Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spears Benching Countdown

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
    Is this the D-Unit guy who is an Administrator saying others are here to puff themselves up?

    WOWZzzzzzzeeeeeeeeee, sure sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.
    I go by what I see. How do I go about looking for credit on everything I say? I may be a pot, but I'm not black. :D

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
      BTW, get rid of Ramonce TNew. He sucks.
      Its funny that ive been posting here almost a yr before you were, consistently at that...im not even sure when Tnew popped up, but i had been here long before he or you for that matter, and while Tnew bothered everyone constantly for the couple of months he was around, you seem to be the only one who feels bothered by me..but ur right, im both posters, i posted on my name for a year, then for amusement made another alias and ran rampid on the board, smh...u do know mods can check the ip address right? but thats not worth discussing, whatever makes you sleep better at night


      my whole point, is that when you come up with thoughts you dont say "i think rice would have been a good pick because of his height and redzone ability, where as we reached on stanback in my opinion, and even if you do, when someone says they liked the stanback pick, they are immediately wrong and an idiot who doesnt understand football..also my other point was that right now, you and everyone else just has an opinion on that matter, its extremely too early for you to swear up and down rice would of been better, you can say the "odds" are with rice, but the "odds" were that reggie williams would be a better WR then marques colston, and the "odds" were alot higher, so if you want to have an opinion on rice thats fine by all means, by thats all it is right now, is what you think about the situation...


      Once you get past the point of knowing that the sole reason robert is here is to puff himself up and you become numb to it, it stops bothering you.

      i realize that, you cannot even have a disagreement with him in a normal sense...jus thought it was funny that he acts like he doesnt know why he's treated a certain way around here, then you read how he responds to BBD post and realize that he is going out of his way to try to rile people up





      Originally posted by Scott Wright
      I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
        This whole discussions started with my stating Jerrah, outside of the trade, screwed up the draft ..... Sidney Rice's name was the start of the "what if" discussion when you stumbled in idiotically and started calling me names telling me Rice sucked, Doucet is better, Stanback is wonderful and Jerrah is a great GM.

        [...]

        This draft will further reinforce it. Only Folk will contribute meaningfully in 2007.
        First, I could take this post as a personal attack. You're calling a lot of guys idiot, stupid, dummy etc recently, uh?
        Second, I've not said that Rice suck and Doucet is better, I've said that we can pick a better WR in next year's draft, because, imo, Doucet, Bennet and Jackson (at least) have more potential and better skills than Rice. And I've not called Jerry and Stanback's names.

        The only thing I've said is that you are complaining about lack of contribution by our rookies, but still wanted us to draft Sidney Rice, who you think should have helpe us by increasing our scoring catching high balls in the redzone. But our scoring offense was the third best in the league last year, so I really don't get why do you think we should improve in this area of the game. Then you came out saying that SD used this type of plays with Brees throwing to Gates and Jackson, and that we should use the same type of plays because Romo is as short as Brees. But the only tall guy to whom Brees throwed was Gates, Jackson received THREE balls that season. So SD didn't use this type of play so often as you said while Brees was playing for them.

        And, there's a guy called Anthony Spencer who is gonna start for us. But only Folk will contribute, uh?

        And weren't you complaining about all the rookies making the team, because a super bowl contender should not expect much production from their rookies? Aren't you contradicting yourself once again?


        In Bob We Trust

        John Madden's wedding video business

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ddPHJWkPvU

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Modano View Post
          First, I could take this post as a personal attack. You're calling a lot of guys idiot, stupid, dummy etc recently, uh?
          Second, I've not said that Rice suck and Doucet is better, I've said that we can pick a better WR in next year's draft, because, imo, Doucet, Bennet and Jackson (at least) have more potential and better skills than Rice. And I've not called Jerry and Stanback's names.

          The only thing I've said is that you are complaining about lack of contribution by our rookies, but still wanted us to draft Sidney Rice, who you think should have helpe us by increasing our scoring catching high balls in the redzone. But our scoring offense was the third best in the league last year, so I really don't get why do you think we should improve in this area of the game. Then you came out saying that SD used this type of plays with Brees throwing to Gates and Jackson, and that we should use the same type of plays because Romo is as short as Brees. But the only tall guy to whom Brees throwed was Gates, Jackson received THREE balls that season. So SD didn't use this type of play so often as you said while Brees was playing for them.

          And, there's a guy called Anthony Spencer who is gonna start for us. But only Folk will contribute, uh?

          And weren't you complaining about all the rookies making the team, because a super bowl contender should not expect much production from their rookies? Aren't you contradicting yourself once again?
          Props to you Modano. Your English has improved by leaps and bounds from the first time you posted here. Wow. I'm impressed.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
            Props to you Modano. Your English has improved by leaps and bounds from the first time you posted here. Wow. I'm impressed.
            Are you serious? :P If my english has improved, it's because of this forum (and watching games on TV). But reading and writing on this forum has been very important for me, "speaking" with other people is the best way to learn a new language.


            In Bob We Trust

            John Madden's wedding video business

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ddPHJWkPvU

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
              i realize that, you cannot even have a disagreement with him in a normal sense...jus thought it was funny that he acts like he doesnt know why he's treated a certain way around here, then you read how he responds to BBD post and realize that he is going out of his way to try to rile people up
              Ohhh Longhorn, so mature and an interesting insight....

              When folks post nonsense backed up by nonsense they get nonsense ...

              When folks post interesting thoughts backed up by intersting thoughts they get interesting thoughts back.

              But seriously, get rid of Ramonce. That is an embarrasment TNew.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                First, I could take this post as a personal attack. You're calling a lot of guys idiot, stupid, dummy etc recently, uh?
                Not alot guys, but you and Pocketaces are seriously pushing for the title.

                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                Second, I've not said that Rice suck and Doucet is better, I've said that we can pick a better WR in next year's draft, because, imo, Doucet, Bennet and Jackson (at least) have more potential and better skills than Rice. And I've not called Jerry and Stanback's names.
                Maybe so but I don't think any of those guys have Sidney Rice's hands or ball skills.

                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                The only thing I've said is that you are complaining about lack of contribution by our rookies, but still wanted us to draft Sidney Rice, who you think should have helpe us by increasing our scoring catching high balls in the redzone. But our scoring offense was the third best in the league last year, so I really don't get why do you think we should improve in this area of the game.
                I dunno, maybe we should improve this area of the game to score more points? You tell me why we shouldn't improve our red zone effectiveness. Should we worsen it or stay the same if given a shot to improve?

                Mind I add this is not the central argument here. But a side track through some data and analysis supporting a conclusion..

                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                Then you came out saying that SD used this type of plays with Brees throwing to Gates and Jackson, and that we should use the same type of plays because Romo is as short as Brees. But the only tall guy to whom Brees throwed was Gates, Jackson received THREE balls that season. So SD didn't use this type of play so often as you said while Brees was playing for them.
                San Diego has used that play very often in the last few years. Just so happens Gates was the #1 option with Brees for obvious reasons. But Vincent came on last year for the #1 Ranked Offense in the NFL. Coincidence??? Maybe, but I luv big guys in the end zone.

                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                And, there's a guy called Anthony Spencer who is gonna start for us. But only Folk will contribute, uh?
                We have a back-up of OLB, starting with Carpenter. I agree Spencer is a better pass rusher but I also see that Spencer is limited in any other role.

                If Ellis comes back, expect Spencer to hits the pines.

                Originally posted by Modano View Post
                And weren't you complaining about all the rookies making the team, because a super bowl contender should not expect much production from their rookies? Aren't you contradicting yourself once again?
                No, learn to reason. I am saying a few less rookies in a few areas of need would have been better in 2007 and beyond as opposed to a bunch of bodies.

                Assuming a deep draft ...............

                If you have Super Bowl talent, normally you want a few high quality guys who can produce today and develop tomorrow. That is give up some later round talent to secure a certain player in the 2nd or 3rd who can play sooner and maybe develop.

                If you are a sucky team, normally your are willing to foreasake draft postion or even 2nd / 3rd round picks for a few more 4th and 5th rounders uder the theory that more bodies equals more competition and a GREATER CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY of developing starters and stars.

                With Super Bowl teams, sometimes real high quality young guys get cut. So why have 2 or 3 young high quality guys when you know you have to throw away 1 or 2 of them.

                There is such a thing as having too much young talent in the NFL.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Rather have a 25% chance of being right on a star WR in the 2nd round then a 5% chance in the 4th round. So I give Rice 4X better shot at being a star than Stanback.
                  Where do you get these percentages from?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
                    Ohhh Longhorn, so mature and an interesting insight....

                    When folks post nonsense backed up by nonsense they get nonsense ...

                    When folks post interesting thoughts backed up by intersting thoughts they get interesting thoughts back.

                    But seriously, get rid of Ramonce. That is an embarrasment TNew.
                    Wait a minute... Longhorns is TNew???? I never even knew that. LOL.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post

                      I dunno, maybe we should improve this area of the game to score more points? You tell me why we shouldn't improve our red zone effectiveness. Should we worsen it or stay the same if given a shot to improve?

                      San Diego has used that play very often in the last few years. Just so happens Gates was the #1 option with Brees for obvious reasons. But Vincent came on last year for the #1 Ranked Offense in the NFL. Coincidence??? Maybe, but I luv big guys in the end zone.
                      two things to pick from this. We had bigger needs than helping the red zone offense, by bringing in Rice such as Secondary (which we didnt do) and NT (again didnt do).:(

                      Also SD didnt have the #1 offense, but if you meant red zone offense I think Ladanian Tomlinson had the most to do with the rating
                      Last edited by Im_a_Romosexual; 09-05-2007, 03:28 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by thule View Post
                        Where do you get these percentages from?
                        1st Round, 1st Pick -- 3,000 Points
                        2nd Round, 1st Pick -- 580 points
                        3rd Round, 1st Pick -- 265
                        4rd Round, 1st Pick -- 112
                        5th Round, 1st Pick -- 43
                        6th Round, 1st Pick -- 27
                        7th Round, 1st Pick -- 14.2

                        If you assume the first pick has a 100% chance of being star .... so that way you get a reference point mathematically.... the rest is division and multiplication but what really matter are the relative weights between picks.

                        Sidney Rice was picked 44 and Stanback 103.... 44 is worth 460 and 103 is worth 88.

                        44th pick is worth about 15% what the first pick is.... but that is not important.....

                        460/88 = 5.22 ------ 5/1 Ratio = 25%/5%

                        That is, Sidney Rice, has 4.22X better shot (mathematically) than Stanback according to a semi scientific weighting system many NFL teams use.

                        But Go talk to them but I am sure some mathematics dude plotted some quantifiable results (Pro Bowls, Total $$$ Made, + Position) to when the player was draft to get a giatn regression analysis. Lord knows what the forecast error was but then he took the math and gave it to some GM in order to give him a clue what a 7th rounder is worth vis a visa a 2nd Rounder.

                        Pure stats at that point once you build the database and keep refreshing with results.

                        So, son, what else you want?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by thule View Post
                          Where do you get these percentages from?
                          Also if I give the Number 1 a 100% shot of being a star then Sidney has a 15% and Stanback a 3.5%.

                          If you say 50% of Number 1 picks become stars then I was lower the 15% to 7.5% and so one.

                          Regardless, it is the relative weighting between rounds that matters.

                          When you look at history first round tends to produce more All Pros then the Second and so on......

                          Now that a 6th round QB (Brady) who turns into a start is worth more than a 3rd Round RB (Gore) goes without saying.

                          Certain positions are worth more so that needs to be taken into account in the regression model EVEN though each team has equal rights to picking a QB at any point in the draft..... need a stat guy to work that out .... but I digress into irrelevant math.

                          Point however is correct. Sidney is 5:1 on Stanback.

                          <Yawn> So Mr Know It All? I don't back my sh*t up but you do?
                          Last edited by robert_in_bigd; 09-05-2007, 03:51 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            I see where you got your numbers but I can't live on numbers. There was a great stat our there about the number of second day guys that actually contirbuted to a team and it was some minuscule number like 7-8&#37;. That is besides the fact. I'm pretty sure there are stats like 50% of first round WR's in the past 10 years don't live up to their hype...using that logic it would skew your stats.

                            I'm fully with you Rice would have gave us a dimension our team didn't have. Hell I was calling for him. But we had to move up and get spencer. And by Have...I mean the talent drop off on the big board we had set up made it well worth the trade. So yes this has to do with the front office not personal beliefs. But I would hate to see where our team would be sitting right now with Ellis hurt. Carp was moved inside because he fit the scheme better on the inside. Parcells went out of the way last year to say Carp just had a knack on the inside. Now call me crazy but I'm going to go with two smart minded coaches over what I see or think in a preseason game. So with this logic Spencer was a huge need for us.

                            I've stated my case how we got f'd in the 2nd round with the run on WR talent. and how when we traded down not one WR went. However you stated earlier that we should have offered 4th's and 5th's. Once again this is subject to speculation. Maybe we did we couldn't meet the needs of teams up there. Part of me says ya I'm sure we could have offered our 4th and 5th to move up with some team. But it's easy in hindsight...the organization could have made the move then turns out steve smith was available at our pick and now we made the wrong move. It's a game of luck and numbers. We missed out on our guys but moving up 2 picks in a row doesn't happen to often unless your a team like the redskins who has little to no value in later round picks.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
                              Also if I give the Number 1 a 100% shot of being a star then Sidney has a 15% and Stanback a 3.5%.

                              If you say 50% of Number 1 picks become stars then I was lower the 15% to 7.5% and so one.

                              Regardless, it is the relative weighting between rounds that matters.

                              When you look at history first round tends to produce more All Pros then the Second and so on......

                              Now that a 6th round QB (Brady) who turns into a start is worth more than a 3rd Round RB (Gore) goes without saying.

                              Certain positions are worth more so that needs to be taken into account in the regression model EVEN though each team has equal rights to picking a QB at any point in the draft..... need a stat guy to work that out .... but I digress into irrelevant math.

                              Point however is correct. Sidney is 5:1 on Stanback.

                              <Yawn> So Mr Know It All? I don't back my sh*t up but you do?
                              Just can't post a point without throwing in a low blow...why? Honestly I'm at a loss. You proved where you got your numbers from....no way I could say anything degrading about it...numbers are set no changing them around. But yet you feel the need to just throw in a little derogatory blow at the end of it...

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by thule View Post
                                I see where you got your numbers but I can't live on numbers. There was a great stat our there about the number of second day guys that actually contirbuted to a team and it was some minuscule number like 7-8&#37;. That is besides the fact. I'm pretty sure there are stats like 50% of first round WR's in the past 10 years don't live up to their hype...using that logic it would skew your stats.
                                With all due respect Thule, numbers are very important to use when trying value NFL currency called draft picks. The only way you do that is by having that type of chart and doing comprehensive statistical analysis. To say f* the numbers b/c you can't live on them is just plain wrong.

                                Now what you say about certain POSITIONS being high or lower bust probabilites REGARDLESS of where drafted is very true.

                                That is why many folks don't like DT and NT or Kickers in the 1st round.

                                Because they feel that one position, regardless of importance, is so variable they just as soon take a player more likely to hit.

                                So in that sense you are correct and it is a very well known observation, but the fact is we are comparing WR to WR. Not NT to WR in this discussion.

                                I assure you each team uses Position Weighting to supplement the Draft Value Chart but the basic numbers don't lie.

                                Game, set, match. Thanks for the workout.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information