Jump to content

GDT 2018: Wilcard Weekend - LA Chargers vs Baltimore Ravens - Sunday 1:05PM


drd23

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Danand said:

I am not priding myself of being a great talent evaluator, but I would say the Colts just proved that going oline early instead of betting on finding talent later is the way to go. Atleast I like that approach rather than having a receiver who is relevant for 30-40 percent of offensive snaps.

Perhaps. But you could also just as easily say that their organization has struggled to find OL in the midrounds and late and thus it makes sense that they used their top picks to address an area they’ve struggled at.

With our OL were literally starting 2 UDFA players and they turned out to be solid starters/good depth players. We have a history of selecting quality options on the second day (which is what I’m suggesting). But we’ve struggled with finding a receiver thus finding a guy to grow with Jackson makes sense. If Flacco nets us a third round pick, using two thirds on the OL isn’t a negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Perhaps. But you could also just as easily say that their organization has struggled to find OL in the midrounds and late and thus it makes sense that they used their top picks to address an area they’ve struggled at.

With our OL were literally starting 2 UDFA players and they turned out to be solid starters/good depth players. We have a history of selecting quality options on the second day (which is what I’m suggesting). But we’ve struggled with finding a receiver thus finding a guy to grow with Jackson makes sense. If Flacco nets us a third round pick, using two thirds on the OL isn’t a negative.

To be fair, those two UDFAs were probably the worst of the starters amongst the offensive line today. 

Imagine having legitimate high quality talent at those positions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I guess part of it comes down to who is available and where but I think receiver is a position where it's not all that useful for us to spend more mid-round picks at best on that - we need legit blue chip talent at the skill positions, not more JAGS. Whereas with our coaching staff I would trust us to be able to coach up/develop a 3rd round interior linemen and turn them into a good starter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

Yeah I guess part of it comes down to who is available and where but I think receiver is a position where it's not all that useful for us to spend more mid-round picks at best on that - we need legit blue chip talent at the skill positions, not more JAGS. Whereas with our coaching staff I would trust us to be able to coach up/develop a 3rd round interior linemen and turn them into a good starter. 

That's been the case for the last... well, every year. Hopefully DeCosta isn't shy about loading up on perimeter weapons early and often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RavensTillIDie said:

To be fair, those two UDFAs were probably the worst of the starters amongst the offensive line today. 

Imagine having legitimate high quality talent at those positions. 

Oh and I understand this. My point is that, if we got average to above average play out of UDFAs, just imagine what we could do with day 2 picks.

But outside of RB, a great OL can come in and have a fast impact for a team. And we do a great job of finding talent at that position that fits our system. And because we do such a great job their is a bit of “law of diminishing returns” that plays a part in this as well. Unless the OL player is can‘t miss and dominant like a Frank Ragnow, Kevin Zeitler, Travis Frederick, Zack Martin, etc.

Right now, I currently haven’t really done a full deep dive, but I haven’t seen any OL players that are simply must haves. But we’ll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Brandon Williams vs. Michael Pierce - if you take PFF's ratings as any sort of indicator, Pierce is the #6 NT and Brandon Williams is #36. That's quite a separation and IMHO quite accurately represents how each has played this year. Pierce has been great and Williams has been...quite not great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

RE: Brandon Williams vs. Michael Pierce - if you take PFF's ratings as any sort of indicator, Pierce is the #6 NT and Brandon Williams is #36. That's quite a separation and IMHO quite accurately represents how each has played this year. Pierce has been great and Williams has been...quite not great.

Those rankings are for DI, which means Defensive Interior. It's NTs, UTs, 5Ts, 3Ts etc etc. Every team in the league probably has at least 3 or 4 qualified, so Williams' ranking is actually impressive- just not so much when compared to Pierce's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i felt the game was lost when Harbaugh decided to kick instead of going for it on 4th and short.

you finally gained some momentum, only to fall back in passive habits.

he build this offense for exact those situations - 3rd/4th and short, that should be easily converted with your dual threat at QB.

and with his background and his emphasis on ST, why in the world are he and Rosburg not able to come up with an idea for an onside kick that may actually work?
being 0/12 (or 0/13 now if i got that right yesterday) is unacceptable for this coaching staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, berlin calling said:

i felt the game was lost when Harbaugh decided to kick instead of going for it on 4th and short.

you finally gained some momentum, only to fall back in passive habits.

he build this offense for exact those situations - 3rd/4th and short, that should be easily converted with your dual threat at QB.

and with his background and his emphasis on ST, why in the world are he and Rosburg not able to come up with an idea for an onside kick that may actually work?
being 0/12 (or 0/13 now if i got that right yesterday) is unacceptable for this coaching staff.

In defense of the onside kicks thing - it's just not a thing that anyone can do reliably, and the NFL rule change this year to onside kicks makes them virtually impossible anyways. That onside kick by Tucker was actually about as well as you can possibly hope to execute it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, berlin calling said:

i felt the game was lost when Harbaugh decided to kick instead of going for it on 4th and short.

you finally gained some momentum, only to fall back in passive habits.

he build this offense for exact those situations - 3rd/4th and short, that should be easily converted with your dual threat at QB.

and with his background and his emphasis on ST, why in the world are he and Rosburg not able to come up with an idea for an onside kick that may actually work?
being 0/12 (or 0/13 now if i got that right yesterday) is unacceptable for this coaching staff.

I agree with the 4th and short point 100%, but disagree with the special teams play. Tucker kicked a REALLY good ball. We just had to deal with Keenan Allen and his top notch hands. What’s more it’s nearly impossible to recover with these current onside rules. Asking a guy to recover a kick by running from a standstill is nearly improbable unless it was a team of Chris Johnson and John Ross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry guys thtey showed a stat that league wide an onside kick has somewhat of 25% success rate.
i understand that it is no gimme, but...

Tucker is 0 for 12.

Harbaugh is a former ST coach and Rosburg is good at his job also.
this is just unacceptable, independent from this specific game, simple mathematics tell me Tucker should have at least converted 1, if not 4, onside kicks throughout his career.
:|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, berlin calling said:

sorry guys thtey showed a stat that league wide an onside kick has somewhat of 25% success rate.
i understand that it is no gimme, but...

Tucker is 0 for 12.

Harbaugh is a former ST coach and Rosburg is good at his job also.
this is just unacceptable, independent from this specific game, simple mathematics tell me Tucker should have at least converted 1, if not 4, onside kicks throughout his career.
:|

That stat is incredibly flawed as most converted attempts are from "surprise" onside kicks. When teams expect onside kicks I am certain the success rate is very low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, M.10.E said:

I refuse to believe an expected onside kick is anything over 5-10% success rate.

10% is one out of 10 though right?

enough of that stuff, sorry. i'll rest my case, it wasn't the downfall yesterday. just something i'd like to see a HC take better care of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...