Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Combine 40 times may sway Bucs most important draft-day decision « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 4 5 6

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 16886
Online
« #75 : February 23, 2013, 12:03:27 PM »

Fluker doesn't look nearly as sloppy as I expected.

How is that...didn't the film show you that he wasn't sloppy ?

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

BucDaFackUp

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4359
Online
« #76 : February 23, 2013, 01:07:04 PM »

LOL....does Java have kids?

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 16886
Online
« #77 : February 23, 2013, 04:37:18 PM »

LOL....does Java have kids?

Why are you still here ? You said the combine is nothing but a show and that "your work here was done" .


...wait ..... u mad ?

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

HolyBuc

*
Starter
****
Posts : 683
Offline
« #78 : February 23, 2013, 06:01:09 PM »

Shocked that Tavon Austin (14 reps 225) did more reps than Stedman Bailey (11 reps 225).   Not a bad thing for Bailey just shocked that Tavon did that much.

MUSCLE_HAMSTER

User is on moderator watch listWatched
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8199
Offline
« #79 : February 23, 2013, 06:02:37 PM »

The 40 is a nice solidifier imo.

If a guy looks fast on the field, he should be relatively fast in a straight line. If a guy who seems fast on the field runs a 4.6, you should be a little concerned.


Redwave

***
Second String

Posts : 113
Offline
« #80 : February 23, 2013, 07:26:50 PM »

Obviously speed matters, but not nearly as much as production, instinct & heart. The 40's a great tie-breaker, or, a deal breaker for the guy who comes in WAY low.

Redwave

***
Second String

Posts : 113
Offline
« #81 : February 23, 2013, 07:28:04 PM »

Actually meant WAY high w/ 40 time

creamsicles

*
Starter
****
Posts : 383
Offline
« #82 : February 23, 2013, 07:59:55 PM »

I read he goes by his gut...not measurables. You have a link creamsicle? I can't find the article.

JDouble, this is the quote that concerned me a bit, but we'll learn more from the upcoming draft:



“I am always driven by size, speed, length and the word ‘potential,’” Stokes said. “I do believe in the word ‘potential.’ If you have a raw player, an unfinished player, a diamond in the rough, give that player more credit for that. Lock into that player more because coaching on this level is so different from coaching at the college level. Players can truly develop and become something with NFL coaching.”

actually the entire section of FAB2 from this article:  http://www.pewterreport.com/index.php?option=com_k2&Itemid=20&view=item&layout=item&id=8719 

Obviously, he'll look at many things and I want measureables to play a part... I just hope we don't get too fixated on workout warriors who've been playing a long time without significant production.   That being said, I'm warming on the BYU kid who's only been playing a short time... if the work ethic is there, he's a potential example of a kid who doesn't have a long resume since he's new to the game and could really blossom.

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
« #83 : February 23, 2013, 08:36:29 PM »

I don't think there is anything wrong with drafting on potential, especially in the later rounds....as long as they show good football instincts. I say that because a player's college success can be greatly effected by their teammates and coaching, which they don't have control over. If they show potential with instincts and work ethic, but lack great stats...I'm all for it.

But if they are a physical freak that show a lack of football instincts...like a Sabby Piscatelli or Taylors Mays.....then to hell with potential! Can't fix stupid.


Redwave

***
Second String

Posts : 113
Offline
« #84 : February 23, 2013, 11:48:29 PM »

Nearly everyone has potential as as a component of their pre-draft analysis, but it gets stupid when teams get into a habit of loading up on the raw high ceiling guy based solely on potential, rather than production & start consistently dropping #1 & #2 picks on them. When Bucs changed their approach essentially overnight (Sapp Brooks Draft), they announced publicly that very change in strategy. It really was the turning point in the franchise. And to your point JDouble - no you can't fix stupid. You can add Trueblood  to the list of offenders. I can still hear the whistle now.

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 16886
Online
« #85 : February 24, 2013, 09:15:34 AM »

Nearly everyone has potential as as a component of their pre-draft analysis, but it gets stupid when teams get into a habit of loading up on the raw high ceiling guy based solely on potential, rather than production & start consistently dropping #1 & #2 picks on them. When Bucs changed their approach essentially overnight (Sapp Brooks Draft), they announced publicly that very change in strategy. It really was the turning point in the franchise. And to your point JDouble - no you can't fix stupid. You can add Trueblood  to the list of offenders. I can still hear the whistle now.

I don't know of any team who ever did that on a consistent basis except Al Davis' Raiders...

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

creamsicles

*
Starter
****
Posts : 383
Offline
« #86 : February 24, 2013, 12:41:40 PM »

I agree with you guys and think he'll be good and balanced... I just like my first 1-3 picks to focus on a high floor and my later picks to focus on higher ceilings.
  Page: 1 ... 4 5 6
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Combine 40 times may sway Bucs most important draft-day decision « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools