The Draft Network's Jon Ledyard Eviscerates Allen’s Week 2 Performance

[K-9]

1 minute ago, Paulus said:

Does this work grammatically? Srs.

Sorry, I don't employ an editor to proof read my posts. Perhaps you could ask another member? There is no shortage of those willing to serve as grammar police. 

[Paulus]

Just now, K-9 said:

Sorry, I don't employ an editor to proof read my posts. Perhaps you could ask another member? There is no shortage of those willing to serve as grammar police. 

No, because it may make sense. I keep picturing it as something Columbo might say. 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Does this work grammatically? Srs.

 

3 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Does this work grammatically? Srs.

Yes

[K-9]

1 minute ago, Paulus said:

No, because it may make sense. I keep picturing it as something Columbo might say. 

What's throwing you off? Is it the adjective "very" preceding the word "credibility?" With or without that modifier, it works grammatically. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

Again, did this guy do analyses of Mayfield and Darnold's last 2 games?

 

 

....why would he?...he pegged Josh as a 3rd rounder and got shown up......bet he had the other two at 1sts............

[teef]

9 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Yes

it does right?  now i'm questioning myself.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

57 minutes ago, Domdab99 said:

I mean, the videos he posted from this last week aren't wrong...but I think the rest of his just give Allen a little slack because he's so raw and new. 

 

The videos are fine, it's the editorializing ("brutally bad" or whatever it was Ledyard said).

Romo sees errors too, but he gets them for what they are, new raw rookie doing OJT (on job training) and showing that he can learn.

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

....why would he?...he pegged Josh as a 3rd rounder and got shown up......bet he had the other two at 1sts............

 

Confirmation bias at its finest.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Confirmation bias at its finest.

 

....I prefer "urinalist" quite frankly.............

[Paulus]

13 minutes ago, K-9 said:

What's throwing you off? Is it the adjective "very" preceding the word "credibility?" With or without that modifier, it works grammatically. 

Idk, it just sounded weird in my head. Perhaps, I'm just not used to people speaking like that in my day-to-day. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ idk.

[oldmanfan]

12 minutes ago, teef said:

it does right?  now i'm questioning myself.

Just using "very" as an adjective.  Old style but appropriate.

 

Not appropriate is a guy claiming to be a football analyst slanting things to fit a preconceived bias.   I just don't read i

[Nihilarian]

That guy is a jackass plain and simple so why read anything the guy writes?

[K-9]

36 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Idk, it just sounded weird in my head. Perhaps, I'm just not used to people speaking like that in my day-to-day. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ idk.

The very idea of this saddens me. 

[MTBill]

19 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

No such thing. These guys revere analytics as though it was religion.

 

 

There are unbiased data scientists - but not this guy in particular.  He formed an opinion about the draft - now he is trying to support his prior opinion.  He is biased.  But there are plenty of guys with no skin in the game who do analytics.

 

I agree though that analytics takes an amount of faith in your data.  Most analtytics guys who get into the data know the data generally has more holes than swiss cheese - so you have to temper your projections.  I think our friend here is now trying to defend his position (poorly).

[TheFunPolice]

Well, to be fair to the guy Josh Allen BARELY cleared the LB on his hurdle.

 

Also, after throwing for nearly 200 yards the first half, which is BARELY more than 199, he basically just handed off all second half. Totally vanished from the stat sheet.

 

Also, when he scrambled for the TD he COULD HAVE fumbled very easily, but didn't. Almost though! That WOULD HAVE cost the Bills.

 

Finally, the Bills SHOULD HAVE won by a lot more, given the way the team played.

 

So he was right after all!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

21 hours ago, K-9 said:

Well, he has an entrenched position. AFAIK, he is the only “pundit” who gave Allen a 3rd round grade. His very credibility as a talent evaluator is on the line every time Allen shows promise and contradicts that position. 

 

I think there were some others.  PFF guys?  I'd have to hunt and I'm not feelin' it right now.

[K-9]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think there were some others.  PFF guys?  I'd have to hunt and I'm not feelin' it right now.

No need to research it, I'll take it as fact that there were others I'm not familiar with. But I do know that in addition to our own, the scouting departments for the LA Chargers, Jaguars, and Falcons had 1st round grades on him. It's rare that there would be such drastic differences among the scouting community and I doubt any team had a 3rd round evaluation of him. These draftnik "pundits" just aren't privy to the body of information that scouts begin compiling, in earnest, from August through draft day; instead they rely on video reviews with little context to support what they are seeing. 

[DCOrange]

23 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

..."Allen had a 3rd rd grade from me".........so this proclaimed urinalist is a tad PO'ed 'cause the kid played better than a 3rd I take it?......

21 hours ago, K-9 said:

Well, he has an entrenched position. AFAIK, he is the only “pundit” who gave Allen a 3rd round grade. His very credibility as a talent evaluator is on the line every time Allen shows promise and contradicts that position. 

 

 

I think he meant that as a compliment honestly. I think his point was that he was higher on Allen than most of the other analytics based people out there. Most of his contemporaries that work for his site/work for PFF graded him as a late Day 3 prospect.

Edited September 27, 2018 by DCOrange

[ddaryl]

On ‎9‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 7:28 AM, Midwest1981 said:

"Utterly dreadful" and "brutally bad in a myriad of ways" isn't quite how I'd characterize it.  But I have to admit- I was more discouraged than encouraged.  "It's his first start," "he had a few good plays," etc.  I know those things- IMO it was still discouraging to see him miss on some blatantly open throws (Murphy & DiMarco, famoulsy) and to force those picks in the second-half (especially the first one- I was imploring him to throw it away as he released it)...

 

Ledyard correctly mentions "there's a long way to go"- and I still think Allen's relentlessly competitive nature gives him a chance, even with his pre-draft concerns rearing their ugly head again in start #1 (mechanical unsoundness, inconsistent accuracy, decision-making, etc.).  Still, I was hoping week #1 offered a few more positives (there WERE some), even considering all factors like the Bills' under-talented roster, the opponent, his first NFL start, etc.

 

https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/1041772507903262720

 

 

 

Allen looked ho hum at his best vs Chargers . I saw a player who had accuracy issues.... There wasn't alot to pull positively IMO from the Chargers game.. You just hope he gets better which he did vs the Vikings on the road.

 

Here's hoping he continues to progress vs GB

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

 

 

I think he meant that as a compliment honestly. I think his point was that he was higher on Allen than most of the other analytics based people out there. Most of his contemporaries that work for his site/work for PFF graded him as a late Day 3 prospect.

A late day three prospect? Late day three would suggest a 6th or 7th round pick. These idiots are even more removed from reality than I thought.