Discussion in 'Arizona Cardinals' started by Ronin, Mar 26, 2021.
What do we think of Rashad Weaver? I did a search for his name in this thread, but nothing came up.
Saw an interview with him on PFT this morning. Simms thinks he's a top 5 edge rusher...Would that out him in 2nd round? Weaver said he watches a lot of film on Chandler Jones (due to similar body and traits) and JJ Watt. Maybe he'd be a good kid to bring in to groom to take over in 2 years.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Unequivocally??? I'd like to see that proof.
Just going off the the top of my head:
Marshall Faulk, Emmitt Smith, Franco Harris, Roger Craig, Marshawn Lynch, Terrell Davis, Walter Payton, John Riggins, Ray Rice, Tony Dorsett, Ricky Watters.....
Fair enough! Only drafting a 1st-round RB when you have the luxury to do so isn't necessarily something I'd stick to--I'd still take an Adrian Peterson at the top-end, when he's the best talent available--but your point is solid.
did it really?
have you already forgotten the Hassan reddick debacle?
Well I guess it’s like that if you want to use stupid ridiculous hyperbole to prop up your bad argument.
it’s called data set significance. First you want to limit examining success of a league with 31 teams to only two. You also want to limit the discussion to only the modern era (you haven’t defined that - but you’ve stated this isn’t the 1990s). So let’s say we even take since 2000. In that span there have been over 250 playoff teams (most would consider making the playoffs a “successful season”). But you want to narrow the game to just 42 playoff teams. On top of that, with repeat teams during that span the examination is often relatively redundant (either same/similar personnel or they reach the super bowl for the same reason - so counting them twice sort of waters down the analysis). I mean, why not just look at super bowl winners if it’s about the ultimate prize? Or if we are looking for a the best of the best why not just examine the patriots as they’ve had multiple Super Bowls? The reason - and I believe you know it - is that both would p’shawed as insignificant data sets. I think the same is easily said of just the two teams that reach the super bowl. Not significant enough data to be persuasive.
Same boots, same jackets, same pick axes, same food, same strategy, same goggles? Don’t think so.
this is just one of the worst analogies I’ve ever seen on this board.
if he is there at #16 and you are the GM -- what do you do? (and if he is there, it implies the big 3 CBs are gone)
I take him without hesitation
John Brown was 179 coming out... The fact he’ll be 23 as a rookie and still rail thin makes you think his frame can’t hold weight.
Aaannnndddd I’m still taking Harris.
If I have to explain how committees giving you better odds of success doesn't mean that great running backs don't exist then I'm wasting my time.
Have we gone back to 1982? Running backs simply don't carry the same importance anymore. As I've explained, it's a position that's highly reliable on the offensive line and scheme. Get those things right and your running game is good whether you have CMC or Kenyan Drake in the backfield. Get them wrong and the same applies.
The Barry Sanders and Adrian Petersons of the world that can make lemon out of lemonade are few and far between. And there's certainly none in this draft.
AD probably wouldn't go top 10 today because of his receiving. I know that's crazy, but that's where the game is now.
Look, I like you and Solar, don't take this rather robust discussion personally. I just think the game has moved on and with it RB has lost it's value. I'd revise slightly what I said before, I don't think no RB is worth a 1st round pick, but I don't think they are worth high picks anymore. And I don't think the NFL does either judging by the last couple of years. Mid 20's onwards seems right and even then only if the board doesn't fall kindly. Unless they are also a massive receiving threat like CMC of course.
Making the playoffs isn't a successful season. Making the NFCCG or AFCCG could be considered a success. Anything else, not really.
But let's play your game and look at last year.
Chiefs - 803, 254, 169, 123, 97
Bills - 687, 481, 70, 63
Steelers - 721, 368, 113, 65
Titans - 2027, 204, 95
Ravens - 805, 723, 299, 70
Browns - 1067, 841, 166
Colts - 1169, 380, 308
Packers - 1104, 505, 242
Saints - 932, 656, 101
Seahawks - 681, 356, 108, 88
WFT - 795, 365, 258
Bucs - 978, 367, 109
Rams - 625, 624, 419
Bears - 1070, 232, 74
So. Of 14 teams only 5 have what you would call a feature back or bellcow. I think you might try to argue RoJo was that guy for the Bucs but he wasn't. He got a bunch of those yards early in the season, lost a lot of carries to Fournette later. I had him in FF so the sadness still lingers.
Carson probably would have had more yards if not for missing some games but would have been 908 at the same rate. And the point is, they still made the playoffs spreading the load around.
If you want to do other years feel free but in todays game, a feature back just isn't crucial.
I'd still like a solid 3rd back before I'm happy with the RB room though.
Separate names with a comma.