Jump to content

Super Bowl LVII - Philadelphia vs Kansas City


Leader

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

You're #3 guard can't make more than 2% of the cap. But he also can't make less than 1.2% of the cap. 

AND his name cannot be in the bible

Well there goes drafting any Ezekiels.

Edited by Sandy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I love Aaron Jones ... great guy .. really good player, but if you want to win a super bowl you should never pay a running back big dough.  There hasn't been a real high dollar back win a super bowl in a very long time.  We won ours in 2010 with James Starks.

The chiefs used a 7th round rookie for a tonne of their big plays last night, Philly sports radio today was seething at the 6.1 yards a clip they gave up against what was a top 3 D front in football this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

You're #3 guard can't make more than 2% of the cap. But he also can't make less than 1.2% of the cap. 

AND his name cannot be in the bible

I actually buy a lot more of Outpost crap than I put on. But he takes some of to the extreme lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Is randomness a tendency?

https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-anything-truly-random/

I love being philosophical but PackerRaymond is going to shut us down. So back to football. The whole idea of scouting players and making trades, and roster construction is to avoid randomness. We should be talking intentionality. Draft choices are intentional, not random (although we joke about it because they aren't always successful). Intentionality in this case is guided by scouting reports, player interviews, RAS scores, etc. Obviously, since not all draft choices are successful, something is missing. If all necessary data were identified, successfully collected, and properly analyzed, the success rate of draft choices should be near 100%. Since that iss far from the outcome, we say there must be randomness involved, but is that true, or is it failure to identify all the necessary data and properly analyze it?

Roster construction is also intentional. In the age of salary cap where to spend your money is a perfectly legitimate question. Outpost advanced a hypothesis that spending more than 13% of cap space on the QB position it would not be possible to win the Super Bowl. Now there is some disconfirming data, but should the hypothesis be junked? I would argue that things aren't so black and white. Maybe the number needs to be changed to 14% or 15%. Surely there's a limit. You can't spend 50% of your cap number on one player, even if that player is the GOAT QB, and expect to field a competitive team. From an intentionality view point regarding roster construction, it would be good to know what that number is, and what the optimum number is for the QB position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...