I'd like to apologize for, and indicate that I realize that's not a picture of James Brown. In my defense, there is a dearth of pics available online for several offensive lineman prior to 2005. That being said, James Brown (No, not "The Godfather of Soul,") was originally selected in the third round of the 1992 NFL Draft by the Dallas Cowboys with the 82nd overall pick out of Virginia State. He did not impress the Cowboys' brass in training camp, however, and was released before the start of the season.
Brown spent his first professional season on the New York Jets practice squad, finally making the roster in 1993. He appeared in 14 games during his "official" rookie season, starting one at the right tackle position. He would spend two more seasons with the Jets, appearing in 44 games overall and starting 19, again at the right tackle position.
The Miami Dolphins picked Brown up prior to the 1996 season, and he would start all 16 games. He made a living out of carving holes for running back Karim Adbul-Jabbar to run through. Jabbar would gain a total of 1,116 yards on 307 carries, scoring 11 touchdowns.
Brown would retain the position in 1997, again starting all 17 games (including a playoff loss to the New England Patriots). He helped Jabbar score a league leading 16 touchdowns, while helping to restrict opposing teams to 20 sacks on quarterback Dan Marino.
In 1998, Brown started all 18 games (including a wildcard win against the Buffalo Bills and a divisional playoff loss to the Denver Broncos). Marino was only sacked 23 times that season, and Jabbar nearly eclipsed 1,000 yards.
Brown signed a five-year, $10.5 million deal prior to the 1999 season, but only stayed with Miami for one more season, starting 14 of the 15 games in which he would appear. He would spend the 2000 season with the Cleveland Browns, retiring after the season.
In total, Brown played 63 games for the Dolphins over four regular seasons, starting 62 games at the right tackle position.
0 recs | 16 comments
There is no rhyme or reason to this list.
Guys like James Brown and Mark Dennis were nice enough players, but really, they’re journeyman roleplayers. There’s no way that they should be slotted above guys like Trace Armstrong or Oronde Gadsden.
BlueGrin - February 22, 2012
My sentiments EXACTLY
I could not have said it better so I will just DITTO your post.
U-Neek - February 22, 2012
Irony
A user named U-Neek who ditto’s someone elses opinion.
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
This list is based an an actual mathematical formula
based on the approximate value statistic, explained here: If you don’t feel like clicking, in short, it’s a way to measure players based on a teams performance while they are on the field. Play by play, game by game, and season by season. Over the course of an NFL players career, I think it is the only measure possible, outside of my own meandering, unscientific opinion, to stack up players one against the other, regardless of favor, position or era.
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
Link fail:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?page_id=8061
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
You posted the same response to me when I questioned Chuck Klingbeil's position last week...
…and your explanation about statistical value makes sense to me. What this whole list says, I think, is the Dolphins simply haven’t had THAT many truly talented players over its 45yr history. Maybe a top 50 list would be more appropriate. It would be interesting to see what a top 100 list would look like for other teams, perhaps Philadelphia, for example. This may have been done already, but I’m too lazy to look.
Dolfan Lee - February 22, 2012
The top 50 list is certainly more impressive,
and I agree that we’re going to see some fringe players here. It’s also true that sometimes I cringe just a little when it comes time to post a player that I don’t remember as being a huge contributor…because I know I’ll hear about it, and probably even agree with it. I won’t deviate from the list because some players aren’t popular choices, or because I don’t think everyone will agree. Hold tight, there’s some serious firepower later on.
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
Agree - I think you're doing the right thing here
The numbers are what the numbers are, regardless of popularity.
Dolfan Lee - February 22, 2012
Except you're using it to make judgements for which it really doesn't work.
There’s no magical voodoo that says “an actual mathematical formula” is some objective be-all end-all stat.
It’s a great rule of thumb, but it doesn’t provide any sort of definitive answer as to whether one player is better than another when they are closely ranked.
What’s more the explanation of the stat SAYS THIS IN THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE:
Doug’s Brief AV Explanation:
“AV is not meant to be a be-all end-all metric. Football stat lines just do not come close to capturing all the contributions of a player the way they do in baseball and basketball. If one player is a 16 and another is a 14, we can’t be very confident that the 16AV player actually had a better season than the 14AV player. But I am pretty confident that the collection of all players with 16AV played better, as an entire group, than the collection of all players with 14AV.”
This is an example of a bad usage of statistics. The fact that you think that this is the “only measure possible” really says more about your limited understanding of statistics than its viability as a metric.
BlueGrin - February 22, 2012
Just to simplify:
The “A” stands for “Approximate,” not “Absolute.”
That alone should tell you how much weight you should place in relying on it. The margin of error totally overshadows the minute differences at the fat part of the curve. So rather than saying “I won’t deviate from the list ,” and posting choices you yourself admit you don’t agree with, have some conviction to your opinions and slot players where they belong when it’s obvious that the metric isn’t up to the task.
BlueGrin - February 22, 2012
Of course it's not perfect
I didn’t say it was magic. I appreciate your opinion here, but the very reason I used this particular formula is lack of box score data for offensive linemen. Also, I haven’t seen every game over the 45 years the franchise has been around. In short, offensive lineman suffer from a historic “box score bias.” I believe they are historically unappreciated, and this is the only stat that addresses this shortfall, but I may be wrong. If there’s another stat, again, other than my or your opinion, let me know. Poring over 45 years of box scores would do nothing to include offensive lineman.
I understand your point of view, which is why I’ve also included these polls in the articles. At the end I’ll collect data and post results, a starting lineup, and hopefully a second string lineup.
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
"If there’s another stat, again, other than my or your opinion, let me know. "
That’s exactly the problem. There ISN’T a stat that will do this. Period.
This is a great metric to use to unearth players like O-lineman for consideration. Maybe even compare them against each other to come up with a rough order. Like you said, they don’t show up in the box scores.
But deferring to a stat and washing your hands of it rather than give your opinion is lazy writing. If you’re going to do a series like this, do some legwork and learn the players yourself – that doesn’t mean poring over 45 years of box scores – the top 25 or so O-lineman should show up in Google searches, and if they don’t, there’s a reason – they weren’t integral to the team’s success. Q.E.D. An o-lineman like Dwight Stephenson, Larry Little, Keith Sims or Richmond Webb all make the news at some point. The guys who don’t get mentioned really were “just warm bodies.”
Anyone can run a stat, but a good writer will form an opinion, have a basis for doing so, and express that opinion in a way that convinces people of his credibility.
This is necessarily going to be subjective, so show some cojones and go out on a limb with your own opinions and try to back that up. That’s far more interesting than hiding behind a dubious statistic, especially where it starts off with such obvious flaws.
Case in point is Trace Armstrong. Try to tell me that if your choices entering a draft were a DT who averaged ~10 sacks, 2.5FF (1.2 FR), 22 tackles and 10 assists per season, while captaining a young defense and even making a pro bowl, you’d pass him over for James Brown? That doesn’t pass the sniff test. I’m sure that there will be plenty of other no-brainers like that where the metric simply gets it wrong. Don’t let a number stop you when common sense should tell you otherwise.
BlueGrin - February 22, 2012
Your opinion is a system.
My opinion is another system.
AV is a system.
We all must have a system.
I’m not stopping the system I already started to make modifications based on opinion; mine, yours or anyones.
I appreciate your opinion, I’m glad you have one. Your points are valid and well thought out. I will take your suggestions into consideration the next time I compile a list such as this one.
Kevin Kraczkowski - February 22, 2012
Actually, no...
My opinion is not a “system.” I actually have the courage of my convictions and don’t outsource my opinions to someone else’s incomplete metric.
Critical thinking is a value-add. Churning out a justification based on a loose metric in lieu of an opinion is anything but. “Don’t blame me, it’s an actual mathematical formula” is pretty weak sauce.
BlueGrin - February 22, 2012
I guess having Dan Marino for a quarterback can make James Brown look like a top 85 player based on the mathematical formula that is used here. Doesnt make much sense if you really think about it but if there is a specific formula being used then I guess it can work
jdelsandro - February 22, 2012
Why is Colombo not an option on the poll?
LimeyPhin - February 22, 2012 via mobile
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of The Phinsider to post a comment.