mi_keys
9 years ago

There is nothing that says a 7'6 WR can't be found... there is no issue with height being a bad thing. However, there is an issue with not enough speed being an issue and you know that and I know that.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Not even remotely the point. I'm not saying you couldn't find a 7'6" receiver. I'm not saying height is a bad thing. I literally said the number was irrelevant, that this arbitrarily threshold could be read into however someone wanted, but that it wasn't a meaningful statistic.

It was selected to illustrate that you could read into a meaningless statistic something that was false or irrelevant. You proceeded to do just that.

Most guys who run 4.65+ aren't going to be WR's. Correct?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Yes. Per my first response, I posted a sample size that suggests very few receivers run slower than 4.65. Assuming that sample size is remotely representative, very few receivers run slower than 4.65.

Why is it so wrong to be concerned when we have guys who are closer to it rather than further away? I don't think Davante Adams can't be a very good WR because of his 4.56 speed.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You've established no evidence that suggests we should be concerned with a 4.56 second 40. None. Maybe it is out there. But if it is, you've not made the case.

However, I think he'd be an even better and more attractive one if he ran 4.36. Right?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Straw man. No one is arguing that, all other relevant factors being equal, that being faster wouldn't help a receiver. This is true if you say that all else being equal a higher vertical or a better shuttle time or a longer broad jump or a higher bench press or a better wonderlic score wouldn't be beneficial. This argument doesn't warrant one of those statistics being taken head and shoulders above the others.

Would the Packers have ever picked up Sam Shields if he ran in the 4.6 range? No...he was added for his unique gift of speed.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I like how when it's undrafted free agent Sam Shields, he's given a chance because he's fast; but when it's undrafted free agent Jarrett Boykin, he fell through the draft because he's slow.


I'm not sure what the issue is with drafting it instead of UDFA'ing it?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



No one said there's an issue with drafting speed.

Again, I was hopeful we'd find guys who were great prospects up high who had very good speed.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



No issue with people having a personal preference for speed.

We did not. We found two bottom end guys speed wise. That's disappointing to me...

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Ok.

Dix can be thrown in there, also. Another middling speed guy. You aren't bothered by middle to low end speed prospects and I am.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



And here's where people start to take issue. All you talk about is 40s, which are only a proxy for playing speed, and you completely discount all of the other factors that go into a good player. THAT's what people have hammered you for.

I'm bothered by someone who is slower and has no other redeeming qualities (or not enough redeeming qualities to net out as an above average to good player). I'm also bothered by someone who is fast but can't tackle, catch, block, hit or read the game.

Just a different view between you and me. I get the Jerry Rice example...painfully Boykin type slow and one of the best of all time. I can only imagine how much more dominant he would've been running like Randy Moss.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Or how much more dominant with a higher vertical. Or a quicker release. Or more strength. Or more ability to break tackles. Or even more sure hands. Or more agility. Or a better understanding of the game. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Born and bred a cheesehead
uffda udfa
9 years ago
I've always been bemused when people use the line by line response technique. I guess when it's done being used they feel like they've really showed the other person.

What evidence do I need to present? You said I've offered none. The point that you and others haven't acknowledged when it comes to speed is that is a HUGE differentiator among scouts and GM's when they set out to draft talent. How many times have you heard... "he would've gone higher if he ran a better 40?" How many? You seem to take issue with what NFL talent evaluators value very highly. I happen to be on the side of the guys who do this for a living that it is a vital component when looking at a prospect. Chris Borland was bantied about over and over regarding his limited athletic traits... "If not for his.... this kid's a 1st rounder"... he was slow, and also short. Yes, the balance of what he brought to the table still netted a decent draft status but, again, with better speed he's going much higher.

If you're studying WR's and you think you might need one MOST franchises are going to be looking for ones with excellent speed. Again, a guy like Robinson from Penn State... "he would've been a 1st rounder if he ran better"...excellent skills...not fast=not a 1st rounder. We select a guy who nets 4.56 when the guys I really liked timed much faster, as, again, we have a stable of middling speed guys. You have turned my disappointment with the turtles we drafted into the idea that I worship 40 times. If we drafted a couple of 260lbers to play DE/NT I would've lamented we didn't get guys with the size needed to be effective. Would I then be worshiping size? No, I would be expressing my disappointment that I felt we took undersized guys when there were more attractive guys available with size.


UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


StarrMax1
9 years ago


I'm lost,

I was looking for opinions on Chris Harper.

?????????????????????????????????

He will surprise everyone if he gets that hammy healed by training camp and will be The packers #4 receiver at the beginning of the season.

uffda udfa
9 years ago

I'm lost,

I was looking for opinions on Chris Harper.

?????????????????????????????????

Originally Posted by: StarrMax1 



Slow. 😆

EDIT: In fairness, he ran 4.38 at his pro day...and was also the guy who did the most reps on the bench for WR's with 20. So, he's plenty strong which is what he's said is his calling card. Plus, he's a converted QB...that reminds me of one of my old pre-season favs, Carlyle Holiday... or even Anquan Boldin.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


StarrMax1
9 years ago

Slow. 😆

EDIT: In fairness, he ran 4.38 at his pro day...and was also the guy who did the most reps on the bench for WR's with 20. So, he's plenty strong which is what he's said is his calling card. Plus, he's a converted QB...that reminds me of one of my old pre-season favs, Carlyle Holiday... or even Anquan Boldin.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I really don't care what these guys ran the 40 in in their underwear.

After the draft that is one of the most useless stats there is.

Quickness, agility, hand-eye coordination, hand strength, are just a few factors that are much more important than any 40yd time.

I'll take a guy who can run a perfect route every time over pure speed any day.



play2win
9 years ago

I've always been bemused when people use the line by line response technique. I guess when it's done being used they feel like they've really showed the other person.

What evidence do I need to present? You said I've offered none. The point that you and others haven't acknowledged when it comes to speed is that is a HUGE differentiator among scouts and GM's when they set out to draft talent. How many times have you heard... "he would've gone higher if he ran a better 40?" How many? You seem to take issue with what NFL talent evaluators value very highly. I happen to be on the side of the guys who do this for a living that it is a vital component when looking at a prospect. Chris Borland was bantied about over and over regarding his limited athletic traits... "If not for his.... this kid's a 1st rounder"... he was slow, and also short. Yes, the balance of what he brought to the table still netted a decent draft status but, again, with better speed he's going much higher.

If you're studying WR's and you think you might need one MOST franchises are going to be looking for ones with excellent speed. Again, a guy like Robinson from Penn State... "he would've been a 1st rounder if he ran better"...excellent skills...not fast=not a 1st rounder. We select a guy who nets 4.56 when the guys I really liked timed much faster, as, again, we have a stable of middling speed guys. You have turned my disappointment with the turtles we drafted into the idea that I worship 40 times. If we drafted a couple of 260lbers to play DE/NT I would've lamented we didn't get guys with the size needed to be effective. Would I then be worshiping size? No, I would be expressing my disappointment that I felt we took undersized guys when there were more attractive guys available with size.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



For F sake! Quit your bitching. You've said all of this enough already.
mi_keys
9 years ago

What evidence do I need to present? You said I've offered none.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You don't NEED to do anything. You can post pictures of kittens blowing bubbles for all I care.

The point that you and others haven't acknowledged when it comes to speed is that is a HUGE differentiator among scouts and GM's when they set out to draft talent... You seem to take issue with what NFL talent evaluators value very highly... I happen to be on the side of the guys who do this for a living that it is a vital component when looking at a prospect.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



But then don't claim that everyone else is wrong and make some vain appeal to authority when the evidence doesn't back your assertions; and then act incredulous when people challenge your opinion.

BTW, Borland had several red flags including injury history. One team removed him from their board due to concern he'd have to have surgery again on his left shoulder where a screw from a past surgery has moved. He was still a 3rd rounder.
Born and bred a cheesehead
nerdmann
9 years ago
I bet Janis beats out Harper. lol
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
play2win
9 years ago

I bet Janis beats out Harper. lol

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



That's the thing. Our WR unit is insanely deep right now. Harper could beat out Boykin, Adams could beat out Boykin. Janis could easily make the final 53. His size and speed are too good, and he showed some solid hands in securing passes. Who knows where this will go? Boykin will be in a real fight to stay the #3 WR.

I think Dorsey, White and Gillett have the biggest uphill battles. Chris Harper is definitely in the mix, and I think Abby and Janis are too.

Plus, Janis has a great 40 time.
uffda udfa
9 years ago

You don't NEED to do anything. You can post pictures of kittens blowing bubbles for all I care.



But then don't claim that everyone else is wrong and make some vain appeal to authority when the evidence doesn't back your assertions; and then act incredulous when people challenge your opinion.

BTW, Borland had several red flags including injury history. One team removed him from their board due to concern he'd have to have surgery again on his left shoulder where a screw from a past surgery has moved. He was still a 3rd rounder.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



Almost everyone is wrong. 40 time is highly valued when it comes to the drafting of prospects. To skewer me for valuing them, also, is ironic.

The evidence doesn't back my assertions? No, there is no evidence that backs yours. It probably matters, though, exactly what issue we're debating. I'm pointing to the idea that the NFL community values 40 times very highly. Your rail against me, is perceived, by me, as a rail against the NFL community which I'm not a part of.

You can try to obfuscate the issues with Borland but you know his 40 time was a monumental negative against him. Let me interject Michael Sam into this discussion. This has been painted as an issue as something other than what it actually is. Go look at Michael Sam's 3 cone time and then see where it fits among other prospects. I don't need a lecture from you, and others, how 3 cone isn't really important. Just look at his number and do a little research and you'll have a giant hint as to why he went undrafted.

Will be interesting to see what the Packers value more... A big strong WR like Harper, or a speedy measurables guy like Janis. Unless Abbrederis goes Ricky Elmore, he's a lock to make the 53 to me.

Maybe, they'll value neither and both won't make it.


EDIT: Here's a GREAT piece on the 40's history:

40 time history and evolution (mercurynews.com) With millions of dollars riding on a prospect's draft position and with draft position partly dependent on the 40, combine training centers have sprouted up across the country. Two of the best-known are the IMG Academy in Bradenton, Florida, and Athletes' Performance Institute in Phoenix.

"I look at it this way: Film and statistics are like a player's grade-point average, and the combine results are like the SATs," said Spitz, who attended Monte Vista High and was a hammer thrower at USC.

"And at the combine, the 40 is everything."


UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Fan Shout
dfosterf (34m) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (48m) : Yes
Zero2Cool (1h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (4h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (4h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (7h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (8h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (18h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
37m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.