Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scott Pioli: Overrated?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by vidae-KC View Post
    No he didn't! Don't make this personal Splat!
    what about the 3 ints that he dropped.
    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...
    Originally posted by Hermstheman83
    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.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
      How many great players has Pioli drafted in the last 4 years? I don't think you can say any so far.
      A thoroughly subjective topic. But I'll play along - Mayo, Mankins, Gostkowski and Hobbs (great return man & decent CB)

      How many other teams can you say have drafted xxxx number of great players over the last 4 years? Since when is 4 years enough to guage a player's "greatness"?

      Also, NE has a track record of slowly working guys into the rotation. So it can be argued that a team like the Patriots, who have excellent depth historically, require longer periods of time before we can truly assess how good a player is b/c they may not play as much as they would with another team.

      And again, why are we dismissing the 2000-2004 drafts? Why don't those count?

      Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by FlyingElvis View Post
        A thoroughly subjective topic. But I'll play along - Mayo, Mankins, Gostkowski and Hobbs (great return man & decent CB)

        How many other teams can you say have drafted xxxx number of great players over the last 4 years? Since when is 4 years enough to guage a player's "greatness"?

        Also, NE has a track record of slowly working guys into the rotation. So it can be argued that a team like the Patriots, who have excellent depth historically, require longer periods of time before we can truly assess how good a player is b/c they may not play as much as they would with another team.

        And again, why are we dismissing the 2000-2004 drafts? Why don't those count?

        what have you done for me lately? maybe? I dunno. they got Wes and Randy recently. So that with Hobbs, Mankins, Mayo and Gos is pretty solid. People dont relaize that not much turnover has happened for the Pat on their roster in the past 4 years besides getting rid of old farts and Asante...so killing it draft wise is not needed per se. and thats comming from the number one hater on the board. :D
        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...
        Originally posted by Hermstheman83
        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.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by njx9
          he WAS impressive in the playoffs that year. i distinctly remember watching him thinking, 'where the heck did this guy come from?'

          but then he was abysmal vs. the giants. and he was abysmal before the playoffs. which makes me feel like the playoffs were the aberration. that said, if he comes out this season and runs really well (by which i mean, isn't getting outperformed by nearly every other rb on the roster), i have no problem eating crow. but when green-ellis looks like a better runner...
          Those 2 games are indicative of what he can become, no doubt. That is exactly why I think he hasn’t been able to play enough to consistently reach his potential. Which is why I say he doesn’t suck. In his second season he did a decent job in a RBBC system and blew up in the playoffs. Then played 3 games in 08.

          The Giants D-line put up one of the greatest performances I have even seen in any game, let alone a superbowl. NE’s O-line got shredded. Sweetness would have looked bad in that game.

          Originally posted by njx9
          i disagree with the ypc argument because it's baseless. it's like saying "well, david carr had an X rating, so he can't suck." without the background data, it's, well, just white noise. for instance:

          maroney has typically become progressively worse over the course of the game (his 4.7 ypc on his first ten carries of the game as compared to 3.2 ypc after twenty). he's horrible inside the red zone (2.9 ypc). he's substantially worse in the 4th quarter than in the first quarter (4.6 ypc to 3.8 ypc).

          without seeing him play (and seeing that defenses tend to wear him down), none of that would be relevant information in and of itself.

          that said, all of those 10 yard runs further skew the stats (at least in the context of this thread), as a 10 yard carry is hardly a "home run". and they make his rushing ability look down right awful in some games (if we play the, 'take away the one big run and you're left with 2.0 ypc for the day' game).
          I understand that stats can be used and misused. For example: 4th Q ypc and his 20th + carries . . . have you considered the status of all of those games? NE was blowing teams out and presumably running out the clock with those late game carries. That situation is much easier to defend. Same goes (sort of) for the red zone, where the D is packed into a short field and can expose a run game that is based more on play-action/screen/draw than true smash mouth, thus exposing an O line geared towards pass protection. It is relatively subjective – you say Maroney wore down, I say the D had less passing to worry about. It’s not like there’s any empirical evidence to say which is correct.

          Originally posted by njx9
          fine, to be fair. if he'd had the full 3 years of play, i might be of a different opinion. but pretty much from his rookie season on, he's done nothing to make me think he's better than mediocre.
          He’s a better than mediocre talent (i.e. “potential”) who has not proven he’s anything better than mediocre. That I can agree with at this point. But, unless you think mediocre = suck . . .

          Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

          Comment


          • #50
            Anyway . . . I'm torn w/Pioli. I have a ton of respect for him and want to see him continue to succeed.

            On the other hand, maybe if he & McDaniels both flop over the next few seasons the rest of the NFL will stay the **** out of Bob Kraft's cupboards. Find some other teams coaches, players & FO staffers to poach for a change.

            Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by FlyingElvis View Post
              A thoroughly subjective topic. But I'll play along - Mayo, Mankins, Gostkowski and Hobbs (great return man & decent CB)

              How many other teams can you say have drafted xxxx number of great players over the last 4 years? Since when is 4 years enough to guage a player's "greatness"?

              Also, NE has a track record of slowly working guys into the rotation. So it can be argued that a team like the Patriots, who have excellent depth historically, require longer periods of time before we can truly assess how good a player is b/c they may not play as much as they would with another team.

              And again, why are we dismissing the 2000-2004 drafts? Why don't those count?
              I'm a post-structuralist, so if you really want to get on the topic I'd say that everything is subjective and we'll all just operating within a completely arbitrary discourse.

              However. There are barometers you can look at to judge the value of a player (ie: Peyton Manning is great, Rex Grossman is not).

              I'm throwing out the kicker. He drafted a good kicker. Cool. They also let Robbie Gould go, who is arguably a better kicker, so that would be a wash to me anyway.

              Logan Mankins is a great guard, but as a 1st round pick he damn well better be. If you get drafted in the first round as a guard and aren't one of the best players at your position you're a bust. A good pick, but a great one? Meh.

              Ellis Hobbs is a good player, I don't think you can call him a great player. At least not yet anyway. He's developing into a good starter, but isn't close to one of the best at his positions from what I've seen.

              Mayo is probably his best pick in the last 3-4 years. Granted it was an inside linebacker with a top 10 pick, so similar to the guard it's a pick he should have hit on. That said, he did, and should be given credit for it. Probably the closest to being an elite player the Pats have drafted in quite a while, assuming he continues to develop.

              I also don't think that anyone is trying to discredit Pioli's record as a drafter, or is trying to ignore his previous accomplishments (although there's no doubt that most of the players drafted on the three Superbowl teams were from drafts when Pioli had less power than he did in the latter part of his years in New England, so I don't think it's entirely arbitrary to examine his more recent work as a better reflection as to what type of GM he would be.

              Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say his record is bad as a GM. I think the general argument is that it has flaws, particularly within the last few years, and to say "Scott Pioli won 3 Superbowls" is a rather limited and short-sighted argument to make about his potential merits as a full-time GM in Kansas City.


              Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
                Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say his record is bad as a GM. I think the general argument is that it has flaws, particularly within the last few years, and to say "Scott Pioli won 3 Superbowls" is a rather limited and short-sighted argument to make about his potential merits as a full-time GM in Kansas City.
                I agree completely. I don't think the post/thread is trying to discredit him at all.

                But I still find the whole premise oddly pessimisstic. KC now has a GM who was an itegral part of the most successful franchise in a decade. What the hell else can any fanbase ask for??
                Last edited by FlyingElvis; 03-27-2009, 02:59 PM. Reason: had to put an M in coMpletely

                Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by bored of education View Post
                  what have you done for me lately? maybe? I dunno. they got Wes and Randy recently. So that with Hobbs, Mankins, Mayo and Gos is pretty solid. People dont relaize that not much turnover has happened for the Pat on their roster in the past 4 years besides getting rid of old farts and Asante...so killing it draft wise is not needed per se. and thats comming from the number one hater on the board. :D
                  I think this is key. The guy does more than draft, he makes some incredible value trades. Welker played decent for the Dolphins, but the Pats gave up a second rounder, and many were thinking WTF. Amazing.

                  Amazing value on Moss, and now on Cassel. Whether you like him or not, he fits the system very well.


                  Follow Me on Twitter!
                  https://twitter.com/ShanePHallam

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by JBond93 View Post
                    I think this is key. The guy does more than draft, he makes some incredible value trades. Welker played decent for the Dolphins, but the Pats gave up a second rounder, and many were thinking WTF. Amazing.

                    Amazing value on Moss, and now on Cassel. Whether you like him or not, he fits the system very well.
                    Very good point. And something tells me he's not done making those kinds of trades for this offseason. I have a feeling he has something up his sleeve for draft day. With holes at DE, LB, RT, no 2nd rounder, and the situations with LJ, Waters, and TG the Chiefs are by no means done making trades IMO.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by LarryJohnson27 View Post
                      Very good point. And something tells me he's not done making those kinds of trades for this offseason. I have a feeling he has something up his sleeve for draft day. With holes at DE, LB, RT, no 2nd rounder, and the situations with LJ, Waters, and TG the Chiefs are by no means done making trades IMO.
                      I think the same. I think the Chiefs will be moving from the number 3 spot as well. The infatuation of Curry(false or true could help KC position them self to move or send smoke signals) and the availability of Stafford/Monroe/Smith would be a dream for KC. They could move down from 3 on the 'cheap' getting a 3rd and future 3rd or something.
                      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...
                      Originally posted by Hermstheman83
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I think this argument is being simplified a little bit for the sake of arguing about the draft. Directors of scouting, college scouts and other areas of searching for draft prospects can go up and down while the GM stays the same.

                        More than one GM has been amazing in one city and terrible in another, or even in the one city over the space of a few years. Their reliance on scouts is a HUGE part of the process.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by BlindSite View Post
                          I think this argument is being simplified a little bit for the sake of arguing about the draft. Directors of scouting, college scouts and other areas of searching for draft prospects can go up and down while the GM stays the same.

                          More than one GM has been amazing in one city and terrible in another, or even in the one city over the space of a few years. Their reliance on scouts is a HUGE part of the process.
                          Which is why Pioli's so good. He's been in charge of hiring scouts and choosing which ones to rely on.
                          ________
                          Glass water pipes
                          Last edited by nepg; 09-17-2011, 07:17 AM.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X

                          Debug Information