Jump to content

big9erfan

Veteran Members
  • Content count

    21,734
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

224 Veteran
  1. Minor Niner News Thread

    Yeah. That could well be the case. On the other hand when a team is coming down to its last few cuts and they're trying to choose between two wrs I think they would givie serious consideration to one that was great at sts if the other guy sucked.
  2. OTAs

    Well I wondered about aligning with what we all perceive as talent and there it is.
  3. Minor Niner News Thread

    I agree. If we carry 6 then he's making the roster - unless he just sucks at ST play. He could turn out to be so good that he forces our hand and makes us carry six for fear of losing him if we decide put him on the PS. If we decide to carry only 5 then I don't see him beating out any of those other guys.
  4. OTAs

    What I don't know though is how it aligns with any intuitive sense of who is a good receiver. ARe the pro bowl type receivers the guys who are high in this stat, or does it someehow identify guys that under appreciative relative to their efficiency? I guess what I'm really wondering if it is a useful stat or just another of the countless stats that might be interesting to look at but don't really tell us anything useful.
  5. I like this one a lot.
  6. OTAs

    At least you were smart enough to ask. I didn't know how to interpret that stat either but I just let it slide.
  7. Nice reference. But I guess every rookie ever signed earns infinitely more than McK per career yard gained since they all have gained zero yards when they're signed as rookies. I guessed at what I said but I seriously can't think of a veteran RB who signed for more after producing less than McK.
  8. OTAs

    I was reading writeups of the d-line. Sounded like lots of guys were looking good by beating him. Oh Trent!
  9. OTAs

    Well, maybe the jury is still out on him too.
  10. Yep. He hand picked them. Now let's see what he can do with them.
  11. See - just as I said. It's impossible to have a discussion about Smith without arguing about it! I see you've learned the "spoiler trick".
  12. I hadn't actually thought about it that way. I should have mentioned the Foster trade up, but didn't because in that case it's the rare example of a trade up that I support - getting a guy that dropped further than he should based on talent alone, and a guy at a position of need where the next best guys are clearly a lot further down on the talent scale.
  13. We traded up to get him. We traded up to get Williams. We traded up to get Pettis. We made Juice the highest paid FB in the history of the league. We paid McK probabbly more per careeer yard earned than any player in history. Our staff darn well better be the best damn evaluators of talent ever because I don't think a franchise can thrive over the long term by paying premium prices in terms of picks or dollars for every specific guy they want.
  14. Minor Niner News Thread

    Interesting. And I assume that a bunch of guys on that list were drafted lower and only hindsight is now telling us they were good. In other words, they weren't legitimate candidates to be selected that high. And many were likely already gone by our pick. So of that would likely lift hjim much higher on the list of guys that any team would seriously have considered taking him at that spot. So he probably turns out to be a decent pick at that spot. Without all the stats which sometimes just obfuscate what is otherwise a simple matter, lots of first round guys turn into to nothing, mere backups, or have a few year career as a mediocre starter. Getting a 10-year NFL starter ia at least an average result, maybe even slightly above average result, for a pick in that range.
  15. New Forum - New Random

    @rudyZ- is it still real poutine if it comes with shredded Havarti on it instead of cheese curds?
×