Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

FormerKCfan · 01-19-2012, 04:48 PM

(01-19-2012 04:42 PM)Radical Wrote: A good place to get some real close and nitty-gritty analysis of all teams and players is ProFootballFocus if you've never heard of them. You'd been hard pressed to beat their premium statistical analysis.

Adding that one to my list, Radical, and thanks.

FormerKCfan · 01-19-2012, 04:54 PM

(01-19-2012 03:08 PM)Dale4Saul2Red0 Wrote: Damn this guy leaves KC, comes over here and comes out guns a blazing. Me likey!

Thanks for that Dale. I have a real long way to go in terms of Falcon knowledge but your early affirmation is encouraging!

FormerKCfan · 01-19-2012, 05:19 PM

By the way and this is as good a place to insert this info as any other, now that I've jumped over to the Falcons and from this point forward a fan, it's worth noting that I'm a franchise's best friend or worst enemy based on what I see from play on the field, moves made be the front office, and intangibles from the media.

It's not always pretty or ugly but I will bring it. My old Chief's fans will so attest. FYI to all. BTW, I like being here with all of you.

***phocis850*** · 01-19-2012, 06:19 PM

(01-19-2012 05:19 PM)FormerKCfan Wrote: By the way and this is as good a place to insert this info as any other, now that I've jumped over to the Falcons and from this point forward a fan, it's worth noting that I'm a franchise's best friend or worst enemy based on what I see from play on the field, moves made be the front office, and intangibles from the media.

It's not always pretty or ugly but I will bring it. My old Chief's fans will so attest. FYI to all. BTW, I like being here with all of you.

Most of us here are pretty open to other's view points. We all don't see eye to eye on everything, but we do allow the voice to be heard. So never feel ashamed of your opinion on an event. For example, Radical was a MM nut hugger. Then came the playoff game against the Giants, and it finally broke him. I've always hated MM. I'm not sure what Koetter will do, but I do know this, it's not MM.

ViperXX79 · 01-19-2012, 06:48 PM

(01-19-2012 03:37 PM)juraitwaluzka Wrote: I like the analysis but I would like to see it in terms of number of snaps instead of starts. Take a CB, if you are #3 on the depth chart are you not a starter even though you may have played many snaps in nickel or dime formations? Another example would be RB or DL where because of rotation you might get meaningful snaps even though you didn't start.

I'd like to see some sort of average based on snaps. For example I'm much more impressed with Sidbury's 4 sacks than Edwards 4 sacks (I think my numbers right but even if not the point remains)

But if you actually watched the games then you would see that a few of Sid's "sacks" were gifts from the QB's because they fumbled and just went to the ground waiting to be touched.

juraitwaluzka · 01-20-2012, 03:20 PM

Even so, in order to pick up his gifts he had to at least be near the QB, something Ray Edwards didn't do much of. He was almost as invisible as Jamal Anderson, an upgrade but not much of one. Hopefully the knee was a big part of it, between that and Nolan I hope to see much better production from him next season.

**Radical** · 01-20-2012, 05:22 PM

(01-19-2012 06:19 PM)phocis850 Wrote: For example, Radical was a MM nut hugger. Then came the playoff game against the Giants, and it finally broke him.

*Raises hand and opens mouth in protest*
*Glares for a second*
*Puts hand down, sighs, and walks away*

Knight of God · 01-23-2012, 12:03 AM

(01-19-2012 10:34 AM)FormerKCfan Wrote: You've heard about how you can't judge a team's draft class for something on the order of 3 years down the road? There's a lot to be said for that given the transition and development time for most young NFL players. I wanted to take an early look at drafting from another perspective which is, how many team's rooks earned considerable playing time this past season and in so doing, found some surprises.

The criteria is simple. The number of rooks starting at least 8 games or more for their respective teams or those young players making an impact for their team from jumpstreet. And where do the teams rank? For example, leading off with the Falcons, rooks appeared in an aggregate total of 61 games this past season while only one, Julio Jones, started 8 games or more. By my calculation, this places Atlanta 30th in the NFL in terms of total rook appearances. Now, that's not a bad thing. It can and should be intrepreted that the Falcons have an experienced playoff team with few opportunities for rooks to make an impact unless they're exceptional players like Julio.

Some random comparisons to other NFL teams:

Tampa had a 96 game array featuring rookie appearances with 3 players making 8 or more starts: DE Clayborn, TE Stocker & LB Foster.

Carolina had rooks participating in 104 total games, and two players started 8 or more: QB Newton & DT McClain.

New Orleans' rooks got in a total of 66 games with only DE Jordan making 8 or more starts.

Only 3 teams, NYG, Pack & SF had no rooks on their rosters make 8 or more game starts in the past season. Every other NFL team had at least 1 rookie make 8 or more starts.

What to make from all of this? Not much, really. It's interesting from the standpoint of assessing impact values of players but one also has to balance the status of the respective teams as to their veteran presence so the results are skewed in that the struggling teams are more apt to play rooks than established teams. One other nugget I picked up points out the importance of first round picks. There were a total of 20 NFL rooks making 8 or more starts this past season that came from the 1st round.

woW

**papachaz** · 01-24-2012, 12:43 AM

(01-23-2012 12:03 AM)Knight of God Wrote: woW

yeah, this guys good huh.