Wrong about Chillar

[bobblehead]

Re: Wrong about Chillar

Last year, I couldn't stand Chillar. I thought he was soft, kept getting run all over.


Maybe it was the new environment, maybe it was the scheme. . .


Whatever the case, besides Aaron Kampman, Chillar is our best linebacker. He's fantastic in coverage and our best interior blitzer. He looks average against the run. In sub defense where coverage and QB pressure are at a premium, that combination of skills makes a DC's job easier and should lead to a lot of big plays.

Last year, Chillar wasn't asked to blitz. Our linebackers seemed to always be chasing TE's and RB's. This year, they're playing downhill. Chillar seems to be our best downhill LB.

Welcome to the fan club JH...but I'm still the president.

[SkinBasket]

I don't think you can blame people for being down on Chillar coming into this season. Last year he was supposed to come in and be the veritable Swiss army knife of the LB core. Turned out he played without confidence after losing the starting spot to Shitpings and when he had the perfect opportunity to shine due to injury, he just kind of held a spot on the field most of the time.

A new coaching staff has certainly helped him and his attitude. As does a scheme that thrives off of versatility. Of course, we should probably wait a few more games before blowing our load over the guy.

[Guiness]

Between our LBs that actually play a lot (minus Matthews because I haven't seen enough of him), I'd rank them like this in each category

Run defense: Hawk, Barnett, Kampman, Poppinga, Chillar
Pass rushing: Kampman, Chillar, Barnett, Hawk, Poppinga
Coverage: Barnett, Chillar, Hawk, Poppinga, Kampman

Matthews appears to have the potential to excel in all three areas. I like the combinaton of LBs.

I'd argue we haven't seen enough of Kampman in this role either to really say how good he'll be.

I think we can extrapolate from last year that his pass rush and Run D will be good. I see you have in ranked behind Hawk and Barnett for run D? Is that because of doubt about how well he can tackle in space (or, at least, more space than he had at DE?).

Not sure why you have him last in coverage though. I think I saw him drop into coverage maybe twice against the Bears, and honestly didn't get a good look at how he did.

[Waldo]

Chillar is a good blitzer, is decent in coverage, he is really no better or worse than Barnett or Hawk.

He is athletic, probably our most athletic linebacker, but he is a liability in the run game. He is a perfect fit for this defense that relies on different personel to run it's scheme.

I am beginning to warm on Chillar because this defense brings out another face of his game, his ability to blitz something you never saw last year.

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist. Sooner or later that myth that waldo started: "weak against the run" is going to get dispelled. .

I doubt it.

When we see him as a starter in base D, not due to injury, then I will eat crow.

Right now he is an extra DB brought in on nickel defense.

[Reggie 92]

lokm

[Partial]

Chillar is a good blitzer, is decent in coverage, he is really no better or worse than Barnett or Hawk.

He is athletic, probably our most athletic linebacker, but he is a liability in the run game. He is a perfect fit for this defense that relies on different personel to run it's scheme.

I am beginning to warm on Chillar because this defense brings out another face of his game, his ability to blitz something you never saw last year.

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist. Sooner or later that myth that waldo started: "weak against the run" is going to get dispelled. .

I doubt it.

When we see him as a starter in base D, not due to injury, then I will eat crow.

Right now he is an extra DB brought in on nickel defense.

$$$ + egos + draft status. Not happening. We all know (evidently) other than you that he should be.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Chillar is a good blitzer, is decent in coverage, he is really no better or worse than Barnett or Hawk.

He is athletic, probably our most athletic linebacker, but he is a liability in the run game. He is a perfect fit for this defense that relies on different personel to run it's scheme.

I am beginning to warm on Chillar because this defense brings out another face of his game, his ability to blitz something you never saw last year.

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist. Sooner or later that myth that waldo started: "weak against the run" is going to get dispelled. .

I doubt it.

When we see him as a starter in base D, not due to injury, then I will eat crow.

Right now he is an extra DB brought in on nickel defense.

$$$ + egos + draft status. Not happening. We all know (evidently) other than you that he should be.

And yet you don't apply that same standard to yourself.

[Lurker64]

Chillar is a guy who has a chance to really succeed in a defense where a smart DC will consistently put him in positions that capitalize on his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. He's quite good at what he does well, but he's quite bad at what he does poorly. Personally, he's not a guy I would feel comfortable about starting in base unless the other 6 of the front 7 are exceptional players against the run, but he should get a lot of snaps in every game this season (unless the other team is just determined not to pass).

I would defer much more to Capers and McCarthy than to anybody on any message board as to how much he should be playing, when, and in what positions. I certainly don't think he should be starting, but I'm glad he's on the team.

[Partial]

And yet you don't apply that same standard to yourself.

That doesn't even make sense.

[Lurker64]

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist.

This is a statistic that bears a closer look. Here are Chillar's appearances in the box score:

2nd Quarter:
(14:11) M.Forte left end to CHI 27 for 8 yards (B.Chillar).
(4:01) G.Wolfe up the middle to CHI 31 for 4 yards (B.Chillar).
(3:19) J.Cutler sacked at CHI 29 for -2 yards (B.Chillar).

3rd Quarter:
(12:04) M.Forte left end to GB 39 for 7 yards (B.Chillar).
(11:23) M.Forte left end to GB 37 for 2 yards (B.Chillar, N.Barnett).
(4:34) (Shotgun) M.Forte left tackle to GB 29 for 1 yard (A.Harris, B.Chillar).

4th Quarter:
(9:20) M.Forte left end to CHI 40 for 1 yard (B.Chillar).
(8:00) M.Forte left tackle to GB 31 for no gain (B.Chillar).

I think that's not really enough to singlehandedly dispell concerns about not being great against the run. Tackling 8, 7, and 4 yards downfield are not exactly positive plays in run defense.

[sharpe1027]

Between our LBs that actually play a lot (minus Matthews because I haven't seen enough of him), I'd rank them like this in each category

Run defense: Hawk, Barnett, Kampman, Poppinga, Chillar
Pass rushing: Kampman, Chillar, Barnett, Hawk, Poppinga
Coverage: Barnett, Chillar, Hawk, Poppinga, Kampman

Matthews appears to have the potential to excel in all three areas. I like the combinaton of LBs.

I thought Kampman's play against the run was outstanding. I'd put him #1 based upon the Bears game, we'll see how he holds up once teams have tape on him as a LBer. What I saw was him standing up a tackle, containing the run and getting off the block to make the tackle.

Of course, I admit that I really don't know the first thing about evaluating his play, but those seem like good signs.

[Partial]

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist.

This is a statistic that bears a closer look. Here are Chillar's appearances in the box score:

2nd Quarter:
(14:11) M.Forte left end to CHI 27 for 8 yards (B.Chillar).
(4:01) G.Wolfe up the middle to CHI 31 for 4 yards (B.Chillar).
(3:19) J.Cutler sacked at CHI 29 for -2 yards (B.Chillar).

3rd Quarter:
(12:04) M.Forte left end to GB 39 for 7 yards (B.Chillar).
(11:23) M.Forte left end to GB 37 for 2 yards (B.Chillar, N.Barnett).
(4:34) (Shotgun) M.Forte left tackle to GB 29 for 1 yard (A.Harris, B.Chillar).

4th Quarter:
(9:20) M.Forte left end to CHI 40 for 1 yard (B.Chillar).
(8:00) M.Forte left tackle to GB 31 for no gain (B.Chillar).

I think that's not really enough to singlehandedly dispell concerns about not being great against the run. Tackling 8, 7, and 4 yards downfield are not exactly positive plays in run defense.

Your logic is severely flawed. If you disregard the anomaly and obvious blown play (which since he made the tackle down field he likely wasn't a part of but I don't recall to be honest), it's 3 yards per carry.

Clearly, the plays in the backfield were plays he blew up. As for the other ones, it's evident to me he wasn't shooting the gap or anything, so who knows what really happened.

That said, that data actually makes him look pretty damn good, so thats something.

[rbaloha1]

Guy led the team in tackles against the bears posting 7 solo and 1 assist.

This is a statistic that bears a closer look. Here are Chillar's appearances in the box score:

2nd Quarter:
(14:11) M.Forte left end to CHI 27 for 8 yards (B.Chillar).
(4:01) G.Wolfe up the middle to CHI 31 for 4 yards (B.Chillar).
(3:19) J.Cutler sacked at CHI 29 for -2 yards (B.Chillar).

3rd Quarter:
(12:04) M.Forte left end to GB 39 for 7 yards (B.Chillar).
(11:23) M.Forte left end to GB 37 for 2 yards (B.Chillar, N.Barnett).
(4:34) (Shotgun) M.Forte left tackle to GB 29 for 1 yard (A.Harris, B.Chillar).

4th Quarter:
(9:20) M.Forte left end to CHI 40 for 1 yard (B.Chillar).
(8:00) M.Forte left tackle to GB 31 for no gain (B.Chillar).

I think that's not really enough to singlehandedly dispell concerns about not being great against the run. Tackling 8, 7, and 4 yards downfield are not exactly positive plays in run defense.

Your logic is severely flawed. If you disregard the anomaly and obvious blown play (which since he made the tackle down field he likely wasn't a part of but I don't recall to be honest), it's 3 yards per carry.

Clearly, the plays in the backfield were plays he blew up. As for the other ones, it's evident to me he wasn't shooting the gap or anything, so who knows what really happened.

That said, that data actually makes him look pretty damn good, so thats something.

Ditto. Words or stats do not tell the story. Tape and coaches grades -- not mumble jumble rhetoric.

[Fritz]

Chillar is a guy who has a chance to really succeed in a defense where a smart DC will consistently put him in positions that capitalize on his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. He's quite good at what he does well, but he's quite bad at what he does poorly. Personally, he's not a guy I would feel comfortable about starting in base unless the other 6 of the front 7 are exceptional players against the run, but he should get a lot of snaps in every game this season (unless the other team is just determined not to pass).

I would defer much more to Capers and McCarthy than to anybody on any message board as to how much he should be playing, when, and in what positions. I certainly don't think he should be starting, but I'm glad he's on the team.

My theory is that Matt Millen and Al Davis ran their teams in ways that people on message boards would.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Chillar is a guy who has a chance to really succeed in a defense where a smart DC will consistently put him in positions that capitalize on his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. He's quite good at what he does well, but he's quite bad at what he does poorly. Personally, he's not a guy I would feel comfortable about starting in base unless the other 6 of the front 7 are exceptional players against the run, but he should get a lot of snaps in every game this season (unless the other team is just determined not to pass).

I would defer much more to Capers and McCarthy than to anybody on any message board as to how much he should be playing, when, and in what positions. I certainly don't think he should be starting, but I'm glad he's on the team.

My theory is that Matt Millen and Al Davis ran their teams in ways that people on message boards would.

I'm not defending al..ok, a bit...but, comparing him to Millen is way wrong.

We all can make fun of him...but, the raiders have a superbowl appearance his decade...detroit doesnt...neither do we.