Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 43 of 45 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 LastLast
Results 631 to 645 of 670
  1. #631
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    43,586
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    I don't know what a "stat sport" is, but football certainly makes use of a ton of stats. They've just held the NFL draft where the use of stats is pretty obvious. If I'm not mistaken, Belichick makes his people write down 14 different stats for every play to find out about the opponents' tendencies.

    Personally I try to make my opinions match reality, so for example it helps to look a snap couts when arguing about DL rotation.
    It means stats carry far less weight in player evaluation because its a conditionally based team sport, not a 1on1 game like baseball. I'm not saying there's nothing insightful in them, but you're not going to get a reliable evaluation of a player or team off of any stat collection. Way too many variables effecting each stat.

    You cite the draft, but there's no GM filling out a card off of stats. It's player evaluation via scouting that carries weight in the decision. Stats may be part of that, but without a football savy mind watching the game tapes and evaluating the surrounding conditions and players....it's useless. Stats don't tell the story.

  2. #632
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    11,467
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    It means stats carry far less weight in player evaluation because its a conditionally based team sport, not a 1on1 game like baseball. I'm not saying there's nothing insightful in them, but you're not going to get a reliable evaluation of a player or team off of any stat collection. Way too many variables effecting each stat.
    But what does that have to do with snap counts?

    The other stat I referenced was DVOA, which is a pretty good game-situation based team evaluation adjusted by opponent. I'm not claiming it's perfect but if there was a difference in running game effectiveness between the Giants' 11-5 and a 3-13 season, it would at least slightly reflect that. I'm not saying the stat proves anything tangible, but it should cast doubt on such a claim. I also don't mean to imply that it is much of a predictor of the Giants' running game in 2018.

  3. #633
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    29,701
    I've been reading up on a lot of stuff saying why the Giants should have taken a QB instead of Barkley. Some of it definitely makes sense, especially the economics part of it.

    The parts I disagree with however are:

    1) I don't agree that an elite RB can't make their teammates better and have a huge impact on an offense. The reason some people point this out is because we haven't seen a lot of teams win a superbowl with an elite RB in recent years, but there are counter arguments that can be made. The bottom line is, there have been plenty of playoff teams and contenders over the years have have leaned on an elite RB and plenty of examples of how valuable said player can be. I'm not going to start naming every single one of these teams because that would take quite a bit of time, but there are definitely plenty of examples such as Gurley on the Rams last year, Elliot on the Cowboys the year before, Lynch on those good Seahawks teams, Bell on the Steelers teams when he's been healthy. Of course there are other reasons those teams had success, but my point is that the RB played a pivotal role. I absolutely think a truly elite RB can make a huge difference for an offense.

    2) I don't agree with the idea that this is the last chance for the Giants to find a good, young, cheap franchise QB. Certainly I understand the value in having such a player, but I think history has showed us there is a multitude of ways of finding such a player and that it's not always the #1 or #2 pick who ends up being the best QB. Look at some of the best QB's in the game today. While a good amount of them are 1st rounders, many of them were not selected with a top 5 pick. QB is perhaps the most difficult position to evaluate. I don't think drafting Darnold or whoever would have been a slam dunk. You are still rolling the dice and you have to commit at least 4 years to said QB in most cases. My big point here is, the most important thing isn't when or where you find your next franchise QB. The most important thing is that you find the right QB, whenever that is and however that is. The Giants passed on one this draft with that #2 pick, but that doesn't mean the search ends. The search is ongoing, as evidence by the fact that they took a QB in the 4th round in this draft. The search is ongoing until they find the right guy to lead the franchise for the next 15 or so years. Drafting Barkley now because you believe he is a generational talent does not prevent you from continuing your search for a true franchise QB moving forward. And you also can't predict that the Giants will never have a top draft pick ever again. If fact, if things go really south with the QB situation in a year or two, they could be right back to making an early draft pick.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  4. #634
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,169
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Do you really believe that?

    They've hardly changed the defense from a personnel perspective; in fact they've lost 3 decent players (JPP, DRC, Kennard) and had one notable addition in Ogletree. They are changing schemes though.

    As for the OL, they've added Solder who's is now the highest paid OT in the NFL but the 5th best OT in the NFC East. They drafted a guard in the 2nd round, who even though I liked him as a prospect, is still a rookie and not from a Power Five conference. They've also let solid players in Richburg and Pugh leave as free agents.
    I really do think that. Barkley is going to make their OL look much better. Plus with Barkley they will be playing more of a ball control offense which is going to protect their defense (which doesnít really need protecting). Then with Barkley and Odell their play action is going to be deadly. I would not be surprised if they have a similar regular season to what the Cowboys had in 2016. The difference is they have a QB that has shown to be clutch.

  5. #635
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    37,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    I really do think that. Barkley is going to make their OL look much better. Plus with Barkley they will be playing more of a ball control offense which is going to protect their defense (which doesnít really need protecting). Then with Barkley and Odell their play action is going to be deadly. I would not be surprised if they have a similar regular season to what the Cowboys had in 2016. The difference is they have a QB that has shown to be clutch.
    You sure the only difference is a QB thatís clutch and not the fact that Dallas had a premier/top rated Oline and the Giants will... not?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  6. #636
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,169
    Quote Originally Posted by koldjerky View Post
    You sure the only difference is a QB thatís clutch and not the fact that Dallas had a premier/top rated Oline and the Giants will... not?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Obviously the OL helped but the Giants should be vastly improved on the OL. Coaching is also going to play a role. If the Giants coaches are committed to pounding the rock there should be no reason that arenít a dominant team this year and they absolutely should challenge for the NFC title.

  7. #637
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    37,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    Obviously the OL helped but the Giants should be vastly improved on the OL. Coaching is also going to play a role. If the Giants coaches are committed to pounding the rock there should be no reason that arenít a dominant team this year and they absolutely should challenge for the NFC title.
    Adding a brand new window to a century old dilapidated house may vastly improve it but still doesn't completely fix it.

    If you want to compare weapons I'd say the Giants of 18 could compare decently to the Cowboys of 16 but I can't dismiss that OL disparity. Solder and (rookie) Hernandez should help but that's some high hopes.

    They'll be a better team for sure though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  8. #638
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    11,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    Obviously the OL helped but the Giants should be vastly improved on the OL. Coaching is also going to play a role. If the Giants coaches are committed to pounding the rock there should be no reason that arenít a dominant team this year and they absolutely should challenge for the NFC title.
    How are they vastly improved on the OL? They replaced two solid players with one solid player and a 2nd round rookie.

  9. #639
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    47,394
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    How are they vastly improved on the OL? They replaced two solid players with one solid player and a 2nd round rookie.
    With OL it's not that simple. It's about where you are replacing.

    They lost what? OC (who was injured a bunch) and RG. Well their backup OC has played enough. The RG was replaced by a second round rookie, who could be better. And they massively upgraded at LT.

    I personally think that improving their OL was a 2 year task, but they have made major strides.

    PROCESSING

  10. #640
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    11,467
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    With OL it's not that simple. It's about where you are replacing.

    They lost what? OC (who was injured a bunch) and RG. Well their backup OC has played enough. The RG was replaced by a second round rookie, who could be better. And they massively upgraded at LT.

    I personally think that improving their OL was a 2 year task, but they have made major strides.
    The Rams going from Greg Robinson to Andrew Whitworth was a massive upgrade.

    Flowers to Solder just isn't.

  11. #641
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    47,394
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    The Rams going from Greg Robinson to Andrew Whitworth was a massive upgrade.

    Flowers to Solder just isn't.
    Yes it is. Flowers is worse than Robinson. Yea Solder isn't as good as Whitworth, but Solder is massively underrated if you don't think it's a massive upgrade.

    For the last 2 years the Giants would have been better served putting traffic cones up for a LT.

    PROCESSING

  12. #642
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4,820
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    The Rams going from Greg Robinson to Andrew Whitworth was a massive upgrade.

    Flowers to Solder just isn't.
    No, it's not the exact same upgrade, but it's a big one nonetheless. Flowers was just that bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    How are they vastly improved on the OL? They replaced two solid players with one solid player and a 2nd round rookie.
    Those two solid players combined for just 12 games in 2017 though, so if we're looking at how much they improved from last year, assuming no injuries to the projected starters, things are definitely looking brighter already. If we're being honest, Richburg never quite settled in and hasn't really looked like the Pro Bowl player that he was at times thought to to be other than that first year he moved to C. I don't doubt that he's talented, he just never made enough impact to be worth a big contract to stay on the roster, and I personally don't think it's entirely his fault for that. I would've loved to keep Pugh as much as the next guy, but being a little tight financially and him being sadly a little injury prone, I don't blame them for wanting to invest that cap space into upgrading the LT. Now, I agree there's still very much room for improvement in rebuilding the OL, and it'll take more than one offseason to do so, but I regard both Solder and Hernandez as great first steps in doing that, and I don't believe those two losses are that big to overcome.

    Also, I personally always thought that McAdoo was just as much to blame for the performance of the OL as the lack of talent was. First week after he gives up the play calling, they go on the road to Denver against what was the #1 rushing defense IIRC, and it looked like quite a completely different blocking unit out there. With Shurmur, most people gave him props for building a competent running game and making an otherwise mediocre OL look serviceable last year for Minny, so I can only imagine he'll only be an upgrade to what McAdoo was, at least in that regard.

  13. #643
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    29,701
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    The Rams going from Greg Robinson to Andrew Whitworth was a massive upgrade.

    Flowers to Solder just isn't.
    You obviously don't realize just how bad Flowers is at LT.

    Flowers to Solder is a MASSIVE upgrade.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  14. #644
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    29,701
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    How are they vastly improved on the OL? They replaced two solid players with one solid player and a 2nd round rookie.
    The problem with Pugh is that he's been injury prone. He's missed a ton of games over the last few years. On top of that, we've have so many problems at the Tackle positions that we've had to move Pugh to RT at times. He spent more time at RT than G last year. Pugh is an ok RT, but he's a pro bowl caliber G when he's healthy. The thing is, our RT was so bad last year that moving Pugh there actually helped the O-line.

    The O-line should be better, not because I think it will be good, but because it was just so bad the last few years. Having a legitimate LT helps a good deal. The group as a whole though, especially the right side, is still one of the biggest concerns on the team. The left side looks much better, although we don't know how good Hernandez will be. He looks like he's NFL ready, but there is no way to know until the games start.

    The hope of course is that Barkley also helps make them look better, but the O-line is definitely a work in progress. He won't be running behind a great O-line though so I would temper expectations when comparing his rookie season to Elliott's. With that said, I think Barkley will make a bigger impact that Elliott as a receiver. They'll find ways to get him the ball in the passing game. Shurmer has a track record of using his RB in the passing game.
    Last edited by Wrigheyes4MVP; 05-03-2018 at 10:23 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  15. #645
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    29,701
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Yes it is. Flowers is worse than Robinson. Yea Solder isn't as good as Whitworth, but Solder is massively underrated if you don't think it's a massive upgrade.

    For the last 2 years the Giants would have been better served putting traffic cones up for a LT.
    Exactly. Flowers probably has been the worst starting LT in the NFL the last 3 years. Meanwhile, Solder has ranged from around average to top 5 at his position over the years. Did the Giants overpay for Solder? Yes. Was it a good signing? Yes. Especially true when you consider that the Giants drafted Barkley and are riding with Eli for one last run. That whole plan would have been a waste if they didn't go out and get the best LT available.

    People can disagree with the Giants approach to this offseason. You can say they should have drafted a QB and started a full rebuild. Whether or not they made the right call probably depends on Eli. But, what you can't say is that they didn't go all in with their plan. They believe Eli still has something left in the tank and they went out and improved the team where they needed to improve it as much as they could. They didn't take a half *** approach. They went all in.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

Page 43 of 45 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •