Cardinals sign Jasper Brinkley

[PJ1]

Just don't recall seeing this guy....Don't know what to think about this one....

 

[Buckybird]

Now it's time to go get OLB Victor Butler

 

[az jam]

Cardinals sign Jasper Brinkley to two-year deal


The Cardinals talked Jasper Brinkley out of becoming a Giant, and landed him Thursday.

Per Mike Garafolo of USA Today, the Cardinals gave Brinkley a two-year deal.

The former Vikings linebacker had visited the Giants, but found a home in the desert, where he fits in with the bulk signings of defensive players Lorenzo Alexander, Jerraud Powers and Yeremiah Bell.

A solid run defender, Brinkley started 15 games for the Vikings last season, his first as a regular.

 

[cardsfanmd]

I really liked him coming out of college and was praying we'd take him late.

 

[Shane]

good signing! so much for anserson starting! back to a STer just like i said he would!

 

[NMCard]

If he can get some good thumps on the running backs within the division and possible the mobile QB's past the LOS it will be a good addition.

 

[CardsFan88]

I think it makes sense. A thumper to protect the speed guy (DWash) on runs and the speed guy to protect the thumper during passes. We need guys who can bring down Lynch and Gore consistently. Hopefully we found that guy.

 

[Stout]

Solid signing. Will this stop some of the whining so rampant on the board all of a sudden?

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Hopefully we got the good twin..

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[gmabel830]

good signing! so much for anserson starting! back to a STer just like i said he would!

You mean Lorenzo Alexander? Weren't they targeting him to start at OLB?

 

[ajcardfan]

You mean Lorenzo Alexander? Weren't they targeting him to start at OLB?

Yeah, that's the case. Alexander is going to be a starter. There is never anything new under the sun anymore. Exact same stupid argument was had over Paris Lenon a few years ago.

 

[Buckybird]

good signing! so much for anserson starting! back to a STer just like i said he would!

Quit getting the big head you bobblehead
Hey I said Skelton was a clipboard carrier too.

 

[Shane]

You mean Lorenzo Alexander? Weren't they targeting him to start at OLB?

Yeah, that's the case. Alexander is going to be a starter. There is never anything new under the sun anymore. Exact same stupid argument was had over Paris Lenon a few years ago.

nope only statement from Jerecki was slotted to play SILB... No way this guy ends up starting unless its due to injury! Book it!

 

[ARZCardinals]

Y'all need to stop hyping him.

He is the worst rated ILB in the game of NFL

If he's good so is Levi brown and Adam Snyder as they are also the worst rated players at their position.

Wake up and admit it. This was a bad signing and u can hope he Pans out, but as of today this moment he's proven to be a ILB that can't handle tackling inside the box, doesn't shed blocks well and can't cover. Think about it if you are the Offensive coordinator. I'm sending the TE right over top of him and boom I just gained 12-15. As a fan how much of that are u gonna put up with. He's a target...not a weapon.

 

[CardsFan88]

Actually we don't know that. What we do know is that via a metric that isn't all encompassing he is not proficient in what that stat says, but what exactly DOES that stat say?

I mean tackling is more than just one thing. There's trying to tackle a wide receiver or TE as they are catching it in motion, and then there's diagnosing, filling the hole, and stuffing the runner.

I don't believe that 'metric' designates the difference.

Perhaps he does suck. Perhaps he was out of position. I'm not saying one way or the other. But to take one obscure stat that puts every type of play in as one thing doesn't mean we can or should come to a conclusion about him.

We will see, and whether he sucks or doesn't, that stat won't be something that told us one way or the other. Not all stats are equal, especially ones that lump in everything as the same thing and situation.

What I hope for, is the guy is used to his strengths and we put a round peg in a round hole rather than perhaps trying to force him into his weaknesses.

Also what I know is not only did they want to sign this guy, they were emphatic enough to not let him leave until he signs. Also we stole him away from the Giants who were keen to signing him.

Once again since it's a 2 year deal even if he sucks, he isn't a Graves 5 year 30 million dollar Bradley signing. So there is little risk.

But everyone can feel how they want to, it's perfectly within anyone's right. I don't think anyone should see this signing as a boon or a travesty. But if people want to they can.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Actually we don't know that. What we do know is that via a metric that isn't all encompassing he is not proficient in what that stat says, but what exactly DOES that stat say?

I mean tackling is more than just one thing. There's trying to tackle a wide receiver or TE as they are catching it in motion, and then there's diagnosing, filling the hole, and stuffing the runner.

I don't believe that 'metric' designates the difference.

Perhaps he does suck. Perhaps he was out of position. I'm not saying one way or the other. But to take one obscure stat that puts every type of play in as one thing doesn't mean we can or should come to a conclusion about him.

We will see, and whether he sucks or doesn't, that stat won't be something that told us one way or the other. Not all stats are equal, especially ones that lump in everything as the same thing and situation.

What I hope for, is the guy is used to his strengths and we put a round peg in a round hole rather than perhaps trying to force him into his weaknesses.

Also what I know is not only did they want to sign this guy, they were emphatic enough to not let him leave until he signs. Also we stole him away from the Giants who were keen to signing him.

Once again since it's a 2 year deal even if he sucks, he isn't a Graves 5 year 30 million dollar Bradley signing. So there is little risk.

But everyone can feel how they want to, it's perfectly within anyone's right. I don't think anyone should see this signing as a boon or a travesty. But if people want to they can.

This!

Wanted to say something similar, but you nailed it.

 

[Bodha]

Actually we don't know that. What we do know is that via a metric that isn't all encompassing he is not proficient in what that stat says, but what exactly DOES that stat say?

I mean tackling is more than just one thing. There's trying to tackle a wide receiver or TE as they are catching it in motion, and then there's diagnosing, filling the hole, and stuffing the runner.

I don't believe that 'metric' designates the difference.

Perhaps he does suck. Perhaps he was out of position. I'm not saying one way or the other. But to take one obscure stat that puts every type of play in as one thing doesn't mean we can or should come to a conclusion about him.

We will see, and whether he sucks or doesn't, that stat won't be something that told us one way or the other. Not all stats are equal, especially ones that lump in everything as the same thing and situation.

What I hope for, is the guy is used to his strengths and we put a round peg in a round hole rather than perhaps trying to force him into his weaknesses.

Also what I know is not only did they want to sign this guy, they were emphatic enough to not let him leave until he signs. Also we stole him away from the Giants who were keen to signing him.

Once again since it's a 2 year deal even if he sucks, he isn't a Graves 5 year 30 million dollar Bradley signing. So there is little risk.

But everyone can feel how they want to, it's perfectly within anyone's right. I don't think anyone should see this signing as a boon or a travesty. But if people want to they can.

The Tackle metric measures instances where a tackler is able to make the play, and whether or not he does. Say a Tacklable situation.

Much like measuring WR catches. Not all balls are catchable, and are therefore not meaured in the metric. A ball that is catchable, that should be caught, is.

Same goes for tackles.


So there are zero excuses. When he had the opprotunity to make a tackle, in which most other players would make the tacke, he didnt. He sucks, everyone stop trying to hype this guy and act like this was such a solid signing. Its not. Its garbage and well probably wish for Paris back by mid season.

 

[bg7brd]

The Tackle metric measures instances where a tackler is able to make the play, and whether or not he does. Say a Tacklable situation.

Much like measuring WR catches. Not all balls are catchable, and are therefore not meaured in the metric. A ball that is catchable, that should be caught, is.

Same goes for tackles.


So there are zero excuses. When he had the opprotunity to make a tackle, in which most other players would make the tacke, he didnt. He sucks, everyone stop trying to hype this guy and act like this was such a solid signing. Its not. Its garbage and well probably wish for Paris back by mid season.

I think that it's more of player not playing in his optimal position. Brinkley, IMHO, is a SILB and would have been better served playing in a 3-4. Time will tell.

 

[Bodha]

I think that it's more of player not playing in his optimal position. Brinkley, IMHO, is a SILB and would have been better served playing in a 3-4. Time will tell.

I have no doubt hell do better in a system hes more comfortable with, but that has nothing to do with his missed tackle issues.

A tackle is 1 guy, heads up with another. Doesnt matter what the D was set up as. Get your hands on him, and put him on the turf. JB is one of the worst at that in the league.

Thats not good.



Thats like saying a guy is terrible at shooting 3 pointers in basketball because of the offensive scheme. At the end of the day, its the same ball, same rim, and the line hasnt moved. Tackling is tackling whether its football or rugby

 

[bg7brd]

I have no doubt hell do better in a system hes more comfortable with, but that has nothing to do with his missed tackle issues.

A tackle is 1 guy, heads up with another. Doesnt matter what the D was set up as. Get your hands on him, and put him on the turf. JB is one of the worst at that in the league.

Thats not good.



Thats like saying a guy is terrible at shooting 3 pointers in basketball because of the offensive scheme. At the end of the day, its the same ball, same rim, and the line hasnt moved. Tackling is tackling whether its football or rugby

I suppose it's different playing in the box than out in the flat. I suspect a guy like Takeo Spikes wouldn't be the same player in a 4-3 defense. Again, time will tell.

 

[CardsFan88]

The Tackle metric measures instances where a tackler is able to make the play, and whether or not he does. Say a Tacklable situation.

Much like measuring WR catches. Not all balls are catchable, and are therefore not meaured in the metric. A ball that is catchable, that should be caught, is.

Same goes for tackles.


So there are zero excuses. When he had the opprotunity to make a tackle, in which most other players would make the tacke, he didnt. He sucks, everyone stop trying to hype this guy and act like this was such a solid signing. Its not. Its garbage and well probably wish for Paris back by mid season.

Actually there is a hole in that. What exactly is opportunity to make a tackle? Like I said, the ability to tackle a TE or WR catching a pass is a completely different skill then tackling a running back coming up from a hole. Have him out in the flats or rushing the QB? It takes different traits. Would the best tackling CB make a good tackling MLB? No it's a different skillset.

You use the example that tackling is all the same when it isn't. Some have the propensity to butt heads no matter the game, but there are a lot of NFL players who are good tacklers that wouldn't do squat without a facemask. Thus it WOULD be different. It goes beyond this because I believe ones tackling prowress depends on many things. One is what the situation is when that opportunity arises. He may be limited in one area, and excel if it's another. This metric clouds the two, and obviously there's more than even that. I do know that some people who are studs find a way to be physical and tend to be better at most situations of tackling, but if PP7 is running by a guy or Deion Sanders, they make a lot of good tacklers miss. Doesn't mean they suck. It's a different situation if one of those guys is burning past someone. So it's all different. It can also be influenced by simply playing different teams and random variability of game planning, weather, etc. Perhaps he played more teams that utilize 2 TE's. Perhaps more with 3 WR sets. Perhaps he just happen to be on the field during plays at a higher percentage to fail simply just because. What about previous years? It could be a one year thing, perhaps not, but even if not, still all the above could apply.

So it's taking at least two (and probably many more) situations and lumping them together to make a generic statement.

Then when people see that statement, they say he sucks at tackling. But the question goes back to, well how are we going to use him? To cover te's and slot receivers over the middle first or to be watching the line first?

Thus what I'm saying is that for what we brought him in to do, that metric might be completely off.

I'm not saying it is, but at the same time what I'm pointing out is that within arbitrary numbers and definitions the truth can be obscured.

It's important because if he was a thumper being used to cover, then you're right he might miss TE's and WR's more often then a running back toting the ball, and this metric would not tell us this difference.

Because all it says is 'opportunity to tackle' and thus you can drive a bus of cocaine (with it showing in plain sight) over the mexican border potentially through such a generic statement.

This is also one reason why metrics change. After awhile people figure out the flaws and try to come up with new ones. Are they really better? Or are they just not found out to be flawed yet so people place unwarranted emphasis on them? Plus the whole 'opportunity' thing is entirely subjective from a human perspective, and might not applied evenly and in the exact same manner with everyone. Also is it one guy doing this or multiple?

All I'm doing is saying it might be right, it might be wrong. Would I rather have all the 'metrics' line up, sure would. Will I label him as something just because this metric tells us the opposite? Not yet. I will heed its warning and watch for it. Which is the correct way to apply the usage of such generic metrics. As potential eye openers, not as supreme evidence.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

The optimistic side of me says if he missed 1 tackle every 5.7 and still had 117 tackles, it means he's around the ball alot and making plays.

The pessimist side of me says he played in a 4-3 and and his name is awfully close to Bradley.

I think he'll be fine because he's still young and, as far as I know, injury free. He's probably a better player than Maualuga at this point. Rey just has more name recognition.

 

[imaCafan]

The optimistic side of me says if he missed 1 tackle every 5.7 and still had 117 tackles, it means he's around the ball alot and making plays.

The pessimist side of me says he played in a 4-3 and and his name is awfully close to Bradley.

I think he'll be fine because he's still young and, as far as I know, injury free. He's probably a better player than Maualuga at this point. Rey just has more name recognition.

Funny, I was hoping we sign Rey (cause his name was familiar, meaning to me he must be decent) but seemed like everyone on the Rey thread was saying no to him & that Brinkley was the guy we should sign. We sign Brinkley, now most posters are saying he sucks too......

 

[WarnerHOF]

where is the source for 117 tackles? Every official site says he had less than 100 combined last season.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

The optimistic side of me says if he missed 1 tackle every 5.7 and still had 117 tackles, it means he's around the ball alot and making plays.

The pessimist side of me says he played in a 4-3 and and his name is awfully close to Bradley.

That's it in a nutshell.

At least the FO is signing these guys to short deals like this one for 2 years so if he does suck we don't have 4 or 5 year contract to deal with.