Pass rushers primed to breakout

[K-9]

25 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I love Oliver.  And it’s good to be enthusiastic.  But I’ll learn that it helps to have reasonable expectations.  Donald might be the greatest  pass rushing DT when it’s all done.  People are trying to say Allen will win the MVP.  It’s just setting yourself up for disappointment.  Oliver could have a Dareus type rookie year and that would be awesome. 

 

And I think you’re a smart poster even when we disagree.  But you really think comparing qb stats from 35 years ago to current day is fair?

Well, I personally don’t have unreasonable expectations. I pretty much take it as it comes. If I had any level of direct influence on the team and their outcomes, perhaps I would. That doesn’t mean I’m above good natured hyperbole from time time, but it’s offered tongue in cheek. Like when I say Allen will be a first ballot HOFer when he’s done, for instance. 

 

Comparisons across eras is always a mistake. Always. But, and I offer this without any animosity intended, you introduced Elway into this discussion about Oliver. 

 

Anyway, I agree there’s a lot to like about Oliver. And my question still stands as to why anyone would say he won’t/can’t be another Donald. Especially when there is little to go by other than their remarkable similarities in physical attributes, most notably their insane athleticism. 

 

 

[Ronin]

13 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

I'm fine with the assessment.  What I find stupid is the following:

 

- Comparing Oliver's college evaluation to Donald as an NFL player, while ignoring what talent evaluators said about Donald in the leadup to the 2014 draft

- Straw-manning by saying that somehow everyone is claiming that Oliver = Donald

- Touting your own draft genius by claiming superior evaluations of 4 players over a 10 year period...if you have to tell people how smart you are, then that means that they can't see it for themselves. Notice that guys like Blokes and Gunner don't need to tell everyone how brilliant their draft evaluations are/were; if you've got the goods then people know it.

 

Oh dude, you're hilarious.  

 

I'm not pointing out my "draft genius" or anything, I'm simply stating that I'm perfectly comfortable with my analyses and for good reason.  I could give a crap whether you care.  Really.  The rest is critical discussion. 

 

And yes, everyone saw for themselves how great and special Spiller would be, or how Watkins would dominate, and how the record-setting Jones would be prolific.  

 

Yeah yeah.  Again, would love to see your assessments of those guys since you brought it up how much time and effort you spend on such things.  

 

I'll assume that those are not forthcoming.   

 

Otherwise, I think we're finished here.  You're getting all personal and I don't care.  We've exhausted our discussion of Oliver in any form it's been carried on.  We wont' agree until the results come in.  

[K-9]

16 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

You're talking about a game during which Texas Tech ran over 100 plays on offense, many of which were explicitly designed to take Oliver's pass rush out of the equation.  It didn't work well early, but around play 90 you could see that Oliver was gassed.

 

Playing nearly 600 snaps 0-tech at 285 lbs over the course of a season and getting doubled nearly 50% of the time, while playing alongside few other draftable defensive pieces, can do that to a guy.

 

I'm fine with the assessment.  What I find stupid is the following:

 

- Comparing Oliver's college evaluation to Donald as an NFL player, while ignoring what talent evaluators said about Donald in the leadup to the 2014 draft

- Straw-manning by saying that somehow everyone is claiming that Oliver = Donald

- Touting your own draft genius by claiming superior evaluations of 4 players over a 10 year period...if you have to tell people how smart you are, then that means that they can't see it for themselves. Notice that guys like Blokes and Gunner don't need to tell everyone how brilliant their draft evaluations are/were; if you've got the goods then people know it.

This is an example of a mitigating circumstance I alluded to in my response to Ronin. I’ll stake my shady reputation on it that EVERYBODY involved in Oliver’s scouting process league wide asked about that game and those plays if they thought it even raised hint of a flag about their assessment of Oliver. 

[thebandit27]

3 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

LOL 

 

So one-on-one was designed to take Oliver out of the pass-rush?  OK, well it worked.  I hope he performs better than that here.  

 

As one.  There are other games too but clearly you'll make excuses for them as well.

 

BTW, would also love to read your takes on Spiller and Watkins.  I know those were favorable because there was no one, and I mean absolutely NO ONE that agreed with my takes.  

 

So say what you want and choose, but works for me.    

 

First off, he was blocked one-on-one on about half of the snaps; it's important that you watch without an agenda (I can type that really fast now that I've written it to you at least 2 dozen times over the past few weeks). Secondly, watch the game.  Tech's offense was designed to get the ball out quickly.  Here's some football 101 for you: get the ball out in less than 2 seconds and the pass rush is severely limited.

 

As for my takes on individual players, I'm not here to lay mine on the table for measurements.  You want to know my takes on individual guys? Go look them up.  This board has a search function.

 

I'll remind you while you tout your genius that Sammy Watkins has the best season by a WR for the Bills in the last half-decade. In the last 2 seasons, in the pass-happy NFL, there have been a cumulative total of 35 WRs that had 1,000 yards. In 2015, Watkins had 1,000 yards on 96 targets in 13 games playing for a team that threw the ball less than any other team in football while catching passes from a career backup.  His problem has been availability more than anything else.

 

But great call on that one.

 

It's easy to point to first-round players and predict that they're busts.  It's actually a 50/50 proposition.  That you've only gotten 4 right in 10 years is astonishingly bad actually.

 

You want to impress me? Tell me a player that you were wrong about.  I'll learn a heckuva a lot more about your ability to scout players from you telling me what traits you saw in a guy that busted when you expected more from him than I will from your chest-thumping.

 

I'll give you an example: @Blokestradamus can scouts guards like nobody's business. He was all over Danny Isidora in the leadup to the 2017 draft.  Izzy ended up going in the 5th round and has been generally lousy (sorry Blokes) for Minnesota.  But do you know what I learned about Blokes in the process?  That he recognizes contact balance and hand usage when he sees it.

 

4 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

Oh dude, you're hilarious.  

 

I'm not pointing out my "draft genius" or anything, I'm simply stating that I'm perfectly comfortable with my analyses and for good reason.  I could give a crap whether you care.  Really.  The rest is critical discussion. 

 

And yes, everyone saw for themselves how great and special Spiller would be, or how Watkins would dominate, and how the record-setting Jones would be prolific.  

 

Yeah yeah.  Again, would love to see your assessments of those guys since you brought it up how much time and effort you spend on such things.  

 

I'll assume that those are not forthcoming.   

 

Otherwise, I think we're finished here.  You're getting all personal and I don't care.  We've exhausted our discussion of Oliver in any form it's been carried on.  We wont' agree until the results come in.  

 

Yes, you are trotting out your draft record as though it has any relevance in this discussion.  "I was right about Spiller/Watkins/etc and nobody else agreed with me, but I'm cool with it" as though it's going to have some impact on me.

 

You want my draft evaluations? They're on the board for all to see. Like I said: if you have the goods, you don't need to trumpet your own record.

[Ronin]

4 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

You want my draft evaluations? They're on the board for all to see. Like I said: if you have the goods, you don't need to trumpet your own record.

 

I'm stupid and ignorant, remember.  

 

Send me the links to your Spiller, Watkins, Zay Jones, Lawson, and Ragland draft reviews.  

[Stank_Nasty]

Ronin doing Ronin things, I see.....

 

CLASSIC.

Edited June 25, 2019 by Stank_Nasty

[thebandit27]

Just now, Ronin said:

 

I'm stupid and ignorant, remember.  

 

Send me the links to your Spiller, Watkins, Zay Jones, Lawson, and Ragland draft reviews.  

 

Ignorant regarding how I grade prospects? Yes.  I never said you were stupid; I said that you did something stupid.  It happens; we all do it from time to time.  Don't believe me? Have kids.  You'll see.

 

As for my evaluations, search the board.  It's not hard.

[Seasons1992]

16 hours ago, CommonCents said:

Did Canada legalize cocaine?

 

[dave mcbride]

15 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Im a big fan of Jerry, don't get me wrong, but he did not have 10 sacks in 2014.  In 9 career seasons, he has one season of 10 sacks and it was in 2013.  In fact he only has more than 7 twice in his 9 year career.  Look for yourself here:  https://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13245/jerry-hughes

 

So his last double digit season was 5 years ago, and the last 4 seasons he averaged 5 sacks.  So a 12 to 15 sack season would be a breakout IMO. 

He absolutely had 10 in 2014. There was a misattribution of a sack in the final game against the Pats, but the official scorers ultimately (and correctly) credited him with the half-sack (he was the lead guy on the sack). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HughJe99.htm and http://www.nfl.com/player/jerryhughes/496796/profile. ESPN is wrong. Here's the box score: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201412280nwe.htm.

Edited June 25, 2019 by dave mcbride

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, Ronin said:

 

I'm stupid and ignorant, remember.  

 

Send me the links to your Spiller, Watkins, Zay Jones, Lawson, and Ragland draft reviews.  

Of his entire post.....:THIS is what you quote and respond too?  Oh boy.  

[Ronin]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

Ignorant regarding how I grade prospects? Yes.  I never said you were stupid; I said that you did something stupid.  It happens; we all do it from time to time.  Don't believe me? Have kids.  You'll see.

 

As for my evaluations, search the board.  It's not hard.

 

I never said anything about you personally being ignorant, please don't put words in my mouth.  I try my best to keep personal insults out of the mix of what I prefer to be civil conversation.  If something I said was construed as such, I apologize.  Often times I generalize and it's taken personally.  Imagine that in a forum.  LOL 

 

Otherwise, as with you, I may point out that a method, analysis, or something said was not wise, is foolish, etc., but again, I do my damdest to ensure that I don't violate the ToS.  

 

I did search, it didn't go back that far.  Same here, search on mine.  Many of mine from former days were online in numerous places.  

 

LOL on the kids.  

[CommonCents]

2 hours ago, ROCBillsBeliever said:

 

Inconclusive, but the ex-mayor of Toronto was a known white-noser ???

Tis The Great White North. 

[thebandit27]

1 minute ago, Ronin said:

 

I never said anything about you personally being ignorant, please don't put words in my mouth.  I try my best to keep personal insults out of the mix of what I prefer to be civil conversation.  If something I said was construed as such, I apologize.  Often times I generalize and it's taken personally.  Imagine that in a forum.  LOL 

 

Otherwise, as with you, I may point out that a method, analysis, or something said was not wise, is foolish, etc., but again, I do my damdest to ensure that I don't violate the ToS.  

 

I did search, it didn't go back that far.  Same here, search on mine.  Many of mine from former days were online in numerous places.  

 

LOL on the kids.  

 

You didn't.  I said that you didn't know anything about my approach to draft grades, and that's the end of that.

 

I've never taken issue with your evaluations; I only ever said that pointing out a few times you were right as though it should give your opinion any greater emphasis doesn't mean much to me.  You have an opinion, and that's fine.

 

If you want a peak at how I evaluate players, the LB thread from the 2016 draft (linked below) is a good sample space.  Lots of discussion about different prospects, what systems they do/don't fit, how the position of off-ball 'backer is changing in the NFL, etc

 

 

[CommonCents]

9 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

You didn't.  I said that you didn't know anything about my approach to draft grades, and that's the end of that.

 

I've never taken issue with your evaluations; I only ever said that pointing out a few times you were right as though it should give your opinion any greater emphasis doesn't mean much to me.  You have an opinion, and that's fine.

 

If you want a peak at how I evaluate players, the LB thread from the 2016 draft (linked below) is a good sample space.  Lots of discussion about different prospects, what systems they do/don't fit, how the position of off-ball 'backer is changing in the NFL, etc

 

 

Dang was hoping you’d find the post Ragland pick thread! I wish I knew how to properly use the search function. 

[Ronin]

2 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

You didn't.  I said that you didn't know anything about my approach to draft grades, and that's the end of that.

 

I've never taken issue with your evaluations; I only ever said that pointing out a few times you were right as though it should give your opinion any greater emphasis doesn't mean much to me.  You have an opinion, and that's fine.

 

If you want a peak at how I evaluate players, the LB thread from the 2016 draft (linked below) is a good sample space.  Lots of discussion about different prospects, what systems they do/don't fit, how the position of off-ball 'backer is changing in the NFL, etc

 

 

 

I didn't say that I did know your methods.  Again, my comments are generally meant.  As well, I've not seen yours, that's why I say that "I've not seen ..."  

 

I'd love to read 'em.  I'd even love to discuss, but forums are toxic for group noise and mob-mentality.  You have to admit however, that just about everything you read about draft picks is little more than parroted-back stuff that's out there in the mainstream.  

 

Quote

I've never taken issue with your evaluations; I only ever said that pointing out a few times you were right as though it should give your opinion any greater emphasis doesn't mean much to me.  You have an opinion, and that's fine.

 

That's fine, and noted.  But the majority of people here do take issue with them.  And truly, I give a crap about being right.  I simply call it as I see it.  But people LOVE to cite the so-called "experts" which I've pointed out many times in the past had their heads so far up their tailpipes that it's amazing that they're still regarded as "experts."  And around here, it's funny how some are experts when their opinions align with the mob/pop mentality, yet despite being correct way more often than not, when their opinions don't align then they're morons.  I won't mention any names, it's pointless.  

 

I also don't expect you to agree with me.  Few ever do when I'm as critical as I am re: Allen & Oliver.  Again, absolutely no one agreed with me on Spiller or Watkins, no one, anywhere, nationally, regional, here, anywhere.  So I fully expect that.  What I don't appreciate is being spoken down to as if I'm some kind of ######, particularly given my track record and being lectured as if my methods haven't worked in the past or assumptions that my track record is abysmal when it's the polar opposite.  That's fine, but please, for the people doing it don't expect me to engage them on anything even approaching a regular basis.  Since most of them cannot control themselves as such, I take it upon myself to put them on ignore, then they get angry and throw out other challenges that I can't see etc.  I mean honestly, talk about being OCD.  

 

You and I get into heated exchanges, but you don't do that.  I enjoy the back-n-forth generally speaking.  

 

Also, keep in mind, that I may respond to you, but in the meantime I may reply to someone else where the context isn't quite the same, but in the same thread those replies can easily be erroneously merged such that misunderstandings arise, which is why I prefer to weed out much of that "noise" and which is why I much prefer independent discussion via PMs or e-mails or whatever.   Unfortunately most people prefer the glass house and mob scene that is the forum, so if you want to discuss there isn't much choice.  

 

Strangely, most of the people I've engaged with in the past in that way simply don't care anymore.  When I call them to talk they don't even really know what's going on with the team anymore, they've dropped off and are in "show me" mode.  I am too but I love analysis.  

 

I've really gotta run and get some biz stuff done, but I'm eager to read from that link.  I'll get back to you.  Perhaps PM if you don't mind.  

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

18 hours ago, whatdrought said:

Has anyone else wondered about the possibility of sending a pick to Jacksonville for their Yannick Nsgsjgksdbgkjsfgbkjgfnjk? I feel like with Campbell and now Allen, he's a bit of an odd man out who will be wanting some cash money while they have none. 

 

......way too costly to fit that name on a damn uniform....would need two rows.............

[Ronin]

28 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

 

 

Am I mistaken, I just took a peek, unless I'm missing something that thread ends with the last post being before that Draft even happened. 

 

I don't care about your takes on a variety of undrafted players, specifically I'm only interested in the players we drafted in rounds 1-3, days 1 & 2.  

 

Check me if I'm wrong.  

 

As well, don't take this wrong, but I also don't have time to scour 24 pages for two or three of your posts.  

 

There used to be a way, perhaps a long time ago, where one could search someone else's post by date.  I always look for draft stuff within the first two or three days after a draft.  When I searched on yours it only went back about three months.  Am I not doing something right in searching?  Is there another way to find dated posts by someone?  

 

 

Edited June 25, 2019 by Ronin

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

He absolutely had 10 in 2014. There was a misattribution of a sack in the final game against the Pats, but the official scorers ultimately (and correctly) credited him with the half-sack (he was the lead guy on the sack). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HughJe99.htm and http://www.nfl.com/player/jerryhughes/496796/profile. ESPN is wrong. Here's the box score: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201412280nwe.htm.

 

We are talking a half a sack here, and that was still 5 seasons ago.  And he’s averaged 5 sacks in the 4 seasons since that season and 5.2 sacks over his 9 year career.  So if he hits 12+ this year, that qualifies as a breakout from a guy averaging 5 in my book.  

[thebandit27]

14 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

Am I mistaken, I just took a peek, unless I'm missing something that thread ends with the last post being before that Draft even happened. 

 

I don't care about your takes on a variety of undrafted players, specifically I'm only interested in the players we drafted in rounds 1-3, days 1 & 2.  

 

Check me if I'm wrong.  

 

As well, don't take this wrong, but I also don't have time to scour 24 pages for two or three of your posts.  

 

There used to be a way, perhaps a long time ago, where one could search someone else's post by date.  I always look for draft stuff within the first two or three days after a draft.  When I searched on yours it only went back about three months.  Am I not doing something right in searching?  Is there another way to find dated posts by someone?  

 

 

 

There's about 3 full pages of Ragland discussion in that thread alone.  Not sure why my post-draft posts (which I can't find) need to be provided to prove that I didn't change my mind when the Bills picked him.

 

I don't bother with what people say post-draft about a prospect...people tend to let the lens of the when/where a guy is selected color their view of the prospect.  Not me.  If I say a guy is one thing before he's drafted, then I'm not going to reverse course 2 months later because a certain team picked him in a certain round.

 

Perfect example: I say that I like Robbie Anderson as a 3rd round pick pre-draft, then he goes undrafted and gets signed by one of the worst-run organizations in the game.  I'm standing by my evaluation because I saw what I saw.  Does that mean I'm going to be right? No. It means that I stand by what I saw.

 

Same goes for Dak Prescott.  I had him as an UDFA because I didn't like his work in the pocket or his throwing mechanics.  He went in the 4th round to a team with Will McClay running their draft board.  McClay is, IMO, the best personnel guy in the NFL.  I don't change my evaluation because I saw what I saw.  Here we are 3 years later, and it turns out I'm dead wrong on Dak.  McClay was right.

[Victory Formation]

I think Shaq Lawson will get 6+ sacks as well, could see him notch as many as 8 if everything goes his way. Many folks say he is leaving town, but I'm not so sure. Would like to see him stay on a team friendly deal.