These posts are nonsensical. And I say this with all due respect, as you're one of my favorites.
1. Yes, the chart indicates that these WR's are about equal at blocking. That's because most WR's really ARE about equal at blocking, because that isn't their job. Only rarely do you need a WR to make a key block, and I imagine its a rare occasion when teams make a real effort to test of a WR's blocking skills.
2. No validity to the metrics? Looks like those are right on. Burleson and Young grade out to below average receivers, Megatron and Andre are off the charts.
3. Show me the chart that says we have a top 3 offensive line, then we'll talk. Our line is about average at run blocking and pretty strong at pass-blocking these days, but we're not top 3.
4. Sure, why not draft a DE? The 2 elements every championship contender has these days are 1) Franchise QB, and 2) Pass-rush. If we can't fix the QB situation in the 2013 draft (likely seeing as this QB class is less than inspiring) I'd be in full support of bringing in another pass-rusher. It'll sure as hell make the potential loss of Revis sting much less.
Yes these charts are rubbish. Fans try to make football fit the baseball/basketball model where stats represent production individually. On a given "play" in baseball, there is one active batter. You can even count a base runner or two if you want. But offensively, they are either batting, or running. So stats and metrics work lovely. In the field you have one-to two guys either throwing or catching...maybe a third if there's a cutoff man. Easy stats, clear results. Football works nothing like this whatsover. 11 offensive guys, 11 defensive guys, each with individual jobs meshing together for a collective result, jobs outlined and determined by plays created by and called by coordinators, which ofetn change mid-play according to reactions to the opposing fronts shown. hot-routes, audibles, check-downs. Go ahead and hire Stephen Hawking, you'll never get an accurate chart on individual performance versus individual performance given the variables of teammates, differing schemes/coordinators/complementary positions/abilities. Which is why Mangold is the greatest when next to Faneca, but is haveing a "down year" next to Slauson, and why Reggie Wayne was washed up last year, and a probowler with Andrew Luck behind center. These. Charts. Are. Useless.
Also, you must have missed the thread where "metrics" determined the Jets OL to be #3 in the league.
Please take no offense...my annoyance is not with you, but the nonsensical statisticians who try to simplify an incredibly complex game and boil it down to charts and "metrics". It just isn't an accurate portrayal of individual accomplishment or lack thereof.