Another off topic note: PFF only has Willie Gay at 55.4% on the season and projected to get a 1-yr $3.75m contract. We keep thinking he's played his way out of KC because his contract will be price prohibitive. Interesting. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
Now say we woulda taken La Porta, or to your comment Kincaid, in the 1st and still taken Rice in the 2nd... That woulda been pretty spectacular!
That’s what I was talking about. When I suggested we should’ve taken Laporte or Kincaid. [if we could’ve traded up] that would’ve been instead of FAU. Absolutely we need to take rice last year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
I think we're sleeping on Malik Washington a bit.
#1 in missed tackles forced
#1 yards from slot
#2 rec from slot
64.7% contested catch rate
2.6% drop rate with 3 total
3.15 yards per route run
92.4% receiving grade (Harrison Jr 89.6% and Nabers 93.1%)
Look a lot bigger than he's listed out there, plays tough, is known for making clutch plays.
Mentioned him elsewhere as a guy I'd like R4-ish. I think the criticisms are legit but I also think he could be a better slot option than Moore. He aint Dell. Nowhere as shifty. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Man, Couch Potato … appreciate the effort, but I don’t think many people around here place real value on PFF grades.
They’re just not very trustworthy.
I like their simulators a lot more than PFN's though, have to say. No idea why people use them [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Man, Couch Potato … appreciate the effort, but I don’t think many people around here place real value on PFF grades.
They’re just not very trustworthy.
I work as a data analytics and strategy consultant so I probably value their metrics more than others. There's value in evaluating players stats, advanced metrics, and game tape pre draft. I'm not thrilled with their content, honestly, thought there would be a lot more to it. Some of Veach's choices in recent years have seemed to correlate with PFF's data-driven takes so I've been curious for awhile. I'll be looking forward to their draft guide and will post more then.
Is there anything posted so far from PFF that you feel stands out as lacking value? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
I work as a data analytics and strategy consultant so I probably value their metrics more than others. There's value in evaluating players stats, advanced metrics, and game tape pre draft. I'm not thrilled with their content, honestly, thought there would be a lot more to it. Some of Veach's choices in recent years have seemed to correlate with PFF's data-driven takes so I've been curious for awhile. I'll be looking forward to their draft guide and will post more then.
Is there anything posted so far from PFF that you feel stands out as lacking value?
The major disconnect I have with valuing PFF is it's a bunch of guys evaluating the game who don't know the game well, have never played the game, and therefore just do not in any way understand assignments and responsibilities. They are attempting to give evaluations and grades on things they have no concept of in reality. It's like me watching a figure skater and saying well... she landed it so it must have been good or she didn't so it's bad. I have no idea what jump she was attempting if it fits within the schema of the routine, or any concept of the difficulty of it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
The major disconnect I have with valuing PFF is it's a bunch of guys evaluating the game who don't know the game well, have never played the game, and therefore just do not in any way understand assignments and responsibilities. They are attempting to give evaluations and grades on things they have no concept of in reality. It's like me watching a figure skater and saying well... she landed it so it must have been good or she didn't so it's bad. I have no idea what jump she was attempting if it fits within the schema of the routine, or any concept of the difficulty of it.
They definitely provide a unique perspective. To your comment the same has been said about sports commentators for years, but we follow their content. [Reply]
When I watch Coleman and Legette back-to-back I come away thinking Legette is better every time. I really want to like Coleman. Great size, and they obviously saw something in him that made them put him out there for punt returns. I don't see punt returner quickness with him though.
I think Legette's got more explosiveness, better contested catch ability even with him being 2-3" shorter, more top end speed, better hands catching, and better lateral quickness (again, just compared to Coleman). Legette just looks like a much more dynamic guy than Coleman to me.
I'm just not a huge Coleman fan. Maybe the combine will change my mind.
Legette is the type of guy I like to try to find flaws with and nitpick, but then I'd hear his name getting called by some team like Buffalo or Baltimore and think "oh no, that's not good". I could definitely see him being really good. High ceiling, maybe low-ish floor just based on lack of production until this last season? Might take a bit longer than Rice to get up-to-speed in a Reid offense, but if he can, watch out. He's the type of guy who could murder the combine, will be interesting to watch him there. [Reply]