Go get DeAndre Baker!!

[MAJBobby]

15 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

I like the 'sign jordan Howard and steal the dolphins playbook' idea a lot better 🤣

We have the Dolphins playbook.  Chan Gaileys offense is the same as it was here.

[Royale with Cheese]

11 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Correct.  Also correct is that the Raiders were a SB caliber team soon after they passed on Bullock.  Adding a kicker didn't make them a SB contender.  They didn't need Bullock. 

 

But this discussion is about value.   Janikowski brought far more value as a 1st round pick than Bullock would have for the Raiders.  It's pretty clear for the reasons already lsited.  He was a rock solid producer for almost 2 decades (over any replacement in that first round especially).

 

The discussion is about value overall and a kicker is not worth a 1st rounder.  

[Mr. WEO]

21 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

The discussion is about value overall and a kicker is not worth a 1st rounder.  

 

 

That kicker was.  You've provided nothing other than "Keith Bullock" to prove otherwise.  So many 1st rounders are busts at any position.  He was a guy who was top 10 all time at his position for 18 years.  If you don't understand that as high value than you can't really participate in a meaningful way in a value discussion.

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

That kicker was.  You've provided nothing other than "Keith Bullock" to prove otherwise.  So many 1st rounders are busts at any position.  He was a guy who was top 10 all time at his position for 18 years.  If you don't understand that as high value than you can't really participate in a meaningful way in a value discussion.

 

LOL...the other 9 guys who are in front of him in scoring were not 1st round picks.  Probably most of them undrafted.  But sure, that's worth a 1st round pick.  I guess in hindsight, all kickers in the top 10 points scoring of all time should have been first round picks.

 

I wonder why even after the great career Janikowski had, being a "great" draft pick.....no other team since then has drafted a kicker in the first round since the Raiders did it.  If the Raiders had great success with this pick, no other teams in the 608 first round picks since....drafted a kicker.  I thought the NFL was a copy cat league....I guess not with kickers.  

Kicking has regressed over the years as well....teams still not placing high value on them.

 

Get off your usual high horse of "if you don't agree with me than your discussion isn't meaningful".  

[Mr. WEO]

30 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

LOL...the other 9 guys who are in front of him in scoring were not 1st round picks.  Probably most of them undrafted.  But sure, that's worth a 1st round pick.  I guess in hindsight, all kickers in the top 10 points scoring of all time should have been first round picks.

 

I wonder why even after the great career Janikowski had, being a "great" draft pick.....no other team since then has drafted a kicker in the first round since the Raiders did it.  If the Raiders had great success with this pick, no other teams in the 608 first round picks since....drafted a kicker.  I thought the NFL was a copy cat league....I guess not with kickers.  

Kicking has regressed over the years as well....teams still not placing high value on them.

 

Get off your usual high horse of "if you don't agree with me than your discussion isn't meaningful".  

 

In that draft, he turned out to be a great pick,  Bullock would not have been as good. .  I don't know how you can say otherwise, given the options.  Pro Football Reference has him at 11th in career value (he was picked at 17) for his team compared to all the players taken in the first round of that draft.  In more than 10% if the games he played in, his were the only points the Raiders scored.  They had gone through 4 kickers in the previous 3 seasons--none of them over 65%.  The season before, they were 8-8 with 4 games lost by  a FG or less.

 

NFL GMs aren't necessarily the best guys for their jobs, obviously.  Because picking a kicker in the first round is rare clearly does not disprove that in this case, it was a good move. GMs said guys like Brees and Wilson were "too short" to succeed in the NFL.  Clearly a stupid position to hold.    

 

Anyway, this might help you understand why it turned out to be a great pick:

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2020/story/_/id/29071769/that-raiders-took-kicker-first-round-weirdest-nfl-draft-pick-ever

[freddyjj]

21 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Just name Dane Jackson the starter.  

He came back in the game, so not a torn ACL, was also on the Bike after the injury

Yeah I couldn't tell what happened from replay other than WR seemed to incidentally catch his knee with his cleats  - maybe a bone bruise?

[Royale with Cheese]

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

In that draft, he turned out to be a great pick,  Bullock would not have been as good. .  I don't know how you can say otherwise, given the options.  Pro Football Reference has him at 11th in career value (he was picked at 17) for his team compared to all the players taken in the first round of that draft.  In more than 10% if the games he played in, his were the only points the Raiders scored.  They had gone through 4 kickers in the previous 3 seasons--none of them over 65%.  The season before, they were 8-8 with 4 games lost by  a FG or less.

 

NFL GMs aren't necessarily the best guys for their jobs, obviously.  Because picking a kicker in the first round is rare clearly does not disprove that in this case, it was a good move. GMs said guys like Brees and Wilson were "too short" to succeed in the NFL.  Clearly a stupid position to hold.    

 

Anyway, this might help you understand why it turned out to be a great pick:

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2020/story/_/id/29071769/that-raiders-took-kicker-first-round-weirdest-nfl-draft-pick-ever

 

LOL....

 

"GM's aren't necessarily the best for their jobs".  Lets focus on some misses but not the other successes.

 

Of the 60 NFL QB's who have played in a game that's under 6 feet tall, how many actually had NFL careers?  You should evaluate a player by everything, including height.

Then weigh everything.  Just because they missed on Brees and Wilson, doesn't mean height isn't a factor at all.  The numbers significantly say something different.

 

Okay, an opinion piece article.  I guess that means that it really isn't a subjective topic, clearly it's objective lol.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

LOL....

 

"GM's aren't necessarily the best for their jobs".  Lets focus on some misses but not the other successes.

 

Of the 60 NFL QB's who have played in a game that's under 6 feet tall, how many actually had NFL careers?  You should evaluate a player by everything, including height.

Then weigh everything.  Just because they missed on Brees and Wilson, doesn't mean height isn't a factor at all.  The numbers significantly say something different.

 

Okay, an opinion piece article.  I guess that means that it really isn't a subjective topic, clearly it's objective lol.

 

We are discussing our opinions here.  What in that article do you most disagree with?

 

Objectively, his career was valued at even higher than his draft spot.

 

What % of QBs drafted over 6 feet tall have "had NFL careers"?  

 

For Wilson, GM's who passed clearly did not "weigh everything".  He was the exact same player in college, where he starred in 2 conferences.  They passed on his height.

[Don Otreply]

23 hours ago, Rigotz said:

 

He was a first round pick ... drafted in the 2019 draft.

Thank god you guys aren't GM.

And that goes for you too..., 😂

 

You do realize that if any of us members here ran the team they would destroy it in one season, with their horrible hot takes decision making, right?

 

Go Bills!!!

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by Don Otreply
K

[Royale with Cheese]

45 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

We are discussing our opinions here.  What in that article do you most disagree with?

 

Objectively, his career was valued at even higher than his draft spot.

 

What % of QBs drafted over 6 feet tall have "had NFL careers"?  

 

For Wilson, GM's who passed clearly did not "weigh everything".  He was the exact same player in college, where he starred in 2 conferences.  They passed on his height.

Of course they weighed everything.  They were wrong that his other abilities wouldn’t make up for his height.  Other short QB’s have been taken high so the teams will overlook height if they see other intangibles that will make up for it.

If it was all about dominance in their play in college and not their size....Major Applewhite and Chase Daniel would have been taken early.

 

There have been 60 QB’s 6 feet and under that have played in an NFL game.  Only a few have had any decent careers.  This is why height matters.  Its not 100% of the time but its the vast majority.

 

Are you really saying Football Reference value chart is an objective measurement?

 

[Simon]

3 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

We have the Dolphins playbook.  Chan Gaileys offense is the same as it was here.

Chan Gailey's offense isn't the same as it was last week, much less years ago.

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

Anyway, this might help you understand why it turned out to be a great pick:

There wasn't one single thing in that article that would make me think it was a good pick.

In Janikowski's 17 years in Oakland they won a grand total of 4 playoff games. In 17 years.

A couple years after he was drafted they embarked on a losing streak that lasted 13 years in a row.

The guy they drafted Janikowski to replace ended up having a 16 year career with a better XP% than Janikowski and a FG% that was virtually identical.

Maybe if they had used that first round pick on an actual football player instead of a drunk kicker, they might have avoided being perennial losers for over a decade. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Simon said:

Chan Gailey's offense isn't the same as it was last week, much less years ago.

There wasn't one single thing in that article that would make me think it was a good pick.

In Janikowski's 17 years in Oakland they won a grand total of 4 playoff games. In 17 years.

A couple years after he was drafted they embarked on a losing streak that lasted 13 years in a row.

The guy they drafted Janikowski to replace ended up having a 16 year career with a better XP% than Janikowski and a FG% that was virtually identical.

Maybe if they had used that first round pick on an actual football player instead of a drunk kicker, they might have avoided being perennial losers for over a decade. 

 

 

Which one in that draft would have kickstarted that amazing turnaround?  No one picks a kicker for that purpose.  Who would they have picked that would changed their outcome (the losing streak)?

 

In 5 of  the next 6 drafts they used their a 1st round pick on DBs.  How did that go?

 

And Joe Nedney?  He had a cup of coffee in Oakland.  Prior to him sliding through town (his 3rd of 7 teams), he had posted years of 62.1, 64.7, 68.4%.  He wasn't worth keeping (see: other teams).  Over his 16 year career, he made only 59% as many FGs as Jankowski (17 over 50).  For 3 of his teams, he was under 80%.

 

Not the same.  The point is that if you ended up locking in a 2 decade player who was among the best ever at his position in the 1st round, most would agree it was a great pick.  Him being a kicker should not matter.  

Edited November 17, 2020 by Mr. WEO

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Of course they weighed everything.  They were wrong that his other abilities wouldn’t make up for his height.  Other short QB’s have been taken high so the teams will overlook height if they see other intangibles that will make up for it.

If it was all about dominance in their play in college and not their size....Major Applewhite and Chase Daniel would have been taken early.

 

There have been 60 QB’s 6 feet and under that have played in an NFL game.  Only a few have had any decent careers.  This is why height matters.  Its not 100% of the time but its the vast majority.

 

Are you really saying Football Reference value chart is an objective measurement?

 

 

You can give me your stat based value chart for comparison.  

 

And if they weighed everything, they would have drafted Wilson earlier.  There was nothing about his game that was not known.  He had lots of games providing lots of film on two different teams in 2 different systems against many opponents.  Lots of scouting reports mentioned his size as his biggest weakness.

[Simon]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

In the next 6 drafts they used their a 1st round pick on DBs.  How did that go?

 

Sounds only slightly less stupid than wasting a first round pick on a K

 

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Prior to him sliding through town (his 3rd of 7 teams), he had posted years of 62.1, 64.7, 68.4%.  He wasn't worth keeping (see: other teams).  Over his 16 year career, he made only 59% as many FGs as Jankowski (17 over 50).  For 3 of his teams, he was under 80%.

 

So for the majority of his teams, his FG% was better than Janikowski's?

Good one.

 

Actually, I'm not wasting my time arguing with you because you just come up with a bunch of immaterial stuff like this to convince yourself you're never wrong.

Go trade infinite irrelevancies with Doc. 

 

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Simon said:

 

Sounds only slightly less stupid than wasting a first round pick on a K

 

 

So for the majority of his teams, his FG% was better than Janikowski's?

Good one.

 

Actually, I'm not wasting my time arguing with you because you just come up with a bunch of immaterial stuff like this to convince yourself you're never wrong.

Go trade infinite irrelevancies with Doc. 

 

 

Janikowski had 12 seasons over 80% to Nedney's 8.

 

I thought it was material to the point I was making.

 

But, will do.

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You can give me your stat based value chart for comparison.  

 

And if they weighed everything, they would have drafted Wilson earlier.  There was nothing about his game that was not known.  He had lots of games providing lots of film on two different teams in 2 different systems against many opponents.  Lots of scouting reports mentioned his size as his biggest weakness.

 

Since I don't have my stat based chart, are you really saying that makes it their chart objective?  I don't have a stat based chart for QB performance myself, I guess that means PFF is objective right?  Geezus.

 

And the bolded part is just stupid.  Just because they were wrong to under estimated him doesn't mean they didn't fully evaluate him.  Scouts/GM's spend insane amount of time studying these players.

 

I'm with Simon, it's just a waste of time arguing with you.

[Mr. WEO]

5 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Since I don't have my stat based chart, are you really saying that makes it their chart objective?  I don't have a stat based chart for QB performance myself, I guess that means PFF is objective right?  Geezus.

 

And the bolded part is just stupid.  Just because they were wrong to under estimated him doesn't mean they didn't fully evaluate him.  Scouts/GM's spend insane amount of time studying these players.

 

I'm with Simon, it's just a waste of time arguing with you.

 

Well give me anyone's similar chart.  Any site's.  Anything you can find that would dispute the PFR value assessment.  My mind is open to persuasion (not petulant foot stomping).

 

An "insane amount for time studying these players" does not prevent them from making busted picks every single year.   Insane amounts of time were spent studying bums like Jamarcus Russell and Ryan Leaf and Brady Quinn and Tim Couch and Akili Smith and JP Losman and......countless others.  Yet you still don't get it. 

 

I tried to help you...

Edited November 18, 2020 by Mr. WEO

[OZBILLS]

Chiefs to sign him.

 

FML

[Process]

I'm not up to speed on this. So did he not do whatever he was accused of doing? Or is he just getting away with it because the lawyers screwed up?

[dgrochester55]

On 11/16/2020 at 12:19 PM, OrtonHearsaWho said:

 

He was ranked 115th out of 116 eligible CBs by PFF.  Just because a guy was drafted in the 1st round doesn't mean he isn't immune to being terrible.

 

Fair enough, but sometimes a high draft pick that does not work out initially needs a change of scenery.  Jerry Hughes is an example that comes to mind, he was a 1st round pick who was considered a bust for the Colts before being traded to Buffalo.

 

This is only Baker's second year.  Besides the character issue, he is not a bad risk for a low price and no worse of an option that Norman or Worley at this point.

Edited November 18, 2020 by dgrochester55