull out Thompson and/or Fisher and put in that horrible soft zone.

 

[lrk27]

I think one way you have to look at it is that if Ray Thompson were available as a free agent, and you could get him at 4 years, $8 million, you would do it in a heartbeat. And if the Cards had let him go at that price, there would be outrage. He is good enough to start for most teams, and with what AZ has to work with, he is too good to let go. He is arguably the most consistent player they have had on defense the last two years.

As far as third downs, he didn't always come out. He moved to inside linebacker in nickel situations and often came out for dime packages. He is not a full time rusher so he is replaced in schemes where he would be in coverage on some third down sets.

If his stats were for 16 games, I could see where the disappointment is, but his numbers are quite good for playing in just 12 games, only 10 of them being healthy. I for one welcome him back to the defense next year, and am counting on him to be one of the leaders of that D.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

Originally posted by swd1974


A lot of people like Ronnie Mac. I personally thought he was awful all the years he was here. You can point to tackle numbers but someone has to tackle eventually. Even when its as rare as it has been on Coach Mac's teams

Ronnie Mac made quite a few plays in 2003. He was, however, at a "playmaker" spot.

The bottom line is, I think he got the job done. Was he spectacular? probably not. Did he miss some tackles? Yeah.

But he played with a lot of intensity and emotion. He hit people hard, all game long, all season long. He's got at least one more good year in him. Two will be pushing it. This year, we need to be grooming the heir apparent at MLB in earnest.

 

[Duckjake]

I agree with K9 100%. Thompson and McKinnon are the most overrated players, by posters on ASFN, on the entire defense.

My knock on 'noch? His 4 game absence made no difference whatsoever on the play of the defense last season.

Not once were there any comments, that I remember, from players, coaches, press or fans that "we sure miss Ray".

Can't be that good if nobody misses you while you're gone. Note: I did hear on a national radio show that the Pitt Panther defense really missed Gerald Hayes.

As for McKinnon, ol' wrong gap Ronnie gets credit for 55 tackles a year where he jumps on someone who is already going down, the ball carrier having been tripped up by one of the DLinemen. Far more often there is RM in the 4 gap while the RB is strolling untouched though the 2.

As one of our astute posters once typed: put down the stat book and watch the games.

 

[CardsRep03]

LOL Duckjake! I loved when you wrote"Ol' wrong gap Ronnie"--that had me cracking up! I've always thought that too, so I've never been overly enamored with Ronnie Mac. And I've always liked Thompson. I think these two guys, and others on the D will benefit from Berry and Ogunleye(if we get him as Walter speculates). Ronnie Mac will benefit the most if we have both of these guys and we'll see if he remains "Ol' wrong gap". And I can see Raynock get pert-near 10 sacks if we get Ogunleye. Ronnie may be the victim of a poor D Line as much as the corners are. Just on opinion. We will see. Do you think there is some lineage to Wrong way Feldman?

 

[Duckjake]

LOL Duckjake! I loved when you wrote"Ol' wrong gap Ronnie"--that had me cracking up! I've always thought that too, so I've never been overly enamored with Ronnie Mac. And I've always liked Thompson. I think these two guys, and others on the D will benefit from Berry and Ogunleye(if we get him as Walter speculates). Ronnie Mac will benefit the most if we have both of these guys and we'll see if he remains "Ol' wrong gap". And I can see Raynock get pert-near 10 sacks if we get Ogunleye. Ronnie may be the victim of a poor D Line as much as the corners are. Just on opinion. We will see. Do you think there is some lineage to Wrong way Feldman?

Well actually I think our dline would benefit greatly from some LB's who could actually play football. They hold up the blockers and leave the gaps open for some big hits but our LB's are off in la-la land somewhere. Just go back watch some tape and count the times some RB got stood up by one of our safeties we have pretending to be LB's. Then go watch some Ravens or Bears or Cowboys or Bucs games and watch their LB's blow up plays.

BTW: Sports Illustrated's NFL preview contained a quote from their anon scouts that the Cardinals LB corps was overrated. So it's not just me.