Draft Countdown Forums

Go Back   Draft Countdown Forums > Draft Countdown Forums > Pro Football

Pro Football Discuss professional football.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2008, 04:53 PM    (permalink
GB12
Team Leader
Icon
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,141
Reputation: 220179
GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.GB12 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I do think we overpaid. I think we could and should have got him for cheaper. That said, I don't really care. We put a lot of the guarenteed money in the first couple of years where we have a ton of cap, before the deal we had $30 million in free space. Other than the early guarenteed money it's largely incentive based. He reaches every incentive he's more than worth every penny of the $30M. If he doesn't the deal ends up at around $18 million if he's just decent. We have him for four years which is the perfect time length and we shouldn't be hurting for cap space during that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbluedefense View Post
Grant is solid, but he's nothing to lose sleep over. I guarantee you if GB had a credible backup RB behind Grant they wouldn't make this deal. Only reason why this deal was done was because GB had no leverage to be able to walk away from him without skipping a beat on offense.
Pretty far off. It'd be ugly but we could have gone to the day before the season starts with him unsigned and he'd still play for us. He'd eventually sign the ERFA tender because he has no other options and holding out does nothing to help him.


Also I don't like this argument of saying it's the system and a lot of credit goes to the offensive line. Yes, it is a zone blocking system but just because Denver has a history of finding RBs no problem it's not always like that. The guys we had were supposed to fit the ZBS, but didn't work out anywhere near as well as Grant. Morency looked to be a good fit in the system, but he struggled. Jackson was drafted (maybe a bit early even) specifically for our system. You can't just plug in any back and have it work.

I do think the system is a part of Grant's success, but I think you're underating Grant to a degree. How well he runs after he breaks through shows his skills. It doesn't matter what system you're running after you're through the hole, then it's on the RB to pick up the extra yards.

As for the offensive line being the reason, I'm kind of sick of hearing this. Our line was considered the biggest reason why the running game wasn't working early in the season. We have one of if not the best pass blocking lines, but the same can't be said when it comes to the run. Tauscher and Clifton are fine run blockers, but the interior of our line is poor. Wells is about average, it's the guards that really struggle getting a push. It wasn't until Grant started to get carries that our run game got going.

You mentioned Wynn could have had a similar story had he been the starter for the time Grant did, but even though Wynn was better than our previous runners he wasn't close to Grant.

Even if Grant is just a product of our system and is nothing special as you say, although I disagree with that I could really care less. Grant's going to be here for the next four years and unless something crazy happens McCarthy and his system will be too.
__________________
GB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 04:59 PM    (permalink
ALD
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In your closet
Posts: 193
Reputation: 76
ALD hopes to escalate quickly but not get out of hand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing View Post
Stats don't show how productive a player was? How do you measure productivity then?
To answer your first question yes they don't.

Stats on a team level may describe productive if you really break them down into very specific splits, such as down and yardage, specifics of the defenses faced, point of the game in which stats are accumulated, and plethora of other factors that simply make stats too much of a pain to deal with as truth.

If you want to measure productivity good luck, but if you want to get a sense for a players productivity focus on the context of the stats and not the actually numerical value themselves.
ALD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:01 PM    (permalink
ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing
 
Posts: n/a
Reputation:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALD View Post
To answer your first question yes they don't.

Stats on a team level may describe productive if you really break them down into very specific splits, such as down and yardage, specifics of the defenses faced, point of the game in which stats are accumulated, and plethora of other factors that simply make stats too much of a pain to deal with as truth.

If you want to measure productivity good luck, but if you want to get a sense for a players productivity focus on the context of the stats and not the actually numerical value themselves.
So you don't think things like YPC, total yards, touchdowns, etc. measure a players productivity? Why do you think the league's top player are consistently at the top of the league in key statistics?
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:08 PM    (permalink
ALD
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In your closet
Posts: 193
Reputation: 76
ALD hopes to escalate quickly but not get out of hand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing View Post
So you don't think things like YPC, total yards, touchdowns, etc. measure a players productivity? Why do you think the league's top player are consistently at the top of the league in key statistics?
I'm sorry but do you not see the logical falicy implicit in your second statement? Since good players usual have A then A is a way to measure good players. Stats do reflect a players effectiveness to a degree, but remember the context.

For example Mark Anderson of the bears notched a bunch of sacks as a rookie coming in against tired olines and blazed past them for sacks in passing situations, does that make him a better passrusher than a defensive end like Osi who was a starter and himself got worn down over the course of the game and had to focus on the run as well?

Or do you think that Joey Porter went from a very productive player to a terribly unproductive one over one offseason when he left the Steelers for the phins? His stats would indicate that to be true but the truth is much closer to his stats on the steelers coming as a result of the teammates and DC, which took attention away from him and gave him open lanes at the quarterback.

There are many explanations for why players put up good or bad stats and productivity is only one of them, which is why I say remember to keep in mind the context.
ALD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:12 PM    (permalink
ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing
 
Posts: n/a
Reputation:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALD View Post
I'm sorry but do you not see the logical falicy implicit in your second statement? Since good players usual have A then A is a way to measure good players. Stats do reflect a players effectiveness to a degree, but remember the context.

For example Mark Anderson of the bears notched a bunch of sacks as a rookie coming in against tired olines and blazed past them for sacks in passing situations, does that make him a better passrusher than a defensive end like Osi who was a starter and himself got worn down over the course of the game and had to focus on the run as well?

Or do you think that Joey Porter went from a very productive player to a terribly unproductive one over one offseason when he left the Steelers for the phins? His stats would indicate that to be true but the truth is much closer to his productivity on the steelers coming as a result of the teammates and DC, which took attention away from him and gave him open lanes at the quarterback.

There are many explanations for why players put up good or bad stats and productivity is only one of them, which is why I say remember to keep in mind the context.
I'm not saying statistics are the only tool we should use when evaluating players. I'm not even saying they are a good tool. I'm just saying they are a measure of productivity.

Peterson rushed for 1341 yards last season. That is how productive he was. Regardless of what the context was, that's how productive Peterson was.

My whole argument is that Peterson and Jacobs are not the same statistically which is what BBD was saying. 300+ more yards, 3x more TDs, 0.6 higher YPC, etc.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:24 PM    (permalink
ALD
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In your closet
Posts: 193
Reputation: 76
ALD hopes to escalate quickly but not get out of hand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing View Post
I'm not saying statistics are the only tool we should use when evaluating players. I'm not even saying they are a good tool. I'm just saying they are a measure of productivity.

Peterson rushed for 1341 yards last season. That is how productive he was. Regardless of what the context was, that's how productive Peterson was.

My whole argument is that Peterson and Jacobs are not the same statistically which is what BBD was saying. 300+ more yards, 3x more TDs, 0.6 higher YPC, etc.
I guess we have very different definitions of productivity then. Your definition of a players productivity is much more dependant on a player's team-mates, coaching and other extenuating circumstances. Here's another more similar example, Marshawn Lynch vs. Brandon Jacobs, having watched a lot of both Marshawn is a lot more productive per my definition although guessing by that fact that he had worse stats I'm assuming you'd say he was less productive.

Peterson was more effective than his stats indicate IMO for reason that stats just can't measure, at least not common stats, such as how much a defense focuses on him, how often his big plays lead to new sets downs, etc. Your also neglecting that AD had about 2 games worth of carries more than jacobs, 35 more carries, and if you add in those 2 games worth of stats their numbers are much closer even though I'd agree that Peterson is infinitely more productive.
ALD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:31 PM    (permalink
ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing
 
Posts: n/a
Reputation:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALD View Post
I guess we have very different definitions of productivity then. Your definition of a players productivity is much more dependant on a player's team-mates, coaching and other extenuating circumstances. Here's another more similar example, Marshawn Lynch vs. Brandon Jacobs, having watched a lot of both Marshawn is a lot more productive per my definition although guessing by that fact that he had worse stats I'm assuming you'd say he was less productive.

Peterson was more effective than his stats indicate IMO for reason that stats just can't measure, at least not common stats, such as how much a defense focuses on him, how often his big plays lead to new sets downs, etc. Your also neglecting that AD had about 2 games worth of carries more than jacobs, 35 more carries, and if you add in those 2 games worth of stats their numbers are much closer even though I'd agree that Peterson is infinitely more productive.
Peterson still averaged 0.6 more YPC. And the fact is that Jacobs didn't get those carries. You simply cannot make the argument that they were close statistically last season and that's the only point I'm trying to make.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:40 PM    (permalink
ALD
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In your closet
Posts: 193
Reputation: 76
ALD hopes to escalate quickly but not get out of hand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing View Post
Peterson still averaged 0.6 more YPC. And the fact is that Jacobs didn't get those carries. You simply cannot make the argument that they were close statistically last season and that's the only point I'm trying to make.
Well here are their per game averages:
17 carries per game
96 yards per game
.86 tds per

18 carries per game
92 yards per game
.45 tds per game

now tell me those two aren't similar statistically, outside of TDs, where we got a lot of ours through the air and Minnesota had no passing game to score for AD.
ALD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 05:43 PM    (permalink
ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing
 
Posts: n/a
Reputation:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALD View Post
Well here are their per game averages:
17 carries per game
96 yards per game
.86 tds per

18 carries per game
92 yards per game
.45 tds per game

now tell me those two aren't similar statistically, outside of TDs, where we got a lot of ours through the air and Minnesota had no passing game to score for AD.
You're right, Jacobs was as productive as Peterson.

Last edited by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing : 08-03-2008 at 05:47 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 06:10 PM    (permalink
ALD
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In your closet
Posts: 193
Reputation: 76
ALD hopes to escalate quickly but not get out of hand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForOneDayHeWouldBeKing View Post
You're right, Jacobs was as productive as Peterson.
I'll try and be more simple:

Similar stats does not equal similar production, comprende?

I just showed that Jacobs and AD had similar stats, and it's blatant that they didn't have similar productivity. I hope that makes sense to you, although I know it's tough to accept that your assumptions are wrong for some people.
ALD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 07:27 PM    (permalink
NY+Giants=NYG
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 9,357
Reputation: 295348
NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.NY+Giants=NYG is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALD View Post
That's the exact reasoning why I hope Jacobs doesn't ask for a ridiculous number in FA this season. He's huge and we'll definately miss his size and ability to just crush all but big defensive lineman, but with an Oline and scheme that work as effectively as ours he's not crucial. I honestly I think that BJ could be even more effective than grant with some seasoning in GB which is why I don't like the idea of making too much of a commitment right now. Let Grant start for a whole season on a reasonable, say 3 mill for this season, deal and then work out an extension if you don't see any progress from Jackson and Grant lights it up again.
No, in the zone system, BJ would get his lunch handed to him. What makes grant a good fit is his vision, balance, and ability to cut back. All traits Ward and Bradshaw have, but Jacobs doesn't. Jacobs is more of a north/south running back, and thus we need to run more ISO and LEADs to better utilize him. We managed to get good production from him, when Shockey was healthy because he was so vital in sealing the edge when we ran our various running concepts, but once Shockey got hurt, Jacobs couldn't run it. Now that's not ALL his fault, because Boss offered bad quality run blocking. Again sorta his fault, but was expected, especially going from D2 college to NFL. I understand it, but then Gilbride needs to change things up in the running game. Instead we changed our passing game and went 4 wide, which helped Eli. I expect us, if we can't develop Boss fast enough, to go more 4 wide again like this past year.

I just realized you meant B. Jackson, not our BJ, who is a FA as well.. Ok well disregard everything else. I haven't seen your B. Jackson to make an opinion on him.
NY+Giants=NYG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 10:44 PM    (permalink
Iamcanadian
All-NFLDC
 
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Wallaceburg, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,200
Reputation: 307331
Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Iamcanadian is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo View Post
I think BBD is severely underrating Grant, I'd take him over any of the Giants' runningbacks. He's a very good combo of vision, speed, and power. He could improve a bit as a receiver, but he's almost fluid the way he moves through the first 5-10 yards past the LOS. Perfect fit for the Packers, well beyond the rest of their runningbacks so I'll agree with BBD on that point (Jackson and Wynn are more of a banger mold than slasher mold).

I have much less of a problem with this signing than the Cowboys' major deal for Marion Barber, which struck me as stupid when I heard it and still feel the same. It's completely stupid to give that much money to Barber, when they drafted Felix Jones in the 1st freaking round and Tashard Choice (who can't break a homerun like Grant, dream on BBD), when Barber plays such a physical game, and when they have serious concerns about the pathetic future at WR and the need to sign DeMarcus Ware long-term. You don't give that much money to a runningback when you have a franchise quarterback who can win you games, you give that quarterback weapons so he can do that.
I disagree to a certain extent. Grant came into a perfect situation. Defenses were spread out to stop GB's passing attack led by Favre. They paid little attention to stopping the run. If Favre isn't there, teams will pay a lot more attention to stopping the run until Rodgers can prove he is a solid passer.
Grant had an easy ride in GB with Favre around as would most RB's. You take Favre out of that offense and Grant and even their WR's may struggle quite a bit. Favre may have made them all look a lot better than they actually are.
__________________
And proud of it!!!
Iamcanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 10:45 PM    (permalink
bored of education
DC Creeper
Icon
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16,627
Reputation: 1057989
bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.bored of education is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

This just reeeks of I TOLD YOU SO.
__________________
my scent?...like making love to a lumberjack
<TACKLE> i will ngata give you a bj raji
<+BOE> Scott, with Burfict's character concerns (whether legit or not) you think Pioli would draft him. :D
<+ScottWright> Why not. Baldwin does need a sparring partner...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermstheman83 View Post
What's with the hate on Ricky Stanzi? Those youtube clips of him with the hulk hogan theme music instantly make him better than Luck.
bored of education is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2008, 11:48 PM    (permalink
Dr. Gonzo
Icon
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 16,211
Reputation: 1432600
Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Dr. Gonzo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

All I have to say to this is

BRING BACK SAMKON GADO!!!
__________________
Dr. Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.