The Consigliere

Members
  • Content count

    1,253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About The Consigliere

  • Rank
    The Role Player
  • Birthday 12/13/1974

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • Redskins Fan Since
    1979
  • Favorite Redskin
    Art Monk
  • Location
    Alameda, California
  • Interests
    Writing, Reading, Travelling, Music, Film, Athletics, Comedy etc
  • Occupation
    Teacher
  1. This is what happens when you fire a superb GM and let the half-wits run the show. Just banging my head against the wall at this point. It's so depressing. Scott did all that work to load us up for a great draft. He knew, as the analytics crowd has, that value is in trading down, not up, and that study after study has backed up that the only way to consistently succeed in drafts is to utilize as many picks as possible. That genius teams are really actually teams w/more selections than others. Now he's gone, and we're back to being the rubes offering the world to move up 20 slots, completely ignoring science and math. This franchise is to stupid for success to happen in any way other than pure accident. So depressing.
  2. Just makes me bang my head against a wall when I hear that. Really, character? Where was character when we signed Chris Culliver? Don't give me that character horse bleep. It's complete bollocks. Character is a big issue for the team when acquiring players that the press will actually notice, otherwise, we don't give a damn about character.
  3. I love Mixon as a prospect too but this doesn't really hold up to scrutiny: 40 Yard Dash: Mixon 91st Percentile > McCaffrey 61st Percentile Burst Score (equally weighted Vertical Leap and Broad Jump: McCaffrey 78th Percentile > Mixon 46th Percentile Agility Score: McCaffrey 97th Percentile> Mixon 45th Percentile Bench Press: Mixon 59th Percentile> McCaffrey 0th Percentile (WEAK-10 reps vs Mixon's 21) SPARQ-x: Mixon 72nd Percentile> McCaffrey 27th Percentile Barfield Yards Created Data: Mixon >McCaffrey (Mixon finished 1st, McCaffrey finished 7th) College Dominator (Pct of RB's Total Team Yards and TD's): McCaffrey 98th percentile > Mixon 42nd Percentile (Perine plays a role here) ROTOVIZ PROSPECT LAB: McCaffrey 78> Mixon 75 http://rotoviz.com/2017/04/2017-rb-prospect-lab-scores-post-combine/?hvid=6AlbPP When you collect all the analytics material and combine data, it's basically a continual pendulum swing between both prospects, with Mixon winning on 5 metrics, and McCaffrey winning on 4. What makes Mixon a much smarter choice to me is the draft day discount in terms of cost. I don't care about the bad press the pick generates. That's a totally separate non-football issue that should not trump making the team an actual better team. Guys like Chris Culliver are proof positive that the Mixon hysteria is complete bollocks. Nobody even knows who the hell Culliver is since his career has careened off the road, and nobody remembers that he did in running a cyclist off the road, and threatening to run down, crash into, and beat up with brass knuckles the child and parent witnesses in family cars that observed the near manslaughter, and then sealed him into a cul de sac in order to keep him on scene till police arrive, infinitely worse than Mixon. Why? Video tape. That's it. Well you could get a 20 to 75 to 150 to 200 pick discount on a talent that would normally go top 10-15 overall in a draft. McCaffrey's going to go at around fair market value or maybe a bit over it. Mixon is going at a sharp discount, the scale of which we don't know yet. Mixon makes a lot more sense with that knowledge in tow. I'd much rather have Mixon in round 2, and an excellent defensive asset in round 1, than McCaffrey in round 1 and whatever left at 49.
  4. Remember this team leaked like my Subaru's head gasket pre-McC, and now it's leaking again. If Keim says that is the target, wouldn't surprise me at all if we end up doing exactly what he thinks we will. Nice to know that PFF rates Willis so highly, Harris at 17 seems like a massive reach though. But remember, the F.O. is now being run by a bunch of stooges so expecting anything halfway intelligent happening is probably expecting too much. Other than Buffalo, and SF, it's hard to imagine there's a worse FO in the league right now and they're on the cusp of replacing, and have just replaced their idiots respectively (although SF hired a neophyte so I wouldn't expect much there).
  5. As you know, I don't think it's a joke. Id put the odds of him going top 15 @ 5% odds of going 16-25 @ 20% odds of going 26-35 @ 20% odds of going 36-50 @ 40% odds of going 51+ @ 15% rough odds. I think his most likely drops are: @17 to us @19 to Tampa Bay @ 21 to Detroit @ 23 to NYG (here they want to take a RB though it sounds like McCaffrey @ 24 to Oakland @27 to KC @29 to GB @30 to Pitt (hearing they're unsure about paying Bell top dollar) @32 to NO(hear this pick could go back to NE) Round 2: @34 to SF @39 to NYJ @40 to Caro @41 to Cincy @42 to NO @43 to Philly @44 to Buff @46 to Indy @47 to Balt @49 to us @50 to TB @53 to Det @55 to NYG @56 to Oak @58 to Sea @59 to KC @61 to GB @62 to Pitt @64 to Caro If I were to guess his landing spot I would agree that it's either 19 to the Bucs, or he falls to probably KC @27, GB @29, SF @34, Carolina @ 40 or between 42-50 where there are literally 7 different teams that could be interested. Remember to consider: Fournette is most likely to go 4th to the Jags or 9th to the Panthers. McCaffrey. seems most likely to land with: 14th to the Eagles: if they break their tradition 15th to the Colts 16th to the Ravens 17th to us 19th to the Bucs 23rd to the Giants 24th to the Raiders 27th to the Chiefs He's definitely a guy who could go via trade up. Then we have Cook, Mixon, Perine, Kamara, Foreman, McNichols, and maybe some team in love with Conner's personality and story going based on system's and needs and of course Mixon's off field issues. Perine, Foreman, and Conner: seems like Us, NYJ, Carolina, Oakland, Detroit, Green Bay, and Pittsburgh Kamara, Mixon, Cook, and McNichols: seems like Us, Tampa Bay, NYG, Oakland, KC, Cincy, New Orleans, Philly, Buffalo, Indy, Baltimore, KC, GB, Pitt and Carolina. Just my random thoughts. I'm curious what we'll target at RB if we don't land McCaffrey or Cook. Who would we want? We already have the slow power guys in Jones and Kelley, and the satellite back in Thompson. Are we gonna target a guy that combines satellite skills with potential bell cow talent w/15-20 touches a game like McCaffrey or like Cook, Mixon, and maybe Kamara and McNichols? Are we going to go w/a between the tackles monster like Perine or Conner or Hunt, or Foreman (though he doesn't run like his size suggests he will). I honestly have no idea who the team likes. If McC was still around I would be imagining he'd be focused on Fournette, Perine, Conner, Mixon, or later guys like Hunt, Brian Hill, and Jamaal Williams. I fully expect us to get a RB, but I'm not sure what they want, and whether they're more satisfied with Kelley as a potential big two down back or Thompson as the satellite guy. Which guys job is more secure? Do they want competition for Kelley, or Thompson? Do they want someone who can do both roles so they can cut how many RB's they need on the roster? I think Kelley makes for a great backup RB, our own Starks, in the sense that he gets what's there, and the offense won't fall off a cliff if he needs to spot start against most teams on the schedule, Thompson seems easier to replace than Kelley's ability to spot start, especially considering the quality of the next two drafts including this years at RB.
  6. I'd be fine with Njoku. He's got monstrous upside, and the highest ceiling of all the prospects and Jordan's a concussion or two away from retirement. I think we could afford to wait on TE with guys like Shaheen, Butt, and Engram to name a few available later. We need to grab one of these guys because Jordan is going to retire sooner rather than later considering his concussion rate, and building the offense around a TE w/his concussion history is beyond moronic and short sighted, and w/this TE crop being either the best ever, or tied for it, we have to take advantage of it. Howard, Njoku, Shaheen, Engram and Hodges are tweeters so I'm not sure about them, but Butt also would be of interest. Doesn't have to be at 17, but I'll be incensed if we don't make a serious effort to land either a top 5 TE prospect (probably Njoku, Howard, Shaheen, Everett, or Butt) or one of the tweeners (Engram is the only one I'm satisfied with right now). Due to the depth of the class I still think we can get get a top 4 prospect by our round 2 pick, but if we trade down to the back of round 2 our only top end option would be Butt in late round 3 or early round 4 if the injury pushes him to day 3.
  7. Barfield's write ups are quite interesting. He is REALLY REALLY high on Mixon, Cook and McCaffrey. https://www.fantasyguru.com/articles/yards-created-2017-class-breakdown Here's a great piece on McCaffrey: https://www.fantasyguru.com/articles/yards-created-christian-mccaffrey All it took for Tunsil to fall from the top ranked prospect overall to out of the top dozen overall picks was a tweeted picture of him in a gas mask taking a toke. So I don't know if we need another incident. We may already have more than enough. I'd still take him at 17 as long as background checks were clean for the most part.
  8. Foster. Best talent available. As long as we do a full work up in terms of background check. This is a fairly deep RB class and the top end of the '18 class is fantastic too. McCaffery is great, but so are Cook, Mixon, Guice,Barkley, maybe Chubb, as well as interesting options in tier 2 this year like Perine, Foreman, McNichols, Hunt etc.
  9. I hear you, but mocks are insanely unreliable because teams are notorious for lying to reporters and planting information and just changing their minds. There's a beat reporter or columnist, forget which, who covers Green Bay whose apparently consistently won the "most accurate mock," award and his hit rate is 11/32. Essentially just a touch above 33%. Not terribly impressive in terms of accuracy, not his fault, of course, hell he's the best at it. But still it tells you how unreliable and difficult it is to project based on cntacts and what you're hearing. Also note that mocks are predicated upon different premises. Some mocks are meant to project what a writer thinks will happen, some are meant to project what the mocker thinks teams will do based on their needs but not w/o contacts and rumors as assists, and some are simply based on a given mockers projected top 32. I think that's part of the reason there is such inconsistency. We also struggle to consistently know which mockers actually have legit contacts and which don't, seems obvious the Green Bay guy must have good contacts, but a lot of others can end up being "useful idiots" for front offices like Will McDonough and Fred Edelstein who were constantly used as tools to leak information a team wanted made public in their own interest. You may be right. In terms of talent and risk assessment, I think Cook is worth a pick from about 15 and below, the agility concern is a big one for me because I dont understand the discrepancy between the performance in the drill and what you see on the field, these kinds of discrepancy's are quite rare, add in the shoulder deal and the fumbles and I'm a bit concerned, the off field stuff sounds like basically a collection of minor offenses that anybody in college could get in trouble for (and the reporting on the incident w/a women backs up the idea of a mis-identification of the assailant, multiple witnesses say it had zilch to do with Cook, and the jury agreed-who cares about bb guns, and the animal thing sounds quite mild compared to Ishamel Zamora's video or Vick's behavior), I'm a fan, heck I plan on picking him ahead of Fournette and maybe McCaffrey in Dynasty drafts pending landing spot :).
  10. No I'm not, I'm arguing, as the history of the draft backs up, that reaching certain numbers in certain drills is more directly correlated with future success in the NFL, than relying on tape, and scout observations. There's no perfect way to do this, and I'm perfectly aware that there are some combine warriors that simply can't translate their gifts, whether it be opportunity and situation or just a lack of ability (McKinnon so far looks like that), but I also know that #'s allow you to remove biases, and that historically analysis of certain aspects of the combine and certain metrics have proven much more reliable in making projections than counting stats or tape. There are plenty of mistakes utilizing both systems, and guys like Kamara are an interesting inbetween. He's not terribly impressive on tape, but hugely impressive at the combine, and yet terribly unimpressive again when it comes to analytics w/regards to his actual work as a back using higher level analytical tools. There's no perfect way to project these things, but removing the biases that come from tape is hugely important when possible, and while tape obviously should be a part of evaluation, it shouldn't be the only part and not the most important in some ways either.
  11. I don't really buy that, I will say one thing, in terms of bests all time, it's right there with '10 in terms of the best TE class ever. There are 3 guys with potnetial All pro potential in Howard, Engram and Njoku, there are another 3-5 guys with pro bowl to very good potential: in everett, Shaheen, Hodges, Butt etc. Very deep in terms of top end talent, although guys like Engram and Hodges are tweeners. It definitely is a very high end draft in terms of defense, I've heard repeated references to the class being quite top heavy in defensive talent overall (18-20 of the top 25 guys are viewed as defensive prospects), also heard that the draft is very deep after that at positions like CB and DB. The flaws appear to be in edge rushers in particular. I expect us to take advantage of this depth through adding defensive talent early, before trying to add a foundation RB, and one of those stud TE's. then again who knows, things are obviously in flux.
  12. I just can't see the justification for taking him in round 1. There is way too much baggage, even w/the top 5 overall upside. We've had our own issues w/players that lacked motivation, possibly love for the game and had attitudes before (see Michael Westbrook for one notorious example), and there is a history of these guys failing at an unusually high rate considering draft pedigree. That's why the Nkmediche example is a sort of good one. Nkemdiche paid a 30 slot penalty for a sketchy final year and falling out of a window after getting baked. He was generally the consensus #1 overall prospect heading into the '15 season in the summer of '15. At the time I thought the Cardinals selection of him was a steal at slot because the discount for the poor season, and falling out the window was already baked into the slotting where the Cardinals selected him. Instead of using a top 3 overall pick and corresponding cash on Nkemdiche, the Cardinals were selecting him after around 29 guys or so had been picked, a huge discount in terms of player potential versus draft pedigree. That's why if you want a McDowell or a Mixon, selecting them in late round 1 or round 2 makes a lot of sense if that's where the feel of the draft is going. If a La'El Collins situation is developing, maybe you wait till the tail end of round 3. Both McDowell, and Mixon represent excellent potential values if they fall as expected-both are top 5-10 talents in this draft. I wouldn't have a problem selecting either of them so long as it wasn't with a top 30 pick in the case of McDowell and a top 15 pick in the case of Mixon. You do have to read the tea leaves on Mixon though and it's unclear where or how far Mixon will fall but his value is #1 to #2 overall RB in the class, and unlike McDowell, his ability to translate his skill set, and avoid being sabotaged by motivational questions aren't genuine concerns, it's just off the field scumbaggery. To me I'd take McDowell with a sub-50 pick, and I'd play selecting Mixon based upon expectations and word around the league, I've heard he could go as high as top 20 according to a packers scout who was overheard at his pro day, to as low as La'El Collins. Figuring out where he will go based upon the scuttlebutt could be huge as selecting him would flat out solve our RB issues and at a seemingly very, very cheap cost. And yes, Cook, if he falls, would make a lot of sense in a trade down in round 2.
  13. yes it can, and it can easily. If field production trumped underwear olympics, it would be infinitely easier to avoid busts. It isn't. Production can be impacted by offensive scheme, OL quality, conference and schedule quality, opportunity and much more. Ignoring metrics and the combine for RB's is an extremely foolhardy gambit. WR combine's aren't nearly as predictive as RB, things like market share, air yards, breakout age, etc play a huge role in terms of predicting WR success in terms of probabilities compared to the combine, but RB shows a much, much closer allignment between 3 cone and associated metrics (like keeping that 40 under 4.65, measurments, agility in general etc) and future success than counting stats.
  14. Let's just say that I disagree w/you fundamentally on this. I don't view the draft geeks as particularly helpful about this. Nearly all of them are exclusively film guys and not numbers guys which is a huge problem made worse by the active antagonism towards numbers guys when it's been proven a gazillion times over that the #'s guys are much, much, much better at evaluating playmaking prospects (QB-RB-WR-TE). When it comes to the other positions it's a mix of tape, of data analysis as well. I tend to view Draft geeks skeptically, though not to the degree of others (I think Kiper is a perfectly reasonable analyst for instance, whereas I think most people's annoyance with his position, and it's relation to self-annoiting, and his personality result in others being dismissive of him), and tend to use their takes only to get a general idea of where prospects probably will go in tiered zone whenever there is consensus. I think Cook's performance at the combine dropped him from a top 10-20 selection to a top 25-55 selection. I'll be surprised if he goes higher and definitely would attribute to the voice of individuals in the war room trumping information in the war room (the same way the Cowboys appear to have selected Dak Prescott against the interests of their top personel guys, instead overruling them due to the massive support Dak had from particular players, and former Cowboys who were screaming that Dak should be the pick-apparently Jerry listened, and overruled his son and the head of the scouting department, taking Dak over Driskell, and not pulling the trigger on QB's they had highly rated earlier (like Cook)). This happens, it could happen again with Cooks, though I'm skeptical. Cook's pro day is largely irrelevant, especially considering he avoided the damning three cone, and because Pro Day's are simply not held in the same esteem as the combine because it's considered a non-neutral testing environment. Teams take the Pro Day much more seriously even to the extent of apparently typically adding .2-.5 seconds to recorded times in the 40 for instance as a default corrective. You may think the combine is old news, but it emphatically isn't. All this being said, like you, I'm a big fan of Cook, and view him as a very underrated RB, he's the #2 in my RB ranks, but because of the 3 cone, I would only consider drafting him in a trade down. I really, really, really wanted him to perform the 3 cone again to see if he had nerves, a bad day, sick, whatever, playing a factor. The performance in games, on tape, and in some metrics are so damn good, that I can't help but feel that something flat out interfered with him performing up to his ability. the fact that he didn't test in it again suggests to me that he and his agent both knew he couldn't improve it enough for it to matter so they left it off the pro day script and that is definitely not good. I keep hearing that Fournette is a lock to go to the Jags and if not there, to the Panthers. We'll see. Sometimes we get surprises, sometimes we dont McCaffrey's numbers are so damn good, whether you look at inside running in Barfield's metric (McCaffrey's inside running numbers were the best in the class, pretty shocking there, better than both Fournette and Cook-although McCaffrey had a much better OL than Cook so there's that), agility in the 3 cone, burst/explosiveness in the jump drills, his route running performance which was absurdly good, he's incredible and I think he has a chance to be an everydown back at the next level and should be considered along with Mixon, and Cook, as easily the best tier in the draft. I have heard that despite rumors to the contrary, people should pay attention to the history of the Eagles F.O., and their head of scouting who echoes it, the Eagles haven't drafted a RB in round 1 since '86 (Byars, or was it '87?), and the semi-new guy in the war room imported from Baltimore played a key role in the decision making process in Baltimore which lead to nearly a half dozen Pro Bowl RB's being drafted between 2005-2014 or thereabouts, all selected outside of the top 2 rounds save for Ray Rice (round 2). That sportswriter was convinced the eagles would address other needs in round 1, before considering RB on day 2 or 3 considering the depth of the class. So that will be interesting to watch too, I imagine the Colts would be ecstatic to have McCaffrey fall in their laps if the Eagles passed. Maybe the Saints too? Who knows. I think Cooks would be a perfect fit for Tampa, but I also would suspect they'd trade down if they wanted him that badly. We'll see. I think in time he will prove worthy of a top 15-20 selection, but I think the flags more than justify him falling out of round 1 (bad combine, bad shoulder/injury history, off field concerns, and fumbles-truly insane fumble rate especially in comparison to say Matt Jones-although Cooks is a gazillion miles the prospect, it's odd that there's so much love for Cook considering that he's 10x the fumbler Jones is). A couple of years from now, pending landing spot I suspect the RB's will prove to be 1. Mixon 2. Cooks 3. McCaffrey big dip 4.Fournette Moderate dip 5.-10: Perine, Hunt, McNichols, Foreman, A. Jones, and maybe Kamara I don't think there's a clear order from 5-11 or thereabouts, though there are hints that if McNichols can develop as a RB (recruited as a WR), he could end up vaulting into the top 4.
  15. I've posted why I think Cook will drop to round 2, or at best late round 1, I don't buy the mocks, the rumors, or any of that, I buy how teams react to the various sources of information they have to work with. With that being said, here's my argument about the difficulty of assessing Cook in combo with Mixon, Fournette and McCaffrey, and maybe the nicest piece of analytic support for the drafting of Cook ahead of all the guys save Mixon (and even possibly above him: My arguments pro-Cook: Despite an awful combine (most particularly a god awful three cone which is a terribly bad sign in terms of predictive models) Cook still had a litany of big games where he absolutely destroyed defenses (including Clemson twice, Miami twice, Florida twice, Michigan in the Orange Bowl, an interesting game against North Carolina early in the season (246 total yards and 3 TD's) and against Louisville in '15 but not '16 (they were blown off the field so the poor game is understandable) he was also impressive. Now no doubt you can trash Cook for what feels like an inexplicable combine performance (if you've watched him actually play, it's hard to make sense of how bad he tested), but how do you reconcile that with his outrageously impactful performance against elite teams with loads of NFL prospects on defense in Clemson, Florida, and Michigan, and to a lesser extent, Miami. Are we supposed to give up on Cook because of the tests? I'm a big believer in the importance of the 3 cone, and the combine, but knowing that FSU's line play has not been what it once was during the bulk of Cook's time there (FSU featured sub top 20 line play for the top 20 RB's in this class, in other words, of the top 20 ranked RB's in this class, FSU's line was worth than all of those corresponding lines), it underlines how hugely impressive he was as FSU's starting tailback. He destroyed every good team he ever played against with the exception of Louisiville in '16 and Houston in their bowl game following the '15 season, both of which can somewhat be explained (Louisville jumped out to an early 14-0 lead, extended it to 35-10 before the half and that was all she wrote, same deal with the bowl game where FSU slept walked through the first half and quickly fell behind 21-3 to Houston before again, being forced to throw all game). If Cook destroyed the best teams on FSU's schedule, and he did with consistency, and multiple times in the case of Miami, Clemson and Florida, and his line play isn't elite, or even good for that matter, and he isn't a system back in the way Wisconsin can produce them, then how much should his combine matter and how far she he fall because of it?" Now consider Graham Barfield's Yards created metric and how Cook produced within it, based on this metric, and Cook's horrible line, Barfield ranks Cook tops in the class, the article is well worth reading beyond the snippet, as are the pieces on McCaffrey and others he's put together so far. Based on his analysis it appears he has Mixon, Cook and McCaffrey as clearly the top backs, followed by Fournette, then there's a drop off: here's a snippet of his analysis with a link to his piece on cook: www.fantasyguru.com/articles/yards-created-dalvin-cook FSU's OL finished 22nd in terms of yards created blocking amongst the 23 lines/RB's Barfield had charted through March 6th of this year, and last year's class (only Dixon's OL was worse). "Despite poor run blocking, Cook created 7.23 yards per attempt in his rushes out of the shotgun. That is by far the single best figure in my database over the last two years. For comparison’s sake, Joe Mixon (6.75) and Ezekiel Elliott (5.98) are No. 2 and No. 3 behind Dalvin Cook in Yards Created/Attempt from the shotgun.Not only did Cook create the most yards per rush out of shotgun; he also dominated on his off-tackle (outside) carries. Among qualified runners, Cook (7.66 YC/A on outside attempts) just marginally bested Ezekiel Elliott (7.63) for the top spot in my database.What makes his Combine so confounding is just how fantastic his Yards Created data actually is. Cook has incredible natural suddenness in his game. Above all, the FSU product is unmatched at setting the edge with his feet and eyes working in tandem to explode up the field on off-tackle runs. In fairness, Cook is closer to average on inside-zone attempts—he created 4.47 yards/carry as an interior runner—but so too was Leonard Fournette (4.46 YC/A on inside carries)....Because FSU was fairly liberal in their rushing sets from both the shotgun and under center, Cook faced a normal distribution of defenders in the box.For reference, I have found that the average college running back faces seven or fewer defenders inside of the tackle box on 70 to 75 percent of their attempts. As such, this gives us a barometer of how running backs perform against similar defensive fronts.Cook dominated here, too.Among the 10 running backs I have finished charting in the 2017 class, only Joe Mixon (6.98) created more yards/attempt versus seven or fewer defenders in the box than Dalvin Cook (6.73). So far, Alvin Kamara and Leonard Fournette (6.53) are tied for third in Yards Created/Attempt vs. seven or fewer defenders...Once again, Cook completely outshines his peers. Over the past two running back classes, Cook is second in missed tackles forced on a per attempt basis and first in missed tackles forced by speed alone (0.21). What’s interesting is that despite a poor showing in the agility-based three-cone drill at the Combine, Cook’s elusiveness wasn’t an issue at all in his data. In fact, Cook is fourth in the 2017 class behind Joe Mixon, Kareem Hunt, and Christian McCaffrey in missed tackles forced by elusiveness (defined as “cutting” in space or in tight quarters) on a per attempt basis.."Really, really confounding prospect...."