Anybody else think we are putting to much on Bryce's plate?

[Mr. Scot]

1 hour ago, CRA said:

So let's take PFF grade last year

Let's not.

If you're gonna base an argument on PFF ratings, it's automatically weak.

You haven't really refuted anything Icege has said either, so...

Edited July 26, 2023 by Mr. Scot

[CRA]

46 minutes ago, Icege said:

Out of curiosity... who was #149? If it wasn't Chuba Hubbard, then throw that baby out with the bath water (imo). But in all seriousness, that's incredibly hard to believe just looking at the numbers for other RBs.

• AJ Dillon: 43 targets, 28 catches, 7 drops (16.3% drop rate)
• Nick Chubb: 37 targets, 27 catches, 4 drops (10.8% drop rate)
• Breece Hall: 31 targets, 19 catches, 5 drops (16.1%)
• James Conner: 58 targets, 46 catches, 7 drops (12.1% drop rate)

It's hard for me to look at those stats along with Sanders' 26 targets, 20 catches, and 2 drops (7.7% drop rate) and not take that PFF grade ranking with a grain of salt.

Hard to get Bryce more when we had to stock the team beforehand. Free agency first, then the draft. Unless we want to rehash the old argument about whether or not they knew it was Bryce all along, but I don't think we've gotten that bored again.

when you pull up the RBs the list actually includes 2 FBs in the overall listing.  Probably some glitch pulling them in as they are supposed to filter out.   149 was FB Adam Prentice. 

I mean, PFF is what it is.  Like I said, love it or hate.  They are mixing in all sorts of things into their grade evaluations besides just a math tally of credited stats.   So two players with identical credited stats aren't going to grade the same. 

I think they should add a solid vet in cuts that has proven to be really good in that role. I mean, that largely remains my point.   Which is why I alluded to all the Shenault talk they keep up with.  They simply may be giving him a real shot to prove he can do more in the backfield.   That would be the spot.  But him being forced into protection would be the issue/unproven realm with him. 

[CRA]

56 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Let's not.

If you're gonna base an argument on PFF ratings, it's automatically weak.

You haven't really refuted anything Icege has said either, so...

Well, I didn't start there.  I started sharing some of the talk out of Philly that you somehow couldn't find on the ole google machine.   You countered by sharing people praising his rushing.  

people around here love PFF stats every week after a game.  I largely use it for fantasy and it's flawed.  But yeah, generally when they say you are worst in the NFL at something......it's a stretch to claim they are actually solid at it.   

For example, I doubt you could find any player using PFF stats that ranked #1 or dead last in their rankings on something and argue in reality that they are actually good/bad at that.  I mean, Miles Sandes excluded.  Because that apparently is what you are going with now.    

It's interesting, so it's cool to critique an area of Hubbard's game.  But not Miles.  

 

[Gerry Green]

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

Well, I didn't start there.  I started sharing some of the talk out of Philly that you somehow couldn't find on the ole google machine.   You countered by sharing people praising his rushing.  

people around here love PFF stats every week after a game.  I largely use it for fantasy and it's flawed.  But yeah, generally when they say you are worst in the NFL at something......it's a stretch to claim they are actually solid at it.   

For example, I doubt you could find any player using PFF stats that ranked #1 or dead last in their rankings on something and argue in reality that are good.  I mean, Miles Sandes excluded.  Because that apparently is what you are going with now.    

It's interesting, so it's cool to critique an area of Hubbard's game.  But not Miles. 

 

 

 

He had 2 drops last year yet you claim he is next to last according to PFF. That should tell you all you need to know about PFF.

 

If 2 drops is too many for your liking, I think maybe you should rethink your rating system.

 

 

[Mr. Scot]

18 minutes ago, CRA said:

Well, I didn't start there.  I started sharing some of the talk out of Philly that you somehow couldn't find on the ole google machine.   You countered by sharing people praising his rushing.  

people around here love PFF stats every week after a game.  I largely use it for fantasy and it's flawed.  But yeah, generally when they say you are worst in the NFL at something......it's a stretch to claim they are actually solid at it.   

For example, I doubt you could find any player using PFF stats that ranked #1 or dead last in their rankings on something and argue in reality that they are actually good/bad at that.  I mean, Miles Sandes excluded.  Because that apparently is what you are going with now.    

It's interesting, so it's cool to critique an area of Hubbard's game.  But not Miles.  

You can critique any area of any players game. I just happen to think you're wrong.

We'll get the ultimate answer to that in the coming season.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Gerry Green said:

 

 

He had 2 drops last year yet you claim he is next to last according to PFF. That should tell you all you need to know about PFF.

 

If 2 drops is too many for your liking, I think maybe you should rethink your rating system.

 

 

You have said like 3x now you were done with this argument but yet...........

[CRA]

13 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

He had 2 drops last year yet you claim he is next to last according to PFF. That should tell you all you need to know about PFF.

If 2 drops is too many for your liking, I think maybe you should rethink your rating system.

 

I don't claim they rated him him poorly as receiver among RBs.  They did.   They have multiple times. 

logically, for a lot of the same reasons Philly steadily took him out of that role after his rookie season.  Which was documented along the way.  His struggles post rookie season in that role.   

 

 

 

[Gerry Green]

11 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

You have said like 3x now you were done with this argument but yet...........

 

So, I changed my mind. Glad that seems to upset you so. 

 

Oh, and I said it once, not 3 times. If you are going to try to insult someone, at least get your facts straight. 

 

Resorting to pooing on posts again? lol How will I ever live down the shame.

Edited July 26, 2023 by Gerry Green

[Icege]

28 minutes ago, CRA said:

when you pull up the RBs the list actually includes 2 FBs in the overall listing.  Probably some glitch pulling them in as they are supposed to filter out.   149 was FB Adam Prentice. 

I mean, PFF is what it is.  Like I said, love it or hate.  They are mixing in all sorts of things into their grade evaluations besides just a math tally of credited stats.   So two players with identical credited stats aren't going to grade the same. 

I think they should add a solid vet in cuts that has proven to be really good in that role. I mean, that largely remains my point.   Which is why I alluded to all the Shenault talk they keep up with.  They simply may be giving him a real shot to prove he can do more in the backfield.   That would be the spot.  But him being forced into protection would be the issue/unproven realm with him. 

Hmm... interesting. I was curious as to whether or not PFF's grades were influenced by usage and that might be the case. Prentice only had 3 targets last year of which he caught all 3 for 9yds and a 1st down. Out of curiosity, do they have JK Dobbins ranked? He had 7 catches on 8 targets with no drops for 42yds, 1 TD, and 3 1sts. Wondering how low they'd consider him if usage is as heavy of an influence as it might seem.

From what it sounded like at training camp today, they were lining Laviska up all over the place as well as letting him take handoffs in the backfield. I'm a big fan of the former part of that, because if the team makes it a point to move him all over the field it can allow them to use him as a gadget player early on before letting him be the decoy later once defenses start keying in on him. That's going to make life even easier for Bryce.

[Gerry Green]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

I don't claim that rated him him poorly as receiver among RBs.  They did.   They have multiple times. 

logically, for a lot of the same reasons Philly steadily took him out of that role after his rookie season.  Which was documented along the way.  His struggles post rookie season in that role.   

 

 

 

 

2 drops is now considered struggling? You sure can spin things to fit your narrative can'tcha?

 

You are stuck in the past. Come on and join the rest of us in the present. 

[CRA]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You can critique any area of any players game. I just happen to think you're wrong.

We'll get the ultimate answer to that in the coming season.

well, I will continue to hope that either Shenault proves capable of an expanded role and if not, they add a quality guy for that role in our backfield when cuts happen.   Preferably the latter as Young's health and growth are frankly the only thing I care about in 2023. 

[csx]

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

well, I will continue to hope that either Shenault proves capable of an expanded role and if not, they add a quality guy for that role in our backfield when cuts happen.   Preferably the latter as Young's health and growth are frankly the only thing I care about in 2023. 

It would make a whole lot more sense to hope you are wrong.

[CRA]

4 minutes ago, csx said:

It would make a whole lot more sense to hope you are wrong.

I mean, depth and a well rounded backfield seems like something everyone should want. 

I mean even if you love Miles Sanders game.  He has suited for a full season once.   So then Hubbard is the every down RB or you go scrambling in season?  

I just like more stability around a rookie QB.  That's generally how they grow and see success.  Put a bunch of dudes around them that are good at what they are asked to do. 

I'm talking about spending peanuts on niche player to ensure Bryce is successful and people flipping their lids as it is somehow disrespectful to Miles Sanders lol. 

[Gerry Green]

7 minutes ago, CRA said:

well, I will continue to hope that either Shenault proves capable of an expanded role and if not, they add a quality guy for that role in our backfield when cuts happen.   Preferably the latter as Young's health and growth are frankly the only thing I care about in 2023. 

 

Well hope springs eternal. However, it won't make the RB you seem to want suddenly show up. Oh no, the Humanity.