|
Grittybeard posted:PFF has fallen far enough that I think it's worth mentioning Daltos doesn't like him that much. The trust level between the sources is about the same for me, and this isn't meant to be a compliment to our resident draft guy. Yeah, I don't like PFF, but I'll at least give minor credence to people who will at least demonstrate a knowledge of the games a player's played and done the work to at least gif out plays to demonstrate what they're seeing. Only linked that article for the gifs really, heh. Same reason I'll read Cian Fahey even though that dude spends most of his time trolling people. Also, when it comes to college football, I tend to ere on the side of those eye test guys over the stats guys because the variance in level of competition is just so gigantic.
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Doltos posted:Tested through the roof at the combine. Speaking of, Mike Lombardi (so take it with a pound of salt) on a podcast pointed out that he thinks combine warriors are less of a thing now then 5-10 years ago because prospects would juice like crazy in those regiment programs that those guys would go to, whereas now, they're taking untestable stuff, so it's not an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
I hope the Patriots hurry up and trade Jimmy G so I can read about some late first round defensive tackles and murmur "yeah, yeah" to myself.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Cian Fahey really doesn't like this fella (click for a bunch of gifs of this dude sucking.) https://twitter.com/Cianaf/status/848358130077630464
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
I call Albert Breer every day and claim I work for the Titans and poo poo talk random draft prospects. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
uhhhhhhhhm, Marshon Lattimore.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Who's going to be the first team to grotesquely reach for a weak QB prospect out of desperation this year? Do we count the Rams / Eagles / Vikings trades of their 1sts this year for Goff / Wentz / Bradford?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
No Irish Need Imply posted:If the Browns only had the #1 pick, would Garrett still be the obvious pick or would we be having the "which QB deserves to go #1?" conversation? I do not think so. The Raiders, Bengals, Seahawks, Cowboys all built solid teams then plugged in a 2nd-4th round draft pick to find success. The 49ers also did in the short term and the Vikings were at least on their way before Bridgewater had that horrific injury and Washington as well weirdly stumbled into their answer for all they're trying to do to not keep him. This is success out of non-first round QB's that hadn't been seen since the 80's in a modestly short timeframe, so maybe it's a fluke, but more likely the analytical approach is going to try and trade that pick, and when failing, take the ridiculous pass rusher instead of reaching on a QB. Better QB's give you more leeway on the rest of your roster, but building a solid roster will let you win with an average QB. In comparison, when it comes to top of the draft QB's going to awful teams, you have, in the last decade, Luck, Cam, Stafford and Matt Ryan as clear successes, Tannehill should be as well but people are weird about him, and then 3 guys from the last two years which are on some variation of the right track. But, on the other hand, you also have Bortles, RG3, Locker, Gabbert, Bradford, Sanchez and JaMarcus, and none of the guys in this year's class stack up very well to many of these guys as prospects (apparently).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Honestly, if you have an utterly terrible QB situation, an NFL team could probably find some success running one of those gimmick offenses. At least more then they currently do. NFL coaches are insanely conservative though. I bet if the NFL expanded by like 8 teams, some would though, because the standard talent pool would just suck so bad at that point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
kiimo posted:I bet Chip Kelly would be great in the NFL It could! Chip proved himself an awful GM, but that first year in Philly his offense was really good, and last year, the 49ers loving sucked, but both Kaepernick and Carlos Hyde looked reasonably solid, especially considering their receiving core was an abortion.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Derek Carr has played 3 seasons and is +50 on TD's / Ints, and taken a team to a 12 win season, that's an easy hit. Wentz has played one year like a rookie with a putrid receiving core, so we expect he'll be better then Goff, but who knows, and there's not much to go on. Hell, I wasn't willing to say anything about Mariota / Winston, and they took very solid steps last year. Also, maybe Bortles is okay, but he's going to have to show significant improvement this year or he'll be chucked in the trash bin. He even has what everyone thought was a good receiving core after what happened in 2015.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Funny thing about McCaffrey: https://twitter.com/CMcCaffrey5/status/854742776273133568 Look at the TV, he sped the video up
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:I still think a Jimmy G trade happens with the Browns. But it's not going to be something insane. I really bet is something really close to what they got for Matt Cassel, and if that happens I'm gonna go on Patsfans and just be insanely smug at the lunatics for awhile.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Oh, I remember when it got announced here and Chiefs and Pats fans were convinced it was for the Chiefs #1 pick until the details came out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
I suspect most of the QB talk is a smokescreen and only one goes in the top half of the first round.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
fsif posted:It's hard to say. It seems like every year GMs vacillate between “Don't reach for a QB” to “If you see a guy you like, you gotta grab him.” I mean, going by how they've been talked about for four months... this just sounds like it's shaping up to be like empty at the top like 2013 or 2000 or any of the years where the QB prospect went early and then nothing until late in the first round lie 2014, 2010, 2008, 2007, 2005 or 2001. I think even if two go, the falloff in feeling from how Trubisky and Watson are viewed is far enough that I bet no one else goes until at least the backend of the first. Everyone wants to trade their pick to the QB hungry team, but those teams are realizing that is often a loving fools errand.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
This isn't super useful, but someone made a visualizer for every team's drafts since 2007, which lets you get a quick overview of how each team's done by status in the league / games started / approximate value: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/ii/sportvis/nfldraft/run/ It's at least interesting to see how the holes have affected some teams like the Browns, Saints and Jets or just how few players from 2007-2009 are still on the team that drafted them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
a honest smile.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Regnevelc posted:He gonna plummet if this is remotely true. I miss bongmask videos, eesh.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Yeah, that's a fuckup for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
It's trying to quantify the eye test and sucks at it. Some of the metrics they can track are pretty cool, but their grades are pretty bunk. I've never looked at their college grades, but the problems seem like they would be made even worse by the severe level of competition differences.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
MY NIGGA D-LINK posted:This really is what the Browns should do. That's how I feel. Carr, Wilson, Cousins, Dalton, Dak and even Kaepernick/Bridgewater all show that you can build a competent team and plug in 2nd-4th round QB's now and find success. That seems better then the talent dry teams grabbing QB's top 10 which has given us over that timeframe: Hits: Cam, Luck, Stafford, Tannehill Misses: Sanchez, Bradford, Gabbert, Locker, RG3 Not sure, trending positive: Mariota, Winston, Wentz Not sure, trending negative: Bortles, Goff Of course plenty (most) round 2-4 QB's loving fail, but at least that only costs you a later pick and not like Eric Berry or Kalil Mack. And QB's in better situations tend to have way higher hit rates for some mysterious loving reason.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Okay, picture Cam Newton in your head. He's dunked on the entire defense, scored a hilariously easy for him touchdown, he does his Superman pose. Imagine that shilling for JC Penney https://twitter.com/DeshaunWatson4/status/857345665785057282 That's not a #1 overall look Watson.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
In the past 25 years, only three quarterbacks have been chosen in the top 100 selections after only one year as a college starter: Brock Osweiler, Mark Sanchez, and Matt Blundin. If you're asking "Who's Matt Blundin?" that's somewhat the point: he was a 1992 second-round Kansas City pick out of Virginia who never started a game in the NFL.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:So you're saying the Chiefs are going to trade up to #1 for Trubinski? Blundin is the closest they've come to trying since Blackledge. It's not even good if you base predictions off of two year starters: quote:This is not a good group of quarterbacks to be associated with, although Cam Newton is sort of attached with an asterisk. (He started only one year at Auburn, but also a year at junior college.) You won't find many successful one-year college starters chosen below pick 100, either: Matt Flynn is probably the best among them. On the other hand, do we really learn anything from a group with such a small sample size? It's likely more accurate to compare Trubisky to quarterbacks with either one or two years as a college starter. Since 1998, that group has over 30 players chosen in the top 100 picks instead of just two. With that in mind, we changed QBASE this year to treat players with one year of college experience the same as players with two.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Diva Cupcake posted:is the number of starts all that important? I saw a stat, obviously cherrypicked, that put the number of college dropbacks/pass attempts somewhat in line with what Brady and Rodgers threw. I dunno, but Brady is kind of an obscene outlier, and Rodgers has those junior college snaps as well that I presume aren't counted in that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
It would be better if the Browns don't, the announcers scream about it for the next hour as nobody trades up for him, and he's there at 12, and then the Browns don't take him there either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
swickles posted:Jake Butt signed an endorsement deal with Charmin. Come on Malik Hooker....
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Those should be military veterans or NFL cheerleaders dressed as hooters waitresses. get your act together NFL.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:So, we're thinking the skins fired their GM and then didn't make any changes to their draft board? The thing is, the gm is making decisions off of what the scouts and coaches give him. They didn't fire those guys, so that information isn't going to change much after like, the combine / pro days, if even then, so...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
Me and the rest of team analytics breathe a heavy sigh of relief https://twitter.com/MaryKayCabot/status/857691979181895681
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
No panic in analytics, it's a 4 year death march until they're the Bengals and riding Teddy Bridgewater to a yearly wild card loss for the next half decade.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
wandler20 posted:Gonna post this one last time. 9 signed up so far. I joined, I guarantee I am wrong on at least 25 picks.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:They usually don't even try to draft offensive players heh. Heard it tossed around a bunch the last few days that they've drafted defensive players the last 8 years in the first round.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Diva Cupcake posted:Confirmed suicide. Mitchell & Webb was pretty funny, so I'm optimistic for Hackenberg & Webb
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 22:00
|
|