Cwood is a nerd and so are all the Packer Favorite Prospects: 2023 Draft Discussion Thread

[incognito_man]

6 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

For those of you thinking the Packers might take an OL high, which are the top guys who actually match the Packers profile for drafting OL?

All of the top 4 OTs do. They're all really good athletically IMO

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, beekay414 said:

Trust me, just once I'd like to see the WR pick. One day we'll get it, just best to tell yourself it's not happening and be surprised. 

[beekay414]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

Trust me, just once I'd like to see the WR pick. One day we'll get it, just best to tell yourself it's not happening and be surprised. 

Oh I do not expect it whatsoever. Just needed to throw an "how dare you" at you for trying to knock me out of my dream state.

[incognito_man]

55 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

But I'm trying to find the reasoning in the math, not what someone may or may not have put out. For all we know, one place made an error (either way) and multiple places ran with it. Unfortunately, anything with access to the actual results is long gone bad link-wise so nobody will really know. Draftscout has never let me down on players results so I'll always default to them.

Though, what I'm asking is what makes more sense. That he cut over a tenth of a second off one portion of his time while only cutting half that from his total time or that he cut reasonably the same time off his 10 yard split as he did his 40? Trying to find the math here.

Impossible to know. Equivalent of asking "you have a piece of red string and piece of blue string. They're 10" long combined. How long is the red string?"

[packfanfb]

10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Trust me, just once I'd like to see the WR pick. One day we'll get it, just best to tell yourself it's not happening and be surprised. 

Truthfully, this would be THE year to do it though. Love's first year, his evaluation year, Gute's boy, WR room is probably the weakest room on the team outside of TE, I can go on...

Of all years, this seems like the one where Gute would not only accept taking a WR, but he would outwardly desire that pick if the right guy is there. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by packfanfb

[beekay414]

5 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Impossible to know. Equivalent of asking "you have a piece of red string and piece of blue string. They're 10" long combined. How long is the red string?"

I'm not asking you to "know," I'm asking what makes more sense. His 20 yard splits were identical in the hand timed portion (2.59 hand timed at the combine and 2.59 at his pro day). His 10 yard split times, both on his RAS graphic and on Draft Scout, were timed at 1.60, which is a 0.04 second improvement. He made a 0.05 second improvement on his overall time. 

IMO, that makes more sense than him drastically upping his initial 10 yard time and then tailing off at the end. It makes more sense that he upped it marginally and hit his peak speed about the same as he did in Indianapolis. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by beekay414

[incognito_man]

13 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

I'm not asking you to "know," I'm asking what makes more sense. His 20 yard splits were identical in the hand timed portion (2.59 hand timed at the combine and 2.59 at his pro day). His 10 yard split times, both on his RAS graphic and on Draft Scout, were timed at 1.60, which is a 0.04 second improvement. He made a 0.05 second improvement on his overall time. 

IMO, that makes more sense than him drastically upping his initial 10 yard time and then tailing off at the end. It makes more sense that he upped it marginally and hit his peak speed about the same as he did in Indianapolis. 

Different sources. Different clocks. LIS, the truth is surely in-between 1.53 and 1.60.

[beekay414]

11 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Different sources. Different clocks. LIS, the truth is surely in-between 1.53 and 1.60.

Actually, I just realized that the B/R article you posted was from February 27th, almost a full month from his pro day. So all they would've had was the combine results at that point and he ran a 1.64 10 yard split at the combine.

The only thing edited on that entire page is where he was selected because they also still had his 4.56 40 time from the combine. Even on the updated May 5th article, they never changed his 40 time to 4.51. So how credible is B/R in this entire exchange?

That gang green nation post too had the same B/R numbers. So they obviously got their number from that "source." Mockdraftable also had those numbers (the non-updated 40 time from 4.56 to 4.51). So it's quite obvious that those sources are flawed at this point. 

So where the hell did they get their 1.53 time from if they are using the combine results for everything else? The 1.53 obviously came out of thin air and was meant to be 1.64 (literally 1 key over on two numbers).

Edited April 11, 2023 by beekay414

[incognito_man]

3 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Actually, I just realized that the B/R article you posted was from February 27th, almost a full month from his pro day. So all they would've had was the combine results at that point and he ran a 1.64 10 yard split at the combine.

The only thing edited on that entire page is where he was selected because they also still had his 4.56 40 time from the combine. Even on the updated May 5th article, they never changed his 40 time to 4.51. So how credible is B/R in this entire exchange?

That gang green nation post too had the same B/R numbers. So they obviously got their number from that "source." Mockdraftable also had those numbers (the non-updated 40 time from 4.56 to 4.51). So it's quite obvious that those sources are flawed at this point. 

So where the hell did they get their 1.53 time from if they are using the combine results for everything else? The 1.53 obviously came out of thin air and was meant to be 1.64 (literally 1 key over on two numbers).

Different. Sources. At. Pro. Day.

[beekay414]

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

Different. Sources. At. Pro. Day.

No. Site. You. Cited. Used. Pro. Day. Numbers.

Jesus Christ.

Edited April 11, 2023 by beekay414

[beekay414]

Just say you were wrong for ******* once.

[HokieHigh]

40 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

All of the top 4 OTs do. They're all really good athletically IMO

even skoronski's biggest red flag - his arm length (32.25 inches) - is slightly better than luke tenuta (32 inches; go hokies). 

 

 

[incognito_man]

12 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

No. Site. You. Cited. Used. Pro. Day. Numbers.

Jesus Christ.

Yikes dude.

You're literally looking right past the point. 

What are "pro day numbers"? There are many people there with stopwatches. There are many "pro day numbers". Different websites have different people as sources. So the sites you found list numbers from one guy. You think of these as the "universal truth pro day numbers", but they are not. They are one opinion/recording (of probably dozens of attendees). Just like other sites have different numbers from different sources. 

One event. Multiple observers. Multiple data sets. Multiple media reportings. Truth somewhere in the middle.

[incognito_man]

15 minutes ago, HokieHigh said:

even skoronski's biggest red flag - his arm length (32.25 inches) - is slightly better than luke tenuta (32 inches; go hokies). 

 

 

That's the 2nd biggest flag among the top 4, I think. Biggest flag is if Broderick Jones is actually good or not. 

[beekay414]

3 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Yikes dude.

You're literally looking right past the point. 

What are "pro day numbers"? There are many people there with stopwatches. There are many "pro day numbers". Different websites have different people as sources. So the sites you found list numbers from one guy. You think of these as the "universal truth pro day numbers", but they are not. They are one opinion/recording (of probably dozens of attendees). Just like other sites have different numbers from different sources. 

One event. Multiple observers. Multiple data sets. Multiple media reportings. Truth somewhere in the middle.

LOL

Yeah, mockdraftable, SI, B/R, all randomly had some sourced time for his 10 yard split and listed it but failed to update his 40 time progress and everything else was identical to the combine. Do you know how ******* absurd that sounds? Talk about looking right past something. It's an error and you ******* ran with it.

You just absolutely cannot admit you were wrong or found the wrong information. You're completely incapable of it so you have to keep expanding on your bull****. You've proven this time and time again. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by beekay414