uffda udfa
9 years ago

Um, is this the offseason? 😆 😆 😆

More than an entire page of posts in a Chris Harper thread dedicated to Charles Johnson? Who in the fuck is Charles Johnson? I mean, really, a guy we drafted late, never saw play, hung onto via IR for a year and waived, picked up by the world beater Browns.

As worthless as 7th round picks may be perceived to be, in walks Jeff Janis...

Some picks work. Some picks don't.

Every team invests heavily in gaining more or better draft info than their competitors. Scouting staffs and their evaluations, along with scheduled visits for private workouts, etc give teams their own info on players to go along with the canned info we fans get in Combines and pro days. This accounts for teams stacking their draft boards differently than others.

Some fans wanted heads to roll after our 3rd round selections this year. Were they reaches? We can't really know. If there are 5-8 other teams below us who feel the same player is rising on their board and we take him 10-20 spots ahead of their picks to insure we secure the player, is it really a reach?

Maybe our scouting staff feels the difference between other players on their board near to this selection is negligible based on their millions of $ worth of research.

Talents in scouting vary as widely as talents in playing the game. That is what heightens the fun of the offseason to me with regards to FA, the draft, and UDFA, and we won't know who trumps who until well after the season starts.

July seems very, very far away...

Originally Posted by: play2win 



I'm just shocked you've forgotten who Charles Johnson was....I would've thought you had him pegged as better than Sterling and the best ever to play in Green Bay without ever seeing him play a regular season snap for the Packers. Nah, you would never do such a thing. 😆

sschind... Bust me all day every day. Makes it fun. I want a guy who can run... really fast. I know it continually is discounted here, but think Sam Shields. I loved when we grabbed him. He had speed beyond belief. He wasn't even drafted and Joe Whitt was saying he had more talent than any 1st rounder from that draft he didn't get taken in. Bold, bold words. I recall that YouTube clip where he ran that KO reverse for a TD vs. our beloved Badgers. If you've never seen it... do yourself a favor and go watch it. We have a nice WR group with some great skill set but the one subset that is missing is pure speed. Janis has that. Harper doesn't. Harper is just another guy with middling speed. Diversify the portfolio!

Oh, and here's that clip... called back by penalty, but watch the entire clip to see just how far and how fast he ran.




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."


play2win
9 years ago

I'm just shocked you've forgotten who Charles Johnson was....I would've thought you had him pegged as better than Sterling and the best ever to play in Green Bay without ever seeing him play a regular season snap for the Packers. Nah, you would never do such a thing. 😆


Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Yep. Completely forgot who he was. 🙄

You are mistaken in saying that people here do not appreciate, or "discount" speed. Everyone here wants the fastest players with the best hands, abilities and instincts for the game.

Unfortunately, you don't seem to want to acknowledge that a player's 40 time might not exactly be completely and fully indicative of his on field speed, game speed, with all of his gear on, running on turf. Nor that plenty of track stars in 40 times don't necessarily make exceptional football players.

Regardless, I do think we all want exactly the same thing for the Packers. Players who are fast, instinctual, with great ball skills, and highly motivated to be the best they can possibly be at their positions.
DakotaT
9 years ago
Every time Uffda goes on his speed rants, I think of guys like Willie Gault, Troy Williamson, Hayward Bey, Renaldo Nehimiah - you know, track stars that can't catch or play football. Then I think about that slow piece of shit Jerry Rice and if could have only unhitched the plow when he was on the field.

Just give me the guys that can catch the fuckin ball when it hits them between the numbers.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
9 years ago

Every time Uffda goes on his speed rants, I think of guys like Willie Gault, Troy Williamson, Hayward Bey, Renaldo Nehimiah - you know, track stars that can't catch or play football. Then I think about that slow piece of shit Jerry Rice and if could have only unhitched the plow when he was on the field.

Just give me the guys that can catch the fuckin ball when it hits them between the numbers.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Driver was a track guy. Then again he had his share of drops earlier in his career.
“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.”
uffda udfa
9 years ago

Yep. Completely forgot who he was. 🙄

You are mistaken in saying that people here do not appreciate, or "discount" speed. Everyone here wants the fastest players with the best hands, abilities and instincts for the game.

Unfortunately, you don't seem to want to acknowledge that a player's 40 time might not exactly be completely and fully indicative of his on field speed, game speed, with all of his gear on, running on turf. Nor that plenty of track stars in 40 times don't necessarily make exceptional football players.

Regardless, I do think we all want exactly the same thing for the Packers. Players who are fast, instinctual, with great ball skills, and highly motivated to be the best they can possibly be at their positions.

Originally Posted by: play2win 



The things you've ascribed to me are false. Use the search function on 40 times and my posts regarding them. The part about you stating that track stars don't make great football players is especially false. I've never come anywhere near contending they do or have. What I have tried to consistently say is I want the Packers to feature at least ONE WR who has blazing speed. Sadly, we routinely trot out a group that doesn't feature a burner.

This little blurb from rotoviz.com was interesting when it comes to speed:

As I mentioned, Boldin and Mike Clayton are the only wide receivers to post slower than 4.65 40 and have a top 30 wide receiver season since 1999. When speaking of Boldin and Rice, what you’re pointing out isn’t that a slower WR can succeed; you’re also pointing out exactly how rare it is for a slower WR to post usable fantasy numbers. It isn’t that it can’t be done, it’s just that it’s rare when it does happen.

As that little blurb points out, it is very rare for a slow WR to fare well at NFL level. The Packer fan that wants to shout...Boykin!...Boykin! doesn't realize how truly rare that is that he is able to produce as he does.

What do you routinely hear about NFL WR's when they get older? They lost their legs and can't run anymore... clearly speed is very important. I have never said it is the only thing that is important but it is critical. AD ain't AD without his speed... Megatron ain't megatron without his either.

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."


mi_keys
9 years ago

The things you've ascribed to me are false. Use the search function on 40 times and my posts regarding them. The part about you stating that track stars don't make great football players is especially false. I've never come anywhere near contending they do or have. What I have tried to consistently say is I want the Packers to feature at least ONE WR who has blazing speed. Sadly, we routinely trot out a group that doesn't feature a burner

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



P2W can correct me if I'm wrong but he's not claiming you literally stated track stars don't make great football players. The comment about track stars comes from the inordinate amount of attention you give 40 times. It's taking the piss.

You seem obsessed with 40 times to an unhealthy level. If 40 times could be manifested as a woman I could almost see you sneaking into her house while she's out and stealing her finger nail clippings. It's creepy.

This little blurb from rotoviz.com was interesting when it comes to speed:

As I mentioned, Boldin and Mike Clayton are the only wide receivers to post slower than 4.65 40 and have a top 30 wide receiver season since 1999. When speaking of Boldin and Rice, what you’re pointing out isn’t that a slower WR can succeed; you’re also pointing out exactly how rare it is for a slower WR to post usable fantasy numbers. It isn’t that it can’t be done, it’s just that it’s rare when it does happen.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



When I compiled the 40 times of all 34 receivers taken in the 2014 draft, only 1 had a 40 time slower than 4.65 (Jarvis Landry, and he has a pro day time at 4.58). 1 in 34.

I don't know how that compares to other years because I haven't pulled them. That said, I'd bet the sample size of wide receivers with a 40 time slower than 4.65 is quite small. If so, then it's not surprising that the subset of wide receivers posting top 30 seasons also contains a small percentage of receivers with a 40 time slower than 4.65. It's ultimately not a very revealing or meaningful statistic with zero context.

To put it another way with a slightly more extreme example, I could say no receiver taller than 7'6" has posted a top 30 season since 1999. Someone could read into that what they want: that being shorter than 7'6" must somehow be advantageous for NFL receivers. Yet, it wouldn't actually mean anything because no receiver in the league is taller than 7'6".

AD ain't AD without his speed... Megatron ain't megatron without his either.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Both of those players are so much more than just their 40 times.

Born and bred a cheesehead
uffda udfa
9 years ago

P2W can correct me if I'm wrong but he's not claiming you literally stated track stars don't make great football players. The comment about track stars comes from the inordinate amount of attention you give 40 times. It's taking the piss.

You seem obsessed with 40 times to an unhealthy level. If 40 times could be manifested as a woman I could almost see you sneaking into her house while she's out and stealing her finger nail clippings. It's creepy.



When I compiled the 40 times of all 34 receivers taken in the 2014 draft, only 1 had a 40 time slower than 4.65 (Jarvis Landry, and he has a pro day time at 4.58). 1 in 34.

I don't know how that compares to other years because I haven't pulled them. That said, I'd bet the sample size of wide receivers with a 40 time slower than 4.65 is quite small. If so, then it's not surprising that the subset of wide receivers posting top 30 seasons also contains a small percentage of receivers with a 40 time slower than 4.65. It's ultimately not a very revealing or meaningful statistic with zero context.

To put it another way with a slightly more extreme example, I could say no receiver taller than 7'6" has posted a top 30 season since 1999. Someone could read into that what they want: that being shorter than 7'6" must somehow be advantageous for NFL receivers. Yet, it wouldn't actually mean anything because no receiver in the league is taller than 7'6".



Both of those players are so much more than just their 40 times.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



Yes, both those players are more than their 40 times, but they wouldn't be what they are without them which is the point.

Your 7'6 comment seems irrelevant to this discussion. There are time constraints beyond which a guy will all but be guaranteed of not being successful as an NFL WR. 4.65 is the threshold used in that piece quoted. I gave you a graph earlier that had 10 years worth of data.

I think you'll find, if you use the search function, that my perspective on 40 times is right on the money, not obsessive even though you feel that way because the majority of you are obsessed in the other direction as it doesn't really matter much. This all started with our drafting a 4.56 and 4.87 guy in the draft in the first 3 rounds and my disappointment with it. Not sure how many times I need to say it but I was hopeful for a guy with unique speed...not another mid 4.5 guy...got enough guys in 4.5 range.

I'm thrilled with the Jeff Janis selection. A rare athlete. My kind of guy. Hoping he can play, too.

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."


mi_keys
9 years ago

Your 7'6 comment seems irrelevant to this discussion. There are time constraints beyond which a guy will all but be guaranteed of not being successful as an NFL WR. 4.65 is the threshold used in that piece quoted.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



And you missed the point. 7'6" is irrelevant because no receiver is 7'6" or taller. 4.65 is irrelevant if almost no receiver was clocked at slower than 4.65. In such a case they might as well have said receivers running slower than an 8 second 40. It does almost nothing in establishing the correlation of 40 times and success as an NFL receiver, let alone any potential causal effects.


I gave you a graph earlier that had 10 years worth of data.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Which watered the data down into averages of arbitrarily selected draft pick ranges, giving no context to sample size, medians, outliers or what the distribution actually looks like. As such, it had almost no value in the context of showing how 40 times were correlated to where players are selected in the draft.



Born and bred a cheesehead
uffda udfa
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.

Most guys who run 4.65+ aren't going to be WR's. Correct? 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. However, I think he'd be an even better and more attractive one if he ran 4.36. Right?

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. I'm not sure what the issue is with drafting it instead of UDFA'ing it? Again, I was hopeful we'd find guys who were great prospects up high who had very good speed. We did not. We found two bottom end guys speed wise. That's disappointing to me... 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. 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.
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."


play2win
9 years ago

The things you've ascribed to me are false.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



No, they are not.
Fan Shout
dfosterf (9h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (16h) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (17h) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (17h) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (21h) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (23h) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (23h) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (23h) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (23h) : Against tbd
dfosterf (23h) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (23h) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (23h) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (23h) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (23h) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (23h) : 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 .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Swivel hip drop is banned
dfosterf (25-Mar) : The hip drop enforcement will be in the form of fines, etc. Not flags
dfosterf (25-Mar) : A major foul will be enforced on the offense if there are offsetting penalties in a change of possession situation
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Teams will receive a 3rd challenge if 1 was successful. Previously, it took 2
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
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21h / 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.