AU-panther

Dalvin is pretty good, and in our system with the same usage his numbers would probably be just as good if not better. Also we would had him a lot later in the draft and used our 1st pick on something else. I get what you are saying, I really do. I actually agree that Moore is a lot closer to Adams than what a lot around here think. I'm a huge of PFF, but like I said earlier QB play will have influence on what a WR can achieve, but PFF is the one grading system that fans have that does try to factor that in. All these other systems are stat based, so yes, PFF is the one that actually can give Moore a higher grade for that play where he has to come back and make a great catch because of the poor throw from his QB. Going play by play is exactly what they do, you just don't like the results they come up with even though you haven't took the time to go play by play. You have yet to name a better grading system, you admitted yourself you haven't watched all of Adams plays, and I doubt you have watched the other 90 wrs.

I have no doubts you can grade your own team, its the time of watching every team. You might think your player is good or bad but in reality good and bad are relative terms and without watching everyone else you don't have that context. You might think your LT is garbage but if you watch them all you realize he is better than 70%, under that scenario he really isn't as bad as you thought. I never said their system was perfect, i said its the best we have when trying to grade everyone relative to each other. So lets say Moore gets a grade of +1 for being open. Maybe Teddy tries the throw and Moore makes an unbelievable catch and run after catch and it would have been a +2. So yes the QB will have some affect on the grade, and that is what i was referencing earlier, but here again what do we have that is a better overall grading system. How about this: You watch film of every receiver, on every play, of every game. On each play you assign a grade of +2 to -2 based on how well the receiver does independent of everyone else. Then rank all of the receivers based on those grades. Now do that for every position. Put those rankings on a website and then i won't have to pay for PFF. Honestly I think you are probably a pretty good judge of what you see. The irony is that your rankings would probably end up being really similar to PFFs. What you are trying to do with your evaluation is actually what PFF is trying to accomplish in ways no other ranking system has.

and my team is the only one that ever gets called for holding. Every fan thinks their team is the one getting biased against. They have no reason to have biases and in reality it would be totally contrary to their goals as a money making business. Will be there be subjectivity involved with human beings, of course, but here again overall it is minimized. Using Josh Allen as an example makes you look bad, look up their grade on him, also they thought higher of Cam this year than most outlets. Also their Herbert grade is pretty high.

I don't have access to play by play grades but yes PFF tries to isolate the player. I would guess both plays would be a positive score, and I don't know about this particular instance but they do give a higher grade based on difficultly and context. So they are in fact factoring in the things you are referencing. Are they perfect with it, no, but its still better than traditional ranking metrics. But earlier I did say that WR is probably the hardest position to totally separate from their teammates from an evaluation standpoint and QB is the reason for this, but what is the better option? Does total yards give us a better ranking? No, PFF actually accounts for the very thing you are saying better than most ranking tools we have. You are quick to talk about how the "eye test" is better but in reality PFF is the closest thing to a uniformly, thoroughly applied eye test as we have. The irony is a lot of the complaints you have with traditional stats are addressed with PFF Here again what ranking system out there doesn't the best job of ranking all of the WRs or any player for that matter?

They actually go over how they grade in pretty big detail on their website, and they actually address some of the issues you have. A lot of people would benefit from taking the time to read it. Are there times they might not know the play call? of course. I'm guessing they are better at it than 99.9% of the fans. Also over the course of the season that margin of error will probably end up being applied pretty evenly to all of the players. Its not that their system is perfect, until you get all 32 teams to give out the play call to a central agency that will never happen, but their system is better than any fans because they apply their system to the entire league. Fans don't have time to watch every snap of every player on every game.

The same as they would to any other receiver doing the same thing. That is what makes their grading system superior to the so called eye test that fans only apply to their own player of which they really only apply when the ball is involved.

pretty obvious you dont' understand how their grading system works. Their actually grading system is the opposite of analytical based, its and eye test. People should go to their website and actually read how it works. Speaking of AB, their grades are based off of how they play for the snaps they do play. Its not a culmination of stats.

won't every happen There are a lot of people on this board who try to act cool by bashing PFF, but none of them have a better option.

Its pretty obvious that the people around here that criticize PFF the most understand it the least. what is a better source? Don't say the eye test, unless you have took the time to watch every snap, focused on that player, of every game, of all 23 players ahead of Moore on that list, while uniformly applying the same grading then any other source is less legitimate. 24 sounds bad but you have to remember there are 90+ starting receivers in the league (if you assume a 3wr set), so in some ways that would be like a top 10 ranking for a QB Also his actually grade is really good, its not like rank 24 means you are bad and then 15 means you are good, you are basically looking at slight differences of good here. I do agree somewhat that the QB can have some influence on the grade but not to the extent you are thinking, whether the QB throws him the ball or not he is receiving a grade. If he runs a prefect route and creates separation he is going to get a positive grade regardless of what the QB does. This is another reason that PFF is superior to a typical fan eye test, the typical fan just watches the ball and only forms an opinion of a player based on those handful of plays that they notice during the broadcast.

Ok, Atlanta and whoever trades up Either way I don’t think it is out of the realm of possibility that all 4 QBs go in the top 7. I would hope that Lance makes it to us but I wouldn’t be opposed to trading up just to make sure

Evaluators aren't just looking at measurables or stats. They are looking at abilities and traits. Maybe in Lance's 24 throws a game he is showing a better ability to get to his 2nd and 3rd reads than Fields is in his 36 throws a game. Maybe Lance is adjusting to pressure better than Fields in his limited throws. I'm not saying he is or isn't the better prospect, but fans have a bad habit of being box score scouts and combine scouts. There is more to evaluation than that. QB A: 67% completion, 174 yards a game, 28 TDs, Zero interceptions. QB B: 66% completion, 204 yards a game, 30 TDs, eight interceptions. A is Lance, B is Cam Lance's YPG don't concern me as much as some of the accuracy numbers I've seen. I would like to see some of those numbers adjusted for depth of target or based on different depths. Normally I'm not of the opinion that accuracy can really be improved much, most guys are who they are by the time they make it to the pros, but Josh Allen is proving otherwise. Speaking of Josh Allen, I think he is definitely going to help how some teams view Lance.

From what I've read a lot of the concern over Fields is his ability if his first read is covered. If you are asking him to drop back and make a throw to his first receiver he is as good as anyone in the draft, including Trevor, his problems show up after that. Also I've read that he tends to hold on to the ball longer when pressured, whereas other QBs speed up their decision making. Sometimes that can be the case when the QB is a great athlete they trust themselves to be able to extend the play. Do you find these two concerns valid? Either way I think his positives (athletic ability and arm talent)are so great that some team is going to draft him early and think they can fixf any perceived negatives, and they might be right.

I used the word "play" to refer to activities outside of work, and I actually said "especially with wearing a mask". I actually agree with you on the importance of wearing mask so relax. My point was I think we could do a better job of really protecting the high risk. Maybe everyone wear a mask and then subsidize the high risk to stay at home. During the lockdown the government paid low risk people to stay at home, meanwhile you had high risk people still working in "essential" businesses. 22 year old healthy bartender gets unemployment to stay at home but 65 year old person with diabetes is still working at the grocery store? Are we trying to stop the spread or trying to stop the deaths?

What I haven't understood through all of this is why we haven't done a better job of protecting the high risk. Even with the total shutdown you still had a tremendous amount of high risk people working in "essential" business. Seems like if you did a better job of removing those from the equation you could let everyone else go back to work/play normally and your net deaths would possible go down, especially with mask and social distancing.

I think when it is all said and done we are going to find out a lot more people have already had it then they thought, and that the mortality rates are't near as high from a percentage view as they thought. Here is a study where they tried to do some testing based on demographics and not symptoms, some community testing if you will. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=be77753b5f9c509cb865d14fbdaf97eeb78e11d5-1587139595-0-AWIUFx6wN0uXOvkl2GvKJJc-Ig8sPLjxRzO454lTi9KpWYjKbxnVGQzEHGD9bYZUKYUUOdrfRQ_wQREzNDVmpdEWVIZYt6UTI9m_LD7byikYQA-loXE677ZRO1gHfKAz7mccB9JD5q3Y8YVehLtYCxNulZzxgq75-rzgoHZ2Heyj5PDAftyTcJ9j-gS_9XvqhP1w_lcrCrvVy9EM4vDfOYSqAiDYODT4O2PXN776dtAuibDok5gMCdzZYcCoRi69cdjoFoqV7X4-dhUOTFhjUA5EzGIOpkN7fsqrkufnBv0pOXqb3nOUoVRFDs5ZdBzO9w_yicdwyhIdvht3lBZyMgA They found the infection rate to be between 2.49 and 4.16 percent. If that is correct that probably means 2 weeks earlier a different 3% were positive. Also there is a lot of talk that this has been going on since late last year or early this year. All these reports of people having odd respiratory conditions. Maybe 20% or more of the population has already had it. If so the mortality rates are grossly over estimated.

Those numbers seem high, 18 months to 2 years is what I hear referenced a lot. Even then that is under normal circumstances, we have a lot more resources going to this then any other type of vaccine in the past. You have mega corporations loaning out their supercomputers for this. That doesn't normally happen. Not to mention the government wil probably relax some of the red tape in this situation. If normal circumstance is 2 years there is no reason to not think it can go quicker.

I didn't see the clip, but could he mean 2-3% more people overall die? Lets say 40,000 people in the country die with schools being closed, opening schools increases that by 2%, which is 800. So now 40800 people die, doesn't necessarily mean 800 more kids.

I doubt he really expects top QB kind of money, but I would guess he expects to be paid as one of the top CBs in the league. Based on last year you can make the argument that he deserves something in the range of 5yr/$70m. If the Panthers don't want to go that high then Josh is going to have to decide: Take $14 million this year and try to get paid as one of the top CBs next year. or Take a little less per year now for a long term deal that has more then $14 million guaranteed. If Josh hits the open market next year would there be a team willing to pay him as much or more then what Peterson or Revis make now? Those are the type of questions he and his agent have to ask themselves. I am all for everyone making as much as they can. I think the idea of "hometown discount" is a bit overplayed by a lot of fans. More times then not that is an older player chasing a ring, one that has made a lot already. Usually when you see a player take a little less per year it is for long term security opposed to a short term deal.

Is that on the coaches or does Cam share some of the blame for that? If I remember correctly,on that particular play Brown was wide open for a short gain over the middle.

No. Whether or not he made the team had no bearing on our comp picks.

I tend to look at the receivers in groups. KB and Funchess are fighting for 2 spots (otherwise known as locks) Cotchery, Bersin, and Boykin are fighting for two spots. Ginn, Brown, and Byrd are fighting for 2 spots. A lot of this will be determined in the preseason games, and it won't necessarily be who makes the spectacular plays but the one who consistently does their job. The fans get exited over the 20yrd RAC but have no idea about the times a player runs the wrong route or misses a block on a running play.

I'll be somewhat surprised if we go into the season with 4 running backs and Tolbert on the 53 man roster. There are just so many carries to go around. Cam and Tolbert will probably have 8-12 carries between them. Personally I think Fozzy and Todman are fighting for a spot. Also I expect Williams to grab one of the tight end spots. I would think we would want 3 pass catching type of tight ends on the roster. If we only have Olsen, Dickson, and Brockel what happens if Olsen or Dickson gets hurt. Would we still be able to run 2 TE sets? I think of Brockel as more of a h-back type of player. How many catches has he had in the last 3 years? Here is the way i see it so far: RB - Stewart RB - CAP RB - Todman or Fozzy RB/FB - Tolbert FB/HB/ST - Ward or Brockel TE - Olsen TE - Dickson TE - Williams

last year? http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Breaking-down-the-53-man-roster/f8b6396f-4ac3-4bc5-b3d3-97deec514f5a

I would be a little surprised if we kept 4 RBs, Tolbert at FB and Brockel or Ward. There are just so many roster spots. Since people tend to debate who is a "FB" and who is a "TE" we can look at a different way. Last year we started the season with 8 roster spots allocated to RB,FB, and TE. I fully expect us to go into the season with 3 "traditional type TEs. Olsen, Dickson, and probably Williams. Stewart is a lock. CAP and probably Tolbert also. That leaves 2 roster spots for guys like Fozzy, Todman, Reaves, Ward, Wegher, and Brockel. We could always carry more then 8 but people are also wanting us to carry 6 WRs. We only had 5 on the roster at the start of last year. Either way roster spots are going to be tight and some decent players are going to be let go.

Last year we started the season with 4 running backs on the roster (Stewart, Williams, Tolbert, and Fozzy). Also Brockel made the team. http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Breaking-down-the-53-man-roster/f8b6396f-4ac3-4bc5-b3d3-97deec514f5a If you consider Brockel more of a fullback then a tight end that would mean that we allocated 5 roster spots to the RB/ FB positions. Stewart will be the starter. I really don't see us cutting Tolbert. Also CAP is probably safe based off of draft position. I would think the final roster decisions will be something like this: Stewart Tolbert CAP Fozzy or Todman Brockel or Ward