No to Spikes. The guy is not accountable. And he is a turd in coverage. He would instantly be the worst coverage linebacker the Bucs have, if he were suddenly materialize in a Bucs uniform...
I am watching Kony Ealy right now against Oklahoma State. He is matched up against a pretty large LT. He looks tiny, and not particularly explosive nor twitchy. Not impressive so far...but it is a small sample size.Worth a look at 7?Not so certain.
Just ran each through Pat Kirwan's "Production Number" calculations and came up with some interesting information. I don't mean to suggest this is the 'holy grail' of data points - it isn't - but it is one data point that compares each one of these prospects actual contributions. It can give you a starting point for data.For those unfamiliar with Kirwan's "Production Number" - it was included in his book "Take Your Eye Off The Ball" and combines Tackles for Loss (TFL's) and Sacks, and divides the total by number of games played to give an overall impact rating for each player being compared. Any number greater than 1.0 indicates a good player.To this (and until we get the Underwear Bowl data), I've added the NFL Scouts most recent published times for the 40 yard dash (WHY? ...because it's primarily a pass RUSH position).Here's what I found:Anthony Barr - 40 yard: 4.47Career TFL's = 41 + Sacks = 23 divided by Games Played = 23 (41 + 23 = 64 =/23 = 2.67)Khalil Mack - 40 yard: 4.54Career TFL's = 74 + Sacks - 25.5 = divided by Games Played = 48 (74 + 25.5 = 99.5/48 = 2.07)Jadeveon Clowney - 40 yard dash 4.47Career TFL's = 47 + Sacks = 24 divided by Games Played = 36 (47 + 24 = 71/36 = 1.97)While others may place more significance 1) on the conference each plays in, 2) their weight, or 3) 40 times - Anthony Barr JUMPED off the page (unexpectedly for me). I have to admit Khalil Mack's production impressed me (and I remember he was a holy terror when my Buckeye's played Buffalo).One could make the case that Clowney played in a more difficult conference and played against better, more consistent, talent. If you do, you may want to take a look at South Carolina's 2013 schedule.You could also make the case that Anthony Barr only played two seasons - he actually played parts of 4 seasons - but the first two at UCLA were on OFFENSE (RB, WR, TE). He was converted in in his 3rd year. He does have some nice production, but playng DE in the pros will be his 3rd position change,...not enough information yet, but I am more impressed with both Anthony Barr & Khalil Mack, and am more encouraged about our options.
Just ran each through Pat Kirwan's "Production Number" calculations and came up with some interesting information. I don't mean to suggest this is the 'holy grail' of data points - it isn't - but it is one data point that compares each one of these prospects actual contributions. It can give you a starting point for data.For those unfamiliar with Kirwan's "Production Number" - it was included in his book "Take Your Eye Off The Ball" and combines Tackles for Loss (TFL's) and Sacks, and divides the total by number of games played to give an overall impact rating for each player being compared. Any number greater than 1.0 indicates a good player....not enough information yet, but I am more impressed with both Anthony Barr & Khalil Mack, and am more encouraged about our options.
What about Kony Ealy? care to post his numbers?
Just ran each through Pat Kirwan's "Production Number" calculations and came up with some interesting information. I don't mean to suggest this is the 'holy grail' of data points - it isn't - but it is one data point that compares each one of these prospects actual contributions. It can give you a starting point for data.For those unfamiliar with Kirwan's "Production Number" - it was included in his book "Take Your Eye Off The Ball" and combines Tackles for Loss (TFL's) and Sacks, and divides the total by number of games played to give an overall impact rating for each player being compared. Any number greater than 1.0 indicates a good player....not enough information yet, but I am more impressed with both Anthony Barr & Khalil Mack, and am more encouraged about our options.
What about Kony Ealy? care to post his numbers?
Well, I did -- just remember - this is only one data point (and based on this data point i wouldn't think we would be as interested).Kony Ealy - 40 time = 4.67 (fastest)Career TFL's = 27 + Sacks = 12.5 divided by Games Played = 39.5 (27 + 12.5 = 39.5/39 = 1.01).As you can see, he does meet the minimum criteria for production - but just barely. He is not as fast as I would think a 1 gap 4-3 under rush DE should be - he definitely played against the best competition in the land. He , like Clowney, seems to have prototypical size for the position.At this point - I'd like to see his explosion index numbers (another of Kirwan's data tools - combines bench press, vertical jump and broad jump to generate an index).
Is Kony a Clayborn clone?
Not sure if I want the guy. Not really explosive, from what I have seen.Pass.
Not sure if I want the guy. Not really explosive, from what I have seen.Pass.
i think hed be one of the few players i could not be happy about drafting. we have enough big slow DE's already.
Khalil has played against some seriously crappy competition.I mean, some of the teams combined probably have records like 5-30 something. He looks solid. But I am not convinced.Given a choice between the two, I would lean towards Mack. He is from Fort Pierce, why the hell did he go to Buffalo?
I agree his competition level is weak...but watch video of him vs UGA in 2012 and Ohio St in 2013. He was a nightmare for those guys to block too.
Just ran each through Pat Kirwan's "Production Number" calculations and came up with some interesting information. I don't mean to suggest this is the 'holy grail' of data points - it isn't - but it is one data point that compares each one of these prospects actual contributions. It can give you a starting point for data.For those unfamiliar with Kirwan's "Production Number" - it was included in his book "Take Your Eye Off The Ball" and combines Tackles for Loss (TFL's) and Sacks, and divides the total by number of games played to give an overall impact rating for each player being compared. Any number greater than 1.0 indicates a good player.To this (and until we get the Underwear Bowl data), I've added the NFL Scouts most recent published times for the 40 yard dash (WHY? ...because it's primarily a pass RUSH position).Here's what I found:Anthony Barr - 40 yard: 4.47Career TFL's = 41 + Sacks = 23 divided by Games Played = 23 (41 + 23 = 64 =/23 = 2.67)Khalil Mack - 40 yard: 4.54Career TFL's = 74 + Sacks - 25.5 = divided by Games Played = 48 (74 + 25.5 = 99.5/48 = 2.07)Jadeveon Clowney - 40 yard dash 4.47Career TFL's = 47 + Sacks = 24 divided by Games Played = 36 (47 + 24 = 71/36 = 1.97)While others may place more significance 1) on the conference each plays in, 2) their weight, or 3) 40 times - Anthony Barr JUMPED off the page (unexpectedly for me). I have to admit Khalil Mack's production impressed me (and I remember he was a holy terror when my Buckeye's played Buffalo).One could make the case that Clowney played in a more difficult conference and played against better, more consistent, talent. If you do, you may want to take a look at South Carolina's 2013 schedule.You could also make the case that Anthony Barr only played two seasons - he actually played parts of 4 seasons - but the first two at UCLA were on OFFENSE (RB, WR, TE). He was converted in in his 3rd year. He does have some nice production, but playng DE in the pros will be his 3rd position change,...not enough information yet, but I am more impressed with both Anthony Barr & Khalil Mack, and am more encouraged about our options.
not buying those 40 times...especially at their respective NFL weights.
If Khalil Mack couldn't play rush end, could he play MLB?
I think that would be wasting a guy who is built to rush the passer.
I think Mosely would project more as a MLB
Just ran each through Pat Kirwan's "Production Number" calculations and came up with some interesting information. I don't mean to suggest this is the 'holy grail' of data points - it isn't - but it is one data point that compares each one of these prospects actual contributions. It can give you a starting point for data.For those unfamiliar with Kirwan's "Production Number" - it was included in his book "Take Your Eye Off The Ball" and combines Tackles for Loss (TFL's) and Sacks, and divides the total by number of games played to give an overall impact rating for each player being compared. Any number greater than 1.0 indicates a good player.To this (and until we get the Underwear Bowl data), I've added the NFL Scouts most recent published times for the 40 yard dash (WHY? ...because it's primarily a pass RUSH position).Here's what I found:Anthony Barr - 40 yard: 4.47Career TFL's = 41 + Sacks = 23 divided by Games Played = 23 (41 + 23 = 64 =/23 = 2.67)Khalil Mack - 40 yard: 4.54Career TFL's = 74 + Sacks - 25.5 = divided by Games Played = 48 (74 + 25.5 = 99.5/48 = 2.07)Jadeveon Clowney - 40 yard dash 4.47Career TFL's = 47 + Sacks = 24 divided by Games Played = 36 (47 + 24 = 71/36 = 1.97)While others may place more significance 1) on the conference each plays in, 2) their weight, or 3) 40 times - Anthony Barr JUMPED off the page (unexpectedly for me). I have to admit Khalil Mack's production impressed me (and I remember he was a holy terror when my Buckeye's played Buffalo).One could make the case that Clowney played in a more difficult conference and played against better, more consistent, talent. If you do, you may want to take a look at South Carolina's 2013 schedule.You could also make the case that Anthony Barr only played two seasons - he actually played parts of 4 seasons - but the first two at UCLA were on OFFENSE (RB, WR, TE). He was converted in in his 3rd year. He does have some nice production, but playng DE in the pros will be his 3rd position change,...not enough information yet, but I am more impressed with both Anthony Barr & Khalil Mack, and am more encouraged about our options.
not buying those 40 times...especially at their respective NFL weights.
Yes, Skull I agree - I used the fastet time reported by scouts in various articles I found - that's why I posted that we didn't have enough information yet. I want to see what they turn in at the combine and buid some explosion index data to see if those numbers hold.
