2017 Draft Chatter Thread...

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Eh, everyone wants to feel like they can do analytics. The truth is different aspects of a combine are way more important then others for a DE. Those categories have to be weighted to have any real accuracy. I'm always skeptical of these "new amateur" type analytics.
There is nothing new about this he is using each players numbers from the combine and comparing them to established NFL guys combine numbers.

Nothing has to be weighted because you are comparing the actual numbers of similar NFL players.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,457
There is nothing new about this he is using each players numbers from the combine and comparing them to established NFL guys combine numbers.

Nothing has to be weighted because you are comparing the actual numbers of similar NFL players.
Um when you come out with a total score, yes it should be weighted. Unless you think a high jump is just as critical to a DEs success as say a 40 time.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Um when you come out with a total score, yes it should be weighted. Unless you think a high jump is just as critical to a DEs success as say a 40 time.
What?

He is using each player's combine stats and comparing them, DE vs DE.

Why would you weight one DE high jump over another DE?

I am in no way pushing this as some magic formula just something interesting when projecting players to the next level.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I am starting to get behind the idea of Malik McDowell at 28.

I think he is better than Charlton, Harris, and Mckinney and I think he has more upside than Barnett.

From what I have watched and read he does not seem to have a motor issue and is just a physical freak.

I like him better than any of the 2 Oregon guys who came out the last 2 years.

Need to read up some more on his attitude issues.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,457
What?

He is using each player's combine stats and comparing them, DE vs DE.

Why would you weight one DE high jump over another DE?
Because who gives a shit what a DE's high jump is. If you lower a players rating because of a poor high jump to the same extent that you would because of a bad forty, I think it's a flawed forumula. Numbers are only interesting to me when they have significance. His doesn't really hold any without better evidence to support it.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Because who gives a shit what a DE's high jump is. If you lower a players rating because of a poor high jump to the same extent that you would because of a bad forty, I think it's a flawed forumula. Numbers are only interesting to me when they have significance. His doesn't really hold any without better evidence to support it.
So the players actual numbers from the combine being compared to the actual numbers of NFL players from the combine is a flawed formula?

This formula is not lowering any ratings based on poor high jumps or anything else it's a one to one comparison.

Before dismising this out of hand at least try and understand what it is, because you are making claims that have nothing to do with what is being presented.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,457
So the players actual numbers from the combine being compared to the actual numbers of NFL players from the combine is a flawed formula?

This formula is not lowering any ratings based on poor high jumps or anything else it's a one to one comparison.

Before dismissing this out of hand at least try and understand what it is, because you are making claims that have nothing to do with what is being presented.
Jesus, you really are retarded sometimes. I know exactly what he is doing but I think you must be statistics challenged or something. And when you give someone an overall score of a 1.96, you're using a formula to calculate that. In his case, that formula weights a high jump exactly the same as a forty time. I'm saying that is a flawed formula because I don't give a shit what a guys high jump is. I doubt that there is any correlation between a high jump and NFL success. If there is, then show me the R value that proves it.

Anyway, it was a nice attempt by the guy but his overall RAS score is meaningless in terms of success.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Jesus, you really are retarded sometimes. I know exactly what he is doing but I think you must be statistics challenged or something. And when you give someone an overall score of a 1.96, you're using a formula to calculate that. In his case, that formula weights a high jump exactly the same as a forty time. I'm saying that is a flawed formula because I don't give a shit what a guys high jump is. I doubt that there is any correlation between a high jump and NFL success. If there is, then show me the R value that proves it.

Anyway, it was a nice attempt by the guy but his overall RAS score is meaningless in terms of success.
I am dense?

If he is using the the same metric for every player from the same position it does not matter.

That's like saying Barnetts 40 should not be compared to Garret's because he is DE.

And high jump is a very good measure of explosive ability no you would not draft anyone on it alone but it a bundle of all the test it serves a purpose.

Did you not notice that I already said the actual RAS score does not mean anything to me.:shrug
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
I am starting to get behind the idea of Malik McDowell at 28.

I think he is better than Charlton, Harris, and Mckinney and I think he has more upside than Barnett.

From what I have watched and read he does not seem to have a motor issue and is just a physical freak.

I like him better than any of the 2 Oregon guys who came out the last 2 years.

Need to read up some more on his attitude issues.
Huge character risk. Didn't I read he had like the worst interviews at the combine EVAR?
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,457
Huge character risk. Didn't I read he had like the worst interviews at the combine EVAR?
Yeah he has one of those defiant personalities from my understanding. Basically he isn't going to do anything anyone tells him to do. But I can't interview the guy or talk to the MSU coaches so I'm just going by what I read.

My bigger concern is 1.5 sacks and 7 TFLs in 2016. For such a supreme athlete where is the production? His best season ever was only 4.5 sacks and 13 TFLs. And now you want to put him where exactly in our defense? DE? His best fit would probably be 3 technique but that's the one spot that isn't a need on our D-line. For a guy who is probably the best athlete on the field, his production frankly sucks.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Huge character risk. Didn't I read he had like the worst interviews at the combine EVAR?
He has never had any off the field issues, the only issue seems to be attitude.

But his tape shows a guy who played hard most of the time.

It'sot like he is a drug risk or something.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Yeah he has one of those defiant personalities from my understanding. Basically he isn't going to do anything anyone tells him to do. But I can't interview the guy or talk to the MSU coaches so I'm just going by what I read.

My bigger concern is 1.5 sacks and 7 TFLs in 2016. For such a supreme athlete where is the production? His best season ever was only 4.5 sacks and 13 TFLs. And now you want to put him where exactly in our defense? DE? His best fit would probably be 3 technique but that's the one spot that isn't a need on our D-line. For a guy who is probably the best athlete on the field, his production frankly sucks.
He played the 1 most of his time at MSU and he was hurt most of last season.

And he is a true junior.

He also played with no returning starters on the D-line this year.

Charlton had 1 year of production and he played with multiple NFL level prospects.

IMO if Charlton can play DE, He certainly can and he is a better athlete.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,457
IMO if Charlton can play DE, He certainly can and he is a better athlete.
Yeah but we have seen Charlton play DE and produce. You're basically looking at a guys combine numbers and saying, well he can probably play DE. And even in his Junior year Taco's numbers outshine those of McDowell. That year Taco still had 5.5 sacks as a part time player.

It's possible that McDowell was just misused in MSU's defense. I'm just skeptical of a guy who has such low production numbers in college. I saw Taco just take over games with his pass rush ability in college. I never saw McDowell do that. And I watch a lot of Big Ten.
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,414
McDowell is basically a rich man's Crawford or Irving, not really an ideal fit for us at DE or DT but could probably play a bit of both. Wouldn't take him at 28 due to the lack of an ideal scheme fit and the personality/work ethic stuff.

And yea, 1.5 sacks as a junior is a joke.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Yeah but we have seen Charlton play DE and produce. You're basically looking at a guys combine numbers and saying, well he can probably play DE. And even in his Junior year Taco's numbers outshine those of McDowell. That year Taco still had 5.5 sacks as a part time player.

It's possible that McDowell was just misused in MSU's defense. I'm just skeptical of a guy who has such low production numbers in college. I saw Taco just take over games with his pass rush ability in college. I never saw McDowell do that. And I watch a lot of Big Ten.
The reason I started thinking about Mcdowell is that I saw video of him playing DE.

And Mcdowell has most definitley taken over games he was an all american as a sophmore.

I just think he is a bit raw and has super upside, I think he could be a difference maker as a 1 and be worth the pick him and collins would be a terror at DT for years.

At the 1 he looks like a rich mans McClain.

Just take a look at this and what he was doing against ND.


I am not on the table for him but he deffinitley needs to be in the discussion with Harris and McKinley.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
McDowell is basically a rich man's Crawford or Irving, not really an ideal fit for us at DE or DT but could probably play a bit of both. Wouldn't take him at 28 due to the lack of an ideal scheme fit and the personality/work ethic stuff.

And yea, 1.5 sacks as a junior is a joke.
He can play the 1 and be dominant and a rich man's Irv and Crawford is an issue why, I think at worst he could be an ideal 1 in Marinelli's scemes and a above average LDE with a little more polish.

He has never had the chance to totally learn 1 position I just think there is some huge untapped potential.

Calais Campbell type.
 
Top Bottom