Stock Market Report: Bombers vs. Argonauts

[Fatty Liver]

https://bomberbuzz.com/2016/08/22/stock-market-report-bombers-vs-argonauts/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

It’s official: the Winnipeg Blue Bombers are streaking, and it shouldn’t end soon.

Having somewhat survived the gruesome opening third of the season, their schedule gets much easier for awhile. In their next three games, the Blue & Gold will play in Montreal and the home-and-home with Saskatchewan. That’s three games that the Bombers are expected to win.

Yes, that makes it six consecutive games the Winnipeg Football Club is expected to win.

The club’s 34-17 win in Toronto, which featured five interceptions from the defense, a 100-yard rushing game and zero sacks-surrendered, has certainly got the ball rolling for the next part of their schedule. This game was another huge confidence booster and, for once, I don’t have this feeling deep down that the team will let the fans down in the next three contests, losing two or more.

BLUE CHIP STOCKS

1. Jamaal Westerman, DE: The Bombers’ Most Outstanding Player nominee in 2015 didn’t even crack the stat-sheet, but he was the best player on the field on Friday. Westerman recorded two quarterback pressures – one of which featured a QB hit – and was consistently grading positively on his pass-rushes on Argos’ LT Chris Van Zeyl. He showed above-average awareness compared to fellow defensive ends when dropping into coverage, and as long as the 31-year-old continues his outstanding work against the run, he’ll continue to earn blue-chip stocks (and be labeled as the best, all-around defensive end in the league).

2. Travis Bond, LG: This was only the rookie’s third ever start, and while he has graded positively in all three starts, the 6-foot-7, 256-pounder is still ironing out the wrinkles in his game. When he makes a good play, it’s always an outstanding play. But, despite these promising blocks, he’s still making plenty of minor errors or leaving some plays on the field. Evidently, Bond has sky-high potential, and since he’s already showing well, it’s hard to imagine just how good he’ll be once he has more experience under his belt. Bond was the Bombers’ best pass-blocker all night, and while he started to catch blocks in the run-game as the contest wore on, his raw strength was enough to open up lanes for running back Andrew Harris.

3. Ian Wild, LB: The fourth-year Bomber has had some good/great games as well as some poor games in 2016. The Argos’ game was undisputedly his best performance all season. Wild played a near flawless game, showing his tremendous range and quickness against the pass, while the Richie Hall’s signature 4-3, 50-front finally worked, opening up lanes for Wild, his MIKE linebacker. Back in week one, the Alouettes attacked Wild in the air, flooding his zone to take advantage of the single high inside linebacker look. But since that game, and as the season has progressed, he’s been absolutely outstanding against the pass. He covered acres of the field, and his nearly decapitating hit on receiver Kenny Shaw during Kevin Fogg’s interception is one of several examples from this game. Wild dropped high and to the right to fulfill a deep, middle-hook zone – almost as an inside robber keeping his eyes on the quarterback while trusting his peripherals (something that Taylor Loffler needs to work at). He then immediately flips to the left faster than most linebackers as Kilgore winds up to throw, and somehow makes it to the receiver to deliver the knockout blow, covering a ton of ground in the process. There aren’t many linebackers in the league that are expected to make that play, with Wild and Adam Bighill being the exceptions.

SOLID INVESTMENTS

1. Andrew Harris, RB: Although Harris had a spectacular second half on route to a 123-yard rushing game, his rough start, which included a handful of runs with straight tunnel-vision (he made a lot of lackluster reads and missed cut-back lanes), brought down his grade just enough. It wasn’t perfect, but from there on Harris consistently scraped for every yard despite merely OK run-blocking. He put on a clinic on breaking tackles and keeping feet moving while running through contact, as none of his runs came easy. Harris, at times, needed to create for himself or make up for missed assignments from the offensive line. The Winnipeg native is now first in the CFL in rushing with 503 yards.

2. Euclid Cummings, DT: While nose tackle Keith Shologan’s success was primarily against two young, inexperienced linemen in RG Corey Watman and rookie C Sean McEwen, Cummings managed to dominate All-Star LG Tyler Holmes. The former Argo continues to be a gem as a pass-rusher, notching two pressures on Logan Kilgore. Playing second fiddle to Westerman, the 6-foot-3, 298-lb three-tech was a threat on the edge when Bombers used stunts between the defensive end and defensive tackle, which few of his size can. Cummings also breached the blocking for two tackle-for-losses in one his best, all-around games of the year.

3. Maurice Leggett, SAM: Likely the face of the defense to Bombers’ fans, Leggett was on cue for his weekly programming of entertainment. The third-year defensive back snagged a pair of interceptions – one of them being returned 98-yards for a touchdown  – and was effective against the run. Although his first interception earned a neutral grade, his second, which only came about a minute later, was much more of an impressive play. As Leggett dropped deep and to the sidelines as a deep-zone defender in cover-3, he picked up receiver Wallace Miles’ corner route. He then climbed the ladder to make a beautiful catch over Miles while keeping his feet in bounds. It was his nicest interception of the season – he leads the CFL with four – in a game where he didn’t surrender a single catch allowed.

(Just missed: Keith Shologan, Stanley Bryant)

JUNK BONDS

1. Manase Foketi, RT: Based on his preseason, Foketi’s regular season debut went as expected: it wasn’t good. Although his run-blocking was the biggest issue, he struggled blocking across his face, being fooled badly by the out-n-in moves of Shawn Lemon – a premiere pass-rusher – from over-committing. In terms of run-blocking, which is typically an extremely easy job for offensive tackles in the CFL, Foketi struggled with both down-blocking and going up to the second-level. Considering how good Jermarcus Hardrick was playing at right tackle, I’d be counting down the days until his return.

2. Chris Normand, FB: In typical rookie fashion, the 1st-year starter – but sophomore Canadian – followed up a great two-game stretch with a poor one. Normand wasn’t quite as involved in the offense like usual, but he hurt the team more than he helped when on the field.

3. Matt Nichols, QB: Sure, Nichols’ grade would have been better if he needed to do more, but the ground-attack was looking unstoppable, and the defense kept forcing turnovers. In the 28 drop-backs he took, he happened to make a lot of mistakes and miss some throws. Nichols’ first interception came on a throw to rookie receiver Kris Adams, who rounded behind the DB in zone coverage to run his in-route, which was a risky throw based on the following: both FS Thomas Gordon and LB Cory Greenwood saw Nichols staring at Adams, while the halfback seemingly noticed the receiver cutting behind him. It would’ve been a great play if Nichols completed the pass in the small window, but instead he sailed the ball high and to the right. Nichols should have also thrown a second interception, except Greenwood chose to tip the ball up rather than making the easy interception. The veteran signal-caller was looking for Jace Davis on a dig-route across the middle, but Greenwood was sitting right in the passing lane – a rookie mistake for Nichols. He also badly under-threw Adams wide open down the sidelines on a go-route in the third quarter, and other than that, he simply missed some open receivers in the direction he was looking and attempted passes to others that were well covered.

(Just missed: CB CJ Roberts, RG Sukh Chungh)

BUY/SELL

BUY: Kevin Fogg is legit. Two interceptions, a sack, a fumble recovery and an outrageously good return average; Kevin Fogg played the best game any rookie has played this season (at least in the box score). With Chris Randle, Johnny Adams and Julian Posey soon returning from injury, Fogg will not be the one losing his spot. I’d expect these six starters in the secondary: Adams (B-CB), Fogg (B-HB), Loffler (FS), Leggett (SAM/SS), Johnson (F-HB), Randle (F-CB). Both CJ Roberts and and Terrance Frederick will be kept around – possibly on the 1-game injured list.

SELL: Clarence Denmark has returned better than ever: Look, I’m cheering for Denmark as much as anyone, but all three of his touchdowns have been the result blown coverages. His touchdown in Hamilton was on a fake screen pass, and his 79-yard major in Toronto was off play-action that made the Argos’ entire defensive backfield bite. His other touchdown in Toronto was also blown coverage on his corner-route – HB Devin Smith, who had a deep-third in cover-3, ran with Thomas Mayo’s post-route by mistake. He also had a 35-yard catch in the third quarter that was also as a result of deadly play-action pass.

[JohnnyOnTheSpot]

6 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Look, I’m cheering for Denmark as much as anyone, but all three of his touchdowns have been the result blown coverages.

Something wrong with making defenders pay in full for their mistakes? 

[Mr Dee]

Whenever I read this market report, I rarely mention the junk bond portion, nor the sell aspect. Here, in the sell portion, he's making it sound like Denmark and Nichols had nothing to do with the plays they put together. It was all the defence making mistakes totally on their own. Puzzling.

 

[Rich]

I think what he is saying is Denmark is a sell because he is out performing what his true top end is.

Not that Denmark is going to be bad in the future, just don't expect him to get 200 receiving yards every game.  You "sell" now because his value is as high as it is going to get.  (And in this case, I don't think sell means trade or anything like that)

It is a bit of an odd read in the way that he does that portion.

[Fatty Liver]

2 hours ago, JohnnyOnTheSpot said:

Something wrong with making defenders pay in full for their mistakes? 

Hey!  That's not my opinion, I'm just the messenger.  I get his point, as soon as Dressler and Smith get back in the lineup Denmark's receptions will likely fall to 3-4, nothing wrong with that.   Nichols has to spread the ball around if he wants to sustain success.

[Noeller]

It's an interesting read because the guy clearly knows football, but there's some bias showing, for sure.

[Pete Catan's Ghost]

Like it or leave it, the writer provides fairly in-depth rationale for his decisions. There aren't too many that do.

Also, it's the first time I've read an actual assessment of Foketi's play. I paid little attention to him during the game and thought that because we ran the ball well and gave up no sacks that he must have been decent.

I think that generally, this is a good read.

[Marshall]

I think it's a good read. I like his assessments. Disagree about Denmark though. He struggled when our offensive system struggled.

Blown coverage is how some big plays happen and he's a great go to guy to make them pay.

[Old Bomber Fan]

And Denmark seldom if ever drops a catchable ball. He is money even in tight situations.... if he can get a hand on it he will catch it. Simply put.

[Eternal optimist]

It's about time the Blue and Gold started paying dividends to their dedicated shareholders.

[iso_55]

Blown coverage is part of the game. If Nicholls gets the ball to any of his receivers like Denmark then that's their job to throw & catch.  They get paid to do that.

Edited August 23, 2016 by iso_55

[Marshall]

I don't get the bad review of Foketi either. Maybe he struggled in his first start, but Nichols was untouched. Perhaps he was just lucky.  We should be so lucky to struggle like that every game.

[Noeller]

3 minutes ago, SteMar_67 said:

I don't get the bad review of Foketi either. Maybe he struggled in his first start, but Nichols was untouched. Perhaps he was just lucky.  We should be so lucky to struggle like that every game.

I would say that just because the OL as a whole played well, doesn't necessarily mean Foketi had a good game. Thing is, Foketi himself said it was going to be a rough game for him because he'd only ever played LT, so playing RT meant having to do everything backwards. I think everyone expected it. Woulda been interesting to see how he progressed into Game 2, but good to hear Hardrick is back. He's been solid on that outside....

[Marshall]

2 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I would say that just because the OL as a whole played well, doesn't necessarily mean Foketi had a good game. Thing is, Foketi himself said it was going to be a rough game for him because he'd only ever played LT, so playing RT meant having to do everything backwards. I think everyone expected it. Woulda been interesting to see how he progressed into Game 2, but good to hear Hardrick is back. He's been solid on that outside....

Sure, I guess it depends how you measure success. I can think of  a few former OL that people referred to as turnstiles. I don't think Foketi had that type of game.

[Noeller]

11 minutes ago, SteMar_67 said:

Sure, I guess it depends how you measure success. I can think of  a few former OL that people referred to as turnstiles. I don't think Foketi had that type of game.

Certainly...but I don't think anyone ever said Foketi had a turnstile game. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone on this board knows enough about OL to say one way or another. Clearly, the guy who wrote that Stock Market piece knows how to review game tape.

[Marshall]

1 minute ago, Noeller said:

Certainly...but I don't think anyone ever said Foketi had a turnstile game. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone on this board knows enough about OL to say one way or another. Clearly, the guy who wrote that Stock Market piece knows how to review game tape.

Sure, I suppose its the pre-determined category that Foketi was placed in that seems a little harsh. I'll have to re-look at the film