| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
skibrett15
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2531
Location: nibelheim
|
 Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:34 pm Post subject: GB Front Office and Athleticism |
 |
|
|
I would say that, prior to 2015 or so, the general consensus here was that this team and the TT regime are basically setting some very base thresholds for height/weight/speed for a position. A perfect example is the 5 10 04 threshold for CB height on the packers. That may very well exclude a few players, but it leaves the majority of DBs still available to picks.
But, if you look at the two most recent drafts, there are an unusually high number of "best sparq" player selections such as Dean Lowry in 2016 or Aaron Jones in 2017.
If you aren't familiar with SPARQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/documentation/
Anyway, I wanted to run through our selections, and show their positional SPARQ ranking:
Kevin King Rank: 1 Score: 142
Josh Jones Rank: 7 Score: 129
Montravius Adams Rank: 21 Score: 109
Vince Biegel: Rank: 35 Score: 123
Jamal Williams Rank: 45 Score: 117
DeAngelo Yancey Rank: 33 Score: 122
Aaron Jones Rank: 3 Score: 136
Kofi Amichia: Rank: 1 Score: 118
Devante Mays Rank: 18 Score 126
Malachi Dupre Rank: 21 Score: 126
2016 Highlights:
Spriggs Rank: 7 Score: 123 (highest sparq for drafted OL)
Dean Lowry rank: 8 (misplaced as an Edge) score: 124
Trevor Davis rank: 12 Score: 128
Fackrell, Martinez, Clark all middle of the road (Clark is lumped in with DE and UTs though, probably stacks better for NT) and Murphy is Unknown.
So, has there been a concerted effort to target these athletes? Clearly there is still some traditional scouting going on, what with Jamaal Williams going before Jones and Yancey before Dupre. Still, to me this has the look of a concerted effort to up the athleticism of the team.
Last edited by skibrett15 on Tue May 02, 2017 11:02 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NormSizedMidget
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17890
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| There's a hell of a lot more to discuss than this but if I didn't pay attention close I would always picture Ted as just this old school numbers be damned type of dude. But he's obviously not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cadmus
Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 2337
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:46 pm Post subject: Re: GB Front Office and Athleticism |
|
|
|
| skibrett15 wrote: | | A perfect example is the 5 10 04 threshold for CB height on the packers. |
Thank you for using a reasonable threshold for CB height instead of being an individual that uses an inane threshold like 5107. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NormSizedMidget
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17890
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Is there also any chance just drafting guys who you think can compete athletically just accidentally coincides with this stuff?
Like they look on tape, damn this kid can move, love him. And that's theoretically what you'll always want.
And then they test well, and you get this stuff. Doesn't that make sense, in theory?
The later you go, the more I would suspect you look at clay with the numbers to mold though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skibrett15
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2531
Location: nibelheim
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NormSizedMidget wrote: | | There's a hell of a lot more to discuss than this but if I didn't pay attention close I would always picture Ted as just this old school numbers be damned type of dude. But he's obviously not. |
I think that's the impression he gives off for sure. People were starting to figure that there's actually a numbers "shell" around the process. I'm wondering now if there isn't an uber-athletic threshold where... you could be an objectively bad college player and still get a draftable grade due to the testing numbers.
To me, it's easy to just "he's a numbers guy" or "he doesn't care bout the numbers" when both types are still looking for athletic players with high college production vs excellent competition at the end of the day. So you need to look for the later rounds when those players are gone to differentiate.
Is he drafting obviously less athletic guys from big schools with production? Is he drafting guys who have a rep as athletic but don't test well?
or is he drafting guys who test well but aren't as productive, or only productive vs bad competition? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lark25
Joined: 01 May 2014
Posts: 397
Location: Aus
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NormSizedMidget
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17890
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| skibrett15 wrote: | | NormSizedMidget wrote: | | There's a hell of a lot more to discuss than this but if I didn't pay attention close I would always picture Ted as just this old school numbers be damned type of dude. But he's obviously not. |
I think that's the impression he gives off for sure. People were starting to figure that there's actually a numbers "shell" around the process. I'm wondering now if there isn't an uber-athletic threshold where... you could be an objectively bad college player and still get a draftable grade due to the testing numbers.
To me, it's easy to just "he's a numbers guy" or "he doesn't care bout the numbers" when both types are still looking for athletic players with high college production vs excellent competition at the end of the day. So you need to look for the later rounds when those players are gone to differentiate.
Is he drafting obviously less athletic guys from big schools with production? Is he drafting guys who have a rep as athletic but don't test well?
or is he drafting guys who test well but aren't as productive, or only productive vs bad competition? |
Kind of like what Palmy said about Kofi to a degree, yeah?
I suppose like your next para it goes both ways. Ya might take a bigger project, biggest risk off the numbers. Then sometimes ya go, okay numbers we don't love, but the kid can play and we think he's safe. It sounds obvious when you break it down like that, but I'd betcha it goes both ways and I would say SPARQ stuff play that out. Kind of like on Biegel.
He seems to have an affinity for small school guys more than the average, but I don't think we saw it this year anyways right? IDK.
I know one thing, I don't think he's a robot like others. It all seems so obvious......after the fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NormSizedMidget
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17890
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PackyAttacky
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 206
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NormSizedMidget wrote: | | lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PackyAttacky
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 206
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Thats the best one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NormSizedMidget
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17890
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PackyAttacky wrote: | | NormSizedMidget wrote: | | lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
|
Had no idea. Is that it?
I talk about remembering AJ in college all the time, and I didn't remember that either. I'm just not that guy, my brain doesn't work that way.
I can tell you what school some 08 late pick was, I can't tell you what their number was, no way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
squire12
Joined: 15 Mar 2013
Posts: 6557
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NormSizedMidget wrote: | | lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
Think Matthews was 47 at USC
_________________
Salary Cap Fantasy Football League
2016 Salary Cap League Rosters |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PackyAttacky
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 206
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NormSizedMidget wrote: | | PackyAttacky wrote: | | NormSizedMidget wrote: | | lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
|
Had no idea. Is that it? |
All the white linebackers except Fackrell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
squire12
Joined: 15 Mar 2013
Posts: 6557
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| squire12 wrote: | | NormSizedMidget wrote: | | lark25 wrote: | | He also has a tendency to draft linebackers that wear #47, that's how I knew Biegel would be a Packer rather than Watt. |
I am terrible at jersey numbers. I couldn't tell you 5 of our top 10 players numbers, not kidding. No clue without looking other than like Jordy, Rodgers. Bak (giggity).
I know Ryan, who else were 47? Since we brought it up. |
Think Matthews was 47 at USC |
As I post that, 3 others beat me to it.
_________________
Salary Cap Fantasy Football League
2016 Salary Cap League Rosters |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skibrett15
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2531
Location: nibelheim
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NormSizedMidget wrote: |
Kind of like what Palmy said about Kofi to a degree, yeah?
I suppose like your next para it goes both ways. Ya might take a bigger project, biggest risk off the numbers. Then sometimes ya go, okay numbers we don't love, but the kid can play and we think he's safe. It sounds obvious when you break it down like that, but I'd betcha it goes both ways and I would say SPARQ stuff play that out. Kind of like on Biegel.
He seems to have an affinity for small school guys more than the average, but I don't think we saw it this year anyways right? IDK.
I know one thing, I don't think he's a robot like others. It all seems so obvious......after the fact. |
Yeah, clearly need to do some comparisons to other NFL teams to make any sort of judgement.
To me, a few picks specifically stand out:
1) Dean Lowry
2) Aaron Jones
3) Jason Spriggs
4) Kofi Amichia
These are all picks at non-need positions, picks that weren't expected, and in Spriggs' case he even traded up to grab. Spriggs was definitely a quality prospect and on the radar as a target in the 2nd, but the trade up for a non-need position makes me flag that one as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
