Gaulden trying to turn corner from rough transition

[MHS831]

Gaulden was drafted as an athlete, basically.  He was announced as a project, as are most third rounders, and did not have a good veteran FS to learn from last year (Reid is not a FS).  The defensive line struggled, and he was learning.  Perhaps some of you  expected more, but  I think it is way too soon to be labeling him.

My resume:  I supported Bradberry when everyone wanted him gone.

That is about it.

[MHS831]

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

And you are hung on microseconds. Do you have any idea how little time .33 seconds is?  If you did you wouldn't keep bringing miniscule differences when they got tested one day years ago.  Remember you are the one hung up with times and stats not me. My point with Sherman was that his slow 40 time simply has little to nothing to do with how well he plays corner. I take your hero's approach which is combine times mean little with guys running around in their underwear.  I used to believe that combine numbers matter but guys like Poe broke of that. Too many times combine times are overemphasized only to find the guy is a workout warrior and little else. Gaulden on the other hand was very productive in college which is more important than a 3 cone race or bench presses. Sure college performance doesn't guarantee success at the next level but it matters more than a 40 yard dash and the ever important  broad jump that just shows up often so often  in a game.  LOL.

Speed really does not matter if you have slow reaction  time.  How quickly you read, do you take false steps, etc. 

Let's face it--anyone arguing with 40 times and 3-cone drills needs to look at the success  rate for players drafted.  Teams had that info,  interviews, game film, private visits, etc.  A recent study that examined starters shows the percentage.  If only considering the first 64 players drafted, the chance for success is just above a coin toss (about 60%).  So if you use  those numbers to verify or certify talent,  it is a weak argument.

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

Defensive Backs

Finally, we come to the largest drafted group in the last decade. Nearly, 21% of all players drafted in the last decade are defensive backs.

• Of the 510 defensive backs drafted, 121 became starters.
• You have the same success rate drafting a DB in the 7th round as you do drafting one in the 4th (11%)
• On average, you have the following number of DBs taken per round: 1st - 6, 2nd - 6, 3rd - 7, 4th - 8, 5th - 8, 6th - 7, 7th - 9
• After you get past the success rates of the first two rounds (64% in the first, 46% in the second), there isn't a huge difference in success (24% - 3rd, 11% - 4th, 17% - 5th, 8% - 6th, 11% - 7th)
• DBs provide the best success potential in the 7th round versus other positions in that round.

Even if Gaulden was not drafted as a project, a realistic expectation would be that he has a 1 in 4 chance of becoming a starter in time. People who expected him to start as a rookie are really unrealistic.  I say give him the time and see what he learns.  His speed is fine if he learns to read and react quickly.  He is capable of that.

 

[top dawg]

6 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Give it a rest and stop replying to me. I don’t need your validation. You just don’t get the preachiness of every post of yours. That’s the high horse I am talking about. Ooo, your right a lot so I should listen to you and your opinions and not express mine. Go look at my draft posts, I’ve been right a lot there as well. So ironic that you like to think you aren’t a broken record.

It’s just you and that other troll who follow me around. There are plenty of others who I can have a normal discourse with and I can’t with you because you are the negativity police and you need to act like you are helping me somehow. Bye.

Someone doesn't like people challenging their bullshit. Too bad!

[MasterAwesome]

13 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Someone doesn't like people challenging their bullshit. Too bad!

You can’t win with him because he argues with his “feels”, outside of the realm of facts and logic. If you challenge him with objective data, he says “I know how I feel and you can’t tell me otherwise!”. Being smug, defensive, and ignorant aren’t great qualities when attempting to engage in discussion.

[Rubi]

17 hours ago, panthers55 said:

The facts are that none of those measureables matter as much for free safeties like they do for corners.  Comparing all DBs is like lumping TEs and receivers together and comparing them as one group.  They aren't. And neither are safeties and corners. Again safeties have to have good instincts, quickness more than speed, and be around the ball. This is what one site said about him when he was drafted.

http://draftanalyst.com/rashaan-gaulden

Doesn't sound like an unathletic weak player  with poor abilities. Only casual fans thrilled with smoke and mirrors believes combine drills over film. Gettleman loved to laugh at folks quoting combine stats as if they mattered.

He’s a bad athlete by NFL standards 

I’ve never come on here and said measurables are everything. But in certain cases not having tools is a valid concern. Gaulden is the example of that. He lacks a lot of physical traits that avg NFL starters have. 

[LinvilleGorge]

30 minutes ago, Rubi said:

He’s a bad athlete by NFL standards 

I’ve never come on here and said measurables are everything. But in certain cases not having tools is a valid concern. Gaulden is the example of that. He lacks a lot of physical traits that avg NFL starters have. 

How did those guys with really poor Combine performances that Gettleman drafted turn out? Funchess? Worley? 

[LinvilleGorge]

30 minutes ago, Rubi said:

He’s a bad athlete by NFL standards 

I’ve never come on here and said measurables are everything. But in certain cases not having tools is a valid concern. Gaulden is the example of that. He lacks a lot of physical traits that avg NFL starters have. 

How did those guys with really poor Combine performances that Gettleman drafted turn out? Funchess? Worley? 

[panthers55]

1 hour ago, stbugs said:

First, .33 seconds is 330,000 microseconds and I do understand how much time it is. It means that the cut by the WR is a completion against Gaulden but a PD again Sherman. The NFL game is a game of tiny windows and people always comment that it’s a game of inches so trying to act like Gaulden’s numbers are irrelevant is just sticking your head in the sand. Can he overcome it with great instincts and breaking on the ball/WR sooner and having better anticipation of what will happen? Absolutely and I never said he couldn’t overcome that. It just means he has to be much better at everything else to make up for his numbers. Making light of the numbers doesn’t prove your argument, it’s part of the whole package. Go look at the 2018 draft threads. Mike Gesicki had amazing numbers and I planned him and said I liked Ian Thomas over him. Why? Because Thomas looked like a TE in the drills and Gesicki looked like a track guy trying to play TE. That said there are plenty of great college players who weren’t anything in the NFL because the athletic ability at the college level isn’t the same so instinct can do wonders in college and not be enough in the NFL. You are mistaking my posting of numbers as being the only measuring stick and that’s a misinterpretation of my posts. I am just trying to say that I haven’t seen anything that shows me that he can overcome the fact that he isn’t as athletic as typical 3rd round CB/Ss.

In terms of my inches note above, remember  that ball Julio caught over Kuechly? If Kuechly was a shade faster that’s an incompletion and not a 50 yard catch. It was truly amazing that Luke was even there but just a point on how close plays are from scoring the GW TD to punting.

A long way to go to say that there are lots of variables that affect any play, and speed is actually not a major one. What makes Kuechly so great is not his physical athleticism but knowing what is being called and being there proactively.

Richard Sherman tugs and pulls and bumps you down the field. He doesn't have to be faster than you because he knows how to slow you down. He knows how to take away your speed and quickness.  And that is the point that seems to allude you. Film study, technique and experience are much more important than speed or athleticism. Everyone in pro football is athletic and fast mostly. But again the biggest muscle you exercise is between your ears. Especially at safety. That is how a guy like Adams lasted as long as he did. What he knew compensated for losing a step or two until he lost too many steps and nothing would make up for that.

[panthers55]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

How did those guys with really poor Combine performances that Gettleman drafted turn out? Funchess? Worley? 

How did Poe work out so far and he is extremely athletic and  blew up the combine.

[panthers55]

42 minutes ago, Rubi said:

He’s a bad athlete by NFL standards 

I’ve never come on here and said measurables are everything. But in certain cases not having tools is a valid concern. Gaulden is the example of that. He lacks a lot of physical traits that avg NFL starters have. 

And you know this how? Are you an NFL scout? I wonder why all our scouts and personnel thought he was a good gamble and instead according to you he is garbage. I guess they need to talk to you before making any evaluations. Again Gaulden is very similar in ability and talent to many of the free safeties playing the game. Plus his film suggests he plays better than his measureables might suggest.  He reminds of a guy like Jake Delhomme. Not terribly athletic and doesn't appear to be starter quality but he is competitive and fiery and plays better than it would appear he should. 

[LinvilleGorge]

The primary point of the drills of the NFL Combine is to measure the pure athleticism of the participants as it pertains to the game of football. Gaulden did not perform well in them compared to his peers. This isn't opinion, this is fact. The resulting numbers show this. This is just another example of P55 arguing in circles just for the sake of arguing.

[top dawg]

2 hours ago, stbugs said:

Look in the mirror dude. I just get tired of your same old arguments. You can’t actual point to anything that’s wrong, just a challenge to those guys who need our support to play well. Lol. Go away man. 

So funny coming from you.

I'm obviously not going anywhere, but you can if it makes you feel better.

 

[panthers55]

4 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The primary point of the drills of the NFL Combine is to measure the pure athleticism of the participants as it pertains to the game of football. Gaulden did not perform well in them compared to his peers. This isn't opinion, this is fact. The resulting numbers show this. This is just another example of P55 arguing in circles just for the sake of arguing.

Actually the purpose of the combine  is designed to allow small conference guys and those folks without big name recognition to compare their measureables to those from bigger schools. What it has become it another opportunity for the NFL to engage fans and sell advertising. The drill gets all the video since the rest isn't open to view but the biggest thing at the combine for teams are not the drills but the interviews, physicals, wonderlic and other things that happen behind the scene. 

90% of the scouting takes part before the combine and usually the results change little in terms of decision making. Now someone who puts up Chris Johnson numbers may rise a bunch but most times guys like John Ross convince a team to reach for him because like Al Davis, some GMs and owners place way too much emphasis on measureables that don't mean much.  Guys who don't participate in the combine still get drafted and it doesn't usually hurt him. Do you think Gaulden was hurt by his combine numbers? Well before the combine he was projected as a third or fourth rounder. Remember how Cam was not impressive at the combine throwing the ball. Did that hurt him being picked number 1.  His measureables we're good but his passing wasn't.  Still he went number 1. The circles here are you failing to understand that pure athleticism or speed is not that important or all receivers would be track stars. You seem to talk out of your butt and show you have never played or coached competitive sports or you wouldn't be so naive.

[Rubi]

4 hours ago, panthers55 said:

And you know this how? Are you an NFL scout? I wonder why all our scouts and personnel thought he was a good gamble and instead according to you he is garbage. I guess they need to talk to you before making any evaluations. Again Gaulden is very similar in ability and talent to many of the free safeties playing the game. Plus his film suggests he plays better than his measureables might suggest.  He reminds of a guy like Jake Delhomme. Not terribly athletic and doesn't appear to be starter quality but he is competitive and fiery and plays better than it would appear he should. 

You’re getting offended because I’m saying Gaulden did not test well. It’s one thing if he was middle of the pack. But he’s at the bottom of almost every category for his position. He’s slow and weak compared to his peers that play DB. 

I just don’t know what your point is other than saying the combine means nothing. They do position specific drills as well don’t forget. 

Why the F do they have the combine every year? Lol I mean come on. It allows teams to evaluate physical ability of the best players in the country. It does matter lol. Kuechly is a HOF caliber player because he’s got the mental and physical gifts that rarely come around. The absolute best players have freakish measurables. They can do things normal guys can’t