Falcons Quote of the Day: Harvel Dahl > Sam Baker

by James Rael on Feb 20, 2012 11:28 PM EST

How bad is Sam Baker? According to this article, he's very bad. But we all knew that.

Sam Baker, the benched Atlanta Falcons left tackle, [netted] the second lowest [pass-blocking efficiency] rating after the former first round pick gave up four sacks, seven hits and 17 hurries on just 242 snaps in pass protection.

While Baker's affinity for sucking is common knowledge, Dahl's value as a pass-blocker ~~makes me want to drive off a cliff~~ is somewhat surprising.

Not only did the former Falcons guard outplay his teammates; he outplayed everyone. The sample size is limited, and he was helped somewhat by playing in an offense that attempts to get rid of the ball quickly, but on 200 snaps in pass protection Dahl gave up just three hits and three hurries, giving him a league-best PBE rating of 97.8. So, while the Rams look at ways to rebuild their line, their use of Dahl could be something to watch.

Damnit. As they say, hindsight is 20-20, and I'm not going to blame TD for this one. Reynolds is a beast, so I can see why the Falcons brass saw him as a viable replacement for Dahl. But now, one year later, we're in the market for a new right guard and a capable tackle. Dahl would've eliminated at least one of those needs. To be frank, these "what if?!" shenanigans are somewhat premature. Let's see how this off-season plays out, then re-evaluate.

Discuss!

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Can't dwell in the past

We knew we had to let go one of the three lineman last year (Clabo, Blalock, and Dahl) and I honestly thought Dahl should’ve been a lock to stay. I didn’t hear much of anything about Blalock all year, which i guess for an o-lineman that’s a good thing. For all the money we gave Clabo, he really under performed this year but who else would we have put there? It took us half a season to find Bakers repacement. So all in all, no matter who we would’ve let walk, we would still have had a huge drop in line production.

by dirtybirds233 on Feb 21, 2012 12:00 AM EST reply actions

Clabo didn't underperform

had a slow start to the year, but ended up in the top 10 of OTs (as the link above notes), and if you include full-time all season starters, he’s at number 5.

I think you’re right on though w/ your last point about a drop in production no matter who we would’ve let walk.

by KMarch on Feb 21, 2012 9:57 AM EST up reply actions

We could only realistically sign 2 out of the 3 free agent Oline last year

And in my opinion still think we made the right choice, look at the combinations..

Sign Clabo and Dahl, let Blalock walk- With Baker as LT and Reynolds as LG our left side would have been absolutely destroyed and do you think without Blalock to his right Svitek would have been as good?

Sign Blalock and Dahl, let Clabo walk- With our Tackle depth as thin as it is now, this would have been awful, plus (not my opinion) some have been using stats to show Clabo as a top 2 tackle (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/31482/best-offensive-tackle-in-nfc-south)

What kinda money is Dahl getting for the Rams anyway?

by HappySour on Feb 21, 2012 12:04 AM EST reply actions

Dahls contract is 4 years $16million.

He only played 200 out of 450 snaps in pass protection.Mike Johnson was to have been the starting guard before a string of injuries put him on IR.Reynolds is a project and needs to add a good amount of solid weight to his 6’ 71/2" frame.And yes ,he was awful this year but in fairness,wasn’t expected to have to contribute alot.

Annualized,Dahl costs more than McClure,Baker,Johnson,Hawley,and Reynolds combined.Claybo had an outstanding season.His 5 year $25 million with $11million guaranteed was well spent.Blalocks new contract was 6 years $38million with 16 million guaranteed.Doesn’t look like such a good deal so far.

by dawg1060 on Feb 21, 2012 1:01 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Not much

I think 4 years 16million, we could have realistically signed all three. I’m guessing they wanted to get younger, which makes sense, but it really didn’t work out

by Hutch11 on Feb 21, 2012 1:02 AM EST up reply actions

Reynolds is a beast

Really?? I was thinking more along the lines of a garbage pail

by Kushion on Feb 21, 2012 12:05 AM EST reply actions

I'm not going to blame TD for this one

Well, of course not, it is not like he is responsible for personnel or anything like that. I mean, who would expect the GM to understand the quality of the team’s personnel?

If I recall, Reynolds the beast, had to take his rear end to the bench.

by Whopper Dawg on Feb 21, 2012 12:24 AM EST reply actions

Help

Why so few snaps? Am I missing something?

by Sbaron55 on Feb 21, 2012 6:38 AM EST via mobile reply actions

He didn't start the season there

he began at RG and played most of his snaps there. The STL OLine was so terrible they basically had to put him over there. Also, I think Dahl’s limited snaps look so good at OT partly due to the inadequacy of the rest of the STL OLine. Sure, Dahl was holding his man, but he didn’t have to do it very long b/c Bradford threw quick passes, and/or a pass rusher was set free by another horrible OLineman.

by KMarch on Feb 21, 2012 10:01 AM EST up reply actions

The problem is that theyplaced

Reyniolds in a position he never practiced for. The whole time he was practicing as back up and potential replacement if Clabo walked. The only true guard we had was Johnson and he got hurt. Hopefully the FO has learned a lesson in all this.

by Fear Me on Feb 21, 2012 7:49 AM EST via mobile reply actions

I agree, and if all you have is projects...

you have to be willing to spend the time to develop starters; that’s what you face when you take (relatively) late rounders. I think we go for OLs in the free agent market, because we have to if we hope to have an immediate impact. In my opinion, the 2nd round pick will be what the FO sees as an impact player. Maybe it is a TE. I think that would be a mistake, unless conventional wisdom is wrong and some stud just falls to our pick late in the 2nd round. I think they’re smarter than me on football related topics, so I suspect the FO has already learned whatever lesson I could offer.

by randomaxe on Feb 22, 2012 12:06 AM EST up reply actions

money

You do have to remember the baker was due his money last season. this season he is not due his money.

and dahl did not do as great as everyone thinks. A lot of rams fans have are 50/50 about his signing, and they all say he was over paid.

by mashburn82 on Feb 21, 2012 9:43 AM EST reply actions

Not sure what you mean with the first sentence

Baker was paid 1MM last season and 1.95MM this season. That is a pretty big step wise increase.

by mwalex on Feb 21, 2012 10:24 AM EST up reply actions

Can't they cut him

with little or no cap hit this year vs last year it would have been more expensive? Not sure about the #s but I do remember that being a part of the conversation.

by drmondo667 on Feb 21, 2012 6:30 PM EST up reply actions

I think we all knew that Baker was not top tier.

But i dont think anyone predicted the epic fail from this year either.

by SmokeyBell on Feb 21, 2012 5:32 PM EST reply actions

Hmmm...

He was drafted in the first round, and we traded up to get him there. At that time, we didn’t all know that Baker was not top tier. Even if you and I knew (and I can’t vouch for 50% of that), the FO obviously didn’t know. That said, he really didn’t look interested this year, did he?

by randomaxe on Feb 22, 2012 12:23 AM EST up reply actions

I think...

He meant, we knew Baker wasn’t “top tier” going into this year (not the 2008 draft), although I could definitely be wrong. I’d agree with his statement if it was this year, as I’m sure you would. I’m with you though, if he’s talking about the draft. I’ve beat that horse bloody, but I don’t think there are any (legitimate) rocks to be thrown at selecting Baker in the back half of the first round that year. Didn’t work out great, but that’s the draft. It was an educated, rational decision when made.

by NB on Feb 22, 2012 11:12 AM EST up reply actions