|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Apr 27, 2018 21:32:31 GMT -5
You're on an NFL thread boss. Want me to link you to NE's coaching staff or are you done? Underling, you of course, were talking about LOSERS, I was talking about a WINNER.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Apr 27, 2018 21:39:39 GMT -5
Uh...what?
We were talking about DEs value vs DBs.
I think someone replaced you glycerine pills with quaaludes. I can't say I'm not a little jealous.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Apr 28, 2018 18:25:11 GMT -5
OK, if you want talk DEs vs DBs, there are more DBs taken in the first round than DEs.
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 19:04:23 GMT -5
Since 2000: Average 1st Round Picks(Total)CB- 4.37 (83)DE- 3.74 (71) Average # of Top 10 PicksCB-0.89 (17) DE-1.05 (20)Average # of Top 5 PicksCB-0.26 (5) DE-0.74 (14)Average # of Top Overall PicksCB- 0.00 (0) DE- 0.21 (4) *edited-wrongly counted Peppers as a #1source: www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?position=LB&type=position
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Apr 28, 2018 19:18:26 GMT -5
AH, but Mr. Torch wants to talk DEFENSIVE BACKS, he does not want to differentiate between Corners and Safeties.
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 19:46:57 GMT -5
note: change of reference sources to profootballreference.com
Since 2000:
For Normalization: (DB=4 positions:2CB/2S) (DE=2 positions: 2DE)
1st Round Picks DB-104 DE-75
Normalized 1st Round Picks DB-26 DE-37.5
Top 10 Picks DB-23 DE-23
Normalized Top 10 Picks DB-5.75 DE-11.5
Top 5 Picks DB-6 DE-13
Normalized Top 5 Picks DB-1.5 DE-6.5
Top Overall Picks DB-0 DE-4
Normalized Top Overall Picks DB-0 DE-2
Average 1st Round Pick Position DB- 18.53 DE- 15.65
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 19:52:24 GMT -5
note: change of reference sources to profootballreference.com Since 2000: For Normalization: (DB=4 positions:2CB/2S) (DE=2 positions: 2DE)1st Round PicksDB-104 DE-75 Normalized 1st Round Picks DB-26 DE-37.5Average # of 1st Round Picks DB-5.47 DE-3.94 Average Number of 1st Round Picks per position DB- 1.36 DE- 1.97
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 20:00:13 GMT -5
there are more DBs taken in the first round than DEs. That is a correct statement, however, as the numbers are showing, that's quite a deceiving statement. Almost all the data since 2000 points to DEs being more valuable in the draft than DB. The only other thing you could point to would be if you considered only # CB vs DE, but even then, every other underlying statistic in that comparison leans towards DE. It would be interesting to look into actual value(likely by Total NFL Service Time) to see how that comparison would play out, but if we're strictly looking at value based on the draft, then it looks like its DE over DB
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Apr 28, 2018 20:09:02 GMT -5
AH, but Mr. Torch wants to talk DEFENSIVE BACKS, he does not want to differentiate between Corners and Safeties. Rofl. 1. You realize if you split up S and CB then the numbers get even worse for you. 2. With Nickel and Dime packages you can have up to 6 DBs on the field at the same time. You never have more than 2 DE on the field at the same time. Fillmore, you are just making yourself look more and more like an idiot. I'm starting to actually feel sorry for you.
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 20:11:18 GMT -5
Since 2000
1st Round DE Leaders OSU-4 Missouri-4 USC-4
1st Round DB Leaders OSU-10 Miami(Fl)-9 Alabama-6 Florida-6 LSU-6 Texas-6
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Apr 28, 2018 20:16:27 GMT -5
Hey Fillmore. I'll see you tonight when you lay down and close your eyes.
Sweet dreams pumpkin. <B
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on Apr 28, 2018 20:17:10 GMT -5
2. With Nickel and Dime packages you can have up to 6 DBs on the field at the same time. You never have more than 2 DE on the field at the same time. Correct, hence the need for normalization. I used 4(2CB/2S) but in all actuality, if you looked at the average number of DBs on the field per defensive play in the NFL, I would guess that number is probably just a shade under 5, if not over 5. And with the NFL trending to more passing and more Nickel Base defenses, that number has only increased recently. It probably hovered around 4 in the 80s, but now is likely hovering around 5. There may be some variance to the DE number as well(2), but I would guess the variance is much less than DBs, due to the dedicated Nickel and Dime packages.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Apr 30, 2018 16:52:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cbus on May 6, 2018 9:12:59 GMT -5
I hope Mayfield has the work ethic of Tom Brady (or close to it).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2018 17:33:12 GMT -5
I'm expecting his work ethic to be a lot like Johnny Manziel, On and off the field. But, I hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by clb6110 on May 7, 2018 7:57:37 GMT -5
I still don't see that comparison. Actually none of the national media that I've heard compare him to Manziel either it's normally someone who watched little of his game compare the 2. He had 1 run in with the law in college,so did I and my son and many other college kids, and people think he's trouble. There were red flags on JM for years that were completely overlooked. I haven't heard about near the issues with Mayfield. I like him but hope he sits at least 10 games. That being said I was more upset with the #4 pick. I'm OK with Ward but really wanted Chubb.
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on May 7, 2018 9:22:39 GMT -5
It do wonders for us, and the entire city of Cleveland if we were to stop talking about Mayfield and start talking about Tyrod.
Taylor is a competent enough QB to win a decent amount of ballgames.
Wins speak though. As the losses mount up, the call for Mayfield obviously increases.
Then again, maybe he gets Sam Bradford’d before the season even starts
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on May 7, 2018 9:55:30 GMT -5
I like the fact that Mayfield walked on twice as a collegian. That tells me he has some drive and passion.
I would have taken Chubb at #4 too.
I've seen enough Tyrod to know he is better than we have had but hard to get excited about.
|
|
|
Post by CEOSouth on May 7, 2018 10:05:09 GMT -5
Yeah, I should rephrase that.
Taylor is a competent enough QB to not lose us a decent amount of ballgames.
|
|