We need a more Balanced GM!!

[Nickster]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

We need a more balanced fan base.

 

I agree. 

 

Too many self assured opinions in the echo chamber. 

 

Not enough tolerance of opposing viewpoints. 

 

Too much emphasis put on posters' interpretations of what statistics show.

 

Too much confidence and not enough ownership.  

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I can't assume Campbell and Pittman were bad picks, but I can assume guys like AJ Brown, Terry Mclaurin, DK Metcalf, Mecole Hardman, Diontae Johnson, Deebo Samuel and Chase Claypool who were all available to us are better players than Campbell and Pittman. If you don't believe Reich was heavily in favor of both Campbell and Pittman, look it up and watch "with the next pick". I'm not wrong.

So what?

Ballard does not have the benefit of hindsight before the draft. 

This 'what if's' or we 'shoulda did this' serves no purpose. 

It's not a point if I believe Reich was heavily in favor of anything.

You sitting around working yourself up over something you have no control over is a useless adventure. 

Geez Jared, just chill. 

[Nickster]

12 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I can't assume Campbell and Pittman were bad picks, but I can assume guys like AJ Brown, Terry Mclaurin, DK Metcalf, Mecole Hardman, Diontae Johnson, Deebo Samuel and Chase Claypool who were all available to us are better players than Campbell and Pittman. If you don't believe Reich was heavily in favor of both Campbell and Pittman, look it up and watch "with the next pick". I'm not wrong.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but why do you think it's safe to assume they are better?  

 

I'd really like to have Johnson or Brown BTW.  Not sure about the other guys.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

I'm not saying you are wrong, but why do you think it's safe to assume they are better?  

 

I'd really like to have Johnson or Brown BTW.  Not sure about the other guys.

They have all had a decent to great sample size so far in their careers. They have shown the capability of being "hits" or at the very least, very good depth players. Campbell and Pittman have shown nothing thus far, and anything they do is based on pure potential and hope right now. 

[Yoshinator]

7 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So what?

Ballard does not have the benefit of hindsight before the draft. 

This 'what if's' or we 'shoulda did this' serves no purpose. 

It's not a point if I believe Reich was heavily in favor of anything.

You sitting around working yourself up over something you have no control over is a useless adventure. 

Geez Jared, just chill. 

Ballard doesn't have the benefit of hindsight, but he does have the benefit of a group of scouts, and the ability to watch every minute of tape on these guys. That's not to mention combines, pro days and interviews as well. If he can't choose correctly based on all that, what makes him any better than us at choosing WRs? I can choose a WR that's projected to go in the 2nd round two years in a row and probably do better than Campbell and Pittman without hindsight. I guess my standards are high for Ballard.

[Superman]

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

I agree. 

 

Too many self assured opinions in the echo chamber. 

 

Not enough tolerance of opposing viewpoints. 

 

Too much emphasis put on posters' interpretations of what statistics show.

 

Too much confidence and not enough ownership.  

 

This feels like the perpetuation of an agenda. Just want the record to reflect that I'm not on board.

[ColtStrong2013]

4 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

   I would argue that this is the deepest roster I’ve seen from the Colts in a long while.

also the most competitive, IMO. We’ll see for sure over the next 4 weeks and going forward this season, but this team is built to compete... which was the vision of Ballard.

[Nickster]

9 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

They have all had a decent to great sample size so far in their careers. They have shown the capability of being "hits" or at the very least, very good depth players. Campbell and Pittman have shown nothing thus far, and anything they do is based on pure potential and hope right now. 

OK but I don't get how you can assume all those players are better at this point.  It's OK.  I don't have to.

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

This feels like the perpetuation of an agenda. Just want the record to reflect that I'm not on board.

It's just a joke Supe.  R E L A X

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard doesn't have the benefit of hindsight, but he does have the benefit of a group of scouts, and the ability to watch every minute of tape on these guys. That's not to mention combines, pro days and interviews as well. If he can't choose correctly based on all that, what makes him any better than us at choosing WRs? I can choose a WR that's projected to go in the 2nd round two years in a row and probably do better than Campbell and Pittman without hindsight. I guess my standards are high for Ballard.

The bottom line is injuries have played a part in Pittman and Campbell and you want to blame Ballard for that.

Judging Ballard because a couple of his draft picks got injured is not standards, it's being delusional. 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

The bottom line is injuries have played a part in Pittman and Campbell and you want to blame Ballard for that.

Judging Ballard because a couple of his draft picks got injured is not standards, it's being delusional. 

You're assuming that Campbell and Pittman would have performed as well as those other WRs I mentioned. That may not be true. Even if they didn't get injured, it doesn't mean they would be hits either. As I said, what we do know is all those other WR's are hits 100%, that's a fact. Campbell is an injury bust up to this point that may or may not be good if he plays. Pittman has been injured and he may or may not be good when he plays now. You can't assume they will play as well as those other guys. That's the difference. I'm not assuming, I have a sample size on them that proves they are good. There is no guarantee Campbell and Pittman are good even with healthy.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

This feels like the perpetuation of an agenda. Just want the record to reflect that I'm not on board.

And I don't necessarily include you.  Last year you and many others were just dead wrong on Jacoby Brissett.  A few of us could see that he was not any good at all.  A bunch of you guys used stats to show he was good when it was pretty clear that he sucked.

I think JT is not very good this year, and might never be a good RB.  People are starting to come around to that viewpoint, but you should have seen the nonsense thrown my why because I said I wasn't impressed with his running.  That video that the one dude put on here shows what I and others have seen all along.

 

You and I discussed his contract, and I've even seen you reference that this year.  it seems as though you realize you were wrong on that too.  

 

I hadn't heard the new idea that running doesn't factor into PA success.  I am not fully on board with it, but I am contemplating it.  If I eventually come to see it as true I'll say I changed my mind and my former perspective is wrong.  

 

That's my agenda.  

 

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

You're assuming that Campbell and Pittman would have performed as well as those other WRs I mentioned. That may not be true. Even if they didn't get injured, it doesn't mean they would be hits either. As I said, what we do know is all those other WR's are hits 100%, that's a fact. Campbell is an injury bust up to this point that may or may not be good if he plays. Pittman has been injured and he may or may not be good when he plays now. You can't assume they will play as well as those other guys. That's the difference. I'm not assuming, I have a sample size on them that proves they are good. There is no guarantee Campbell and Pittman are good even with healthy.

I don't think that is what it says.  I am not assuming that they would be better than anyone, but I pretty much know there is no real way to judge it yet because they haven't played.  The games that Campbell did play were with a horrible QB. and unlike Mclaurin for instance, he wasn't near the first option on a team last year with Ebron, TY, Doyle healthy, and a heavy running game with Hines taking receptions.  

 

Me I never saw anything from Campbell until his first game this season and he looked like he was going to be deadly on long crossers which is what he should be able to do really well.  I really don't like Pittman becaue of the speed factor, but realize we won't know what we have until he plays some games and is utilized in the offense.  

 

That's all I am saying.  I don't think it's safe to assume that either of these players is better or worse than any of the other palyers.

 

I can say personally, that redraft I would take Johnson and Brown over either of our guys in a heartbeat.  Brown has been a consistent stud.
 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

And I don't necessarily include you.  Last year you and many others were just dead wrong on Jacoby Brissett.  A few of us could see that he was not any good at all.  A bunch of you guys used stats to show he was good when it was pretty clear that he sucked.

I think JT is not very good this year, and might never be a good RB.  People are starting to come around to that viewpoint, but you should have seen the nonsense thrown my why because I said I wasn't impressed with his running.  That video that the one dude put on here shows what I and others have seen all along.

 

You and I discussed his contract, and I've even seen you reference that this year.  it seems as though you realize you were wrong on that too.  

 

I hadn't heard the new idea that running doesn't factor into PA success.  I am not fully on board with it, but I am contemplating it.  If I eventually come to see it as true I'll say I changed my mind and my former perspective is wrong.  

 

That's my agenda.  

 

Who cares if someone was wrong? 

None of us are perfect and making an issue over it does nothing but cause ill feelings. 

It's all water under the bridge as they say and rehashing it over and over serves no purpose. 

This "I was right and you were wrong" face you put on just makes you look petty. 

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Who cares if someone was wrong? 

None of us are perfect and making an issue over it does nothing but cause ill feelings. 

It's all water under the bridge as they say and rehashing it over and over serves no purpose. 

This "I was right and you were wrong" face you put on just makes you look petty. 

Thats not what I am saying to Superman Craze.

 

I'm joking about some of the imbalance of posters on here. It's lighthearted. 

 

Lighten up Francis.

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, Nickster said:

And I don't necessarily include you.  Last year you and many others were just dead wrong on Jacoby Brissett.  A few of us could see that he was not any good at all.  A bunch of you guys used stats to show he was good when it was pretty clear that he sucked.

I think JT is not very good this year, and might never be a good RB.  People are starting to come around to that viewpoint, but you should have seen the nonsense thrown my why because I said I wasn't impressed with his running.  That video that the one dude put on here shows what I and others have seen all along.

 

You and I discussed his contract, and I've even seen you reference that this year.  it seems as though you realize you were wrong on that too.  

 

I hadn't heard the new idea that running doesn't factor into PA success.  I am not fully on board with it, but I am contemplating it.  If I eventually come to see it as true I'll say I changed my mind and my former perspective is wrong.  

 

That's my agenda.  

 

 

I never used stats to show JB was good. I was never very impressed with JB as a starter, and have been saying since 2017 that Colts fans overrated his value and ability. I held out hope that he would perform better in 2019, which he did, but I was very clear all along that I didn't think he was good enough.

 

We disagreed on JB's contract. And it wasn't about whether we should have paid him what we did; I was surprised by the value of his new contract. I just understood and agreed with the strategy. Still do, but I don't think they needed to pay him as much as they did. In hindsight, he didn't increase his value with his play in 2019, so that gamble was lost by the Colts. 

 

Recently, we disagreed on whether JB is a good backup. We can agree to disagree on that. But I want to be clear that I was never someone who argued that JB was anything more than a good backup.

 

Your previous post fits into your constantly pushed narrative that stats can be interpreted differently by different people, so that reduces their value relative to the eyeball test. But if you say it was a joke, cool. I'm okay to move on.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I never used stats to show JB was good. I was never very impressed with JB as a starter, and have been saying since 2017 that Colts overrated his value and ability. I held out hope that he would perform better in 2019, which he did, but I was very clear all along that I didn't think he was good enough.

 

We disagreed on JB's contract. And it wasn't about whether we should have paid him what we did; I was surprised by the value of his new contract. I just understood and agreed with the strategy. Still do, but I don't think they needed to pay him as much as they did. In hindsight, he didn't increase his value with his play in 2019, so that gamble was lost by the Colts. 

 

Recently, we disagreed on whether JB is a good backup. We can agree to disagree on that. But I want to be clear that I was never someone who argued that JB was anything more than a good backup.

 

Your previous post fits into your constantly pushed narrative that stats can be interpreted differently by different people, so that reduces their value relative to the eyeball test. But if you say it was a joke, cool. I'm okay to move on.

 

Yeah, man I was mostly commenting about how some on here are a bit arrogant.  I don't think you are.  

 

You were joking about "imbalance of posters" (which has an agenda BTW), and I just took the joke in a little bit of a different direction.

 

I've been wrong in my day plenty.  I have said on here numerous times that I wanted the Colts to draft Ryan Leaf.

 

As far was stats go, I think guys are trying to make it look like football stats are kinda like the new baseball stats.   I don't think they are.  The Baseball stats are pretty reliable (who would have ever thought that we would start teaching guys to basically swing as hard as the can at pretty much every ball with an uppercut swing/), I think fooball is infinitley more complex than baseball or basketball or really any other sport that i can think of when trying to use certain stats to be definitive about certain things.  

I like to joke with echo chamber type of people.  They crack me up.  You seem reasonable though occastionally humorless ;)

[crazycolt1]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Thats not what I am saying to Superman Craze.

 

I'm joking about some of the imbalance of posters on here. It's lighthearted. 

 

Lighten up Francis.

Fair enough but you didn't show a clue you were joking. 

[Yoshinator]

12 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I don't think that is what it says.  I am not assuming that they would be better than anyone, but I pretty much know there is no real way to judge it yet because they haven't played.  The games that Campbell did play were with a horrible QB. and unlike Mclaurin for instance, he wasn't near the first option on a team last year with Ebron, TY, Doyle healthy, and a heavy running game with Hines taking receptions.  

 

Me I never saw anything from Campbell until his first game this season and he looked like he was going to be deadly on long crossers which is what he should be able to do really well.  I really don't like Pittman becaue of the speed factor, but realize we won't know what we have until he plays some games and is utilized in the offense.  

 

That's all I am saying.  I don't think it's safe to assume that either of these players is better or worse than any of the other palyers.

 

I can say personally, that redraft I would take Johnson and Brown over either of our guys in a heartbeat.  Brown has been a consistent stud.
 

Right now, we can assume those other WRs are most likely hits based on their sample size, and there's no definitive proof either way with Campbell and Pittman right now. The only thing we know is we missed out on a lot of good receivers and ours aren't guaranteed to do anything as of now. Right now, they have been injury-riddled, and their production will be anyones guess.

[Nickster]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

Fair enough but you didn't show a clue you were joking. 

I am a dry type of humor guy.  And I have an old school kinda aversion to emoticons and am a terrible texter and actually don't really know most of the lol and other internet abbreviations.  

 

I joke a lot.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

I am a dry type of humor guy.  And I have an old school kinda aversion to emoticons and am a terrible texter and actually don't really know most of the lol and other internet abbreviations.  

 

I joke a lot.

I have been victim of that myself. 

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I have been victim of that myself. 

Cool.  I know I come off as a * sometimes, but it's mostly in jest.  and it doesn't bother me in the least.

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Right now, we can assume those other WRs are most likely hits based on their sample size, and there's no definitive proof either way with Campbell and Pittman right now. The only thing we know is we missed out on a lot of good receivers and ours aren't guaranteed to do anything as of now. Right now, they have been injury-riddled, and their production will be anyones guess.

That is a true statement but blaming Ballard and over reacting does yourself no good. 

 Right now we don't know how Campbell or Pittman are going to turn out. 

 Keep in mind that all GMs have hits, home runs and strike outs. 

 

 

[Zoltan]

35 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

You're assuming that Campbell and Pittman would have performed as well as those other WRs I mentioned. That may not be true. Even if they didn't get injured, it doesn't mean they would be hits either. As I said, what we do know is all those other WR's are hits 100%, that's a fact. Campbell is an injury bust up to this point that may or may not be good if he plays. Pittman has been injured and he may or may not be good when he plays now. You can't assume they will play as well as those other guys. That's the difference. I'm not assuming, I have a sample size on them that proves they are good. There is no guarantee Campbell and Pittman are good even with healthy.

 

Just going off your logic you also can't assume that they won't be better than all of those players you listed, its an unknown. I would also argue that a player like Metcalf would not be good in our offense and having a player like Wilson is the perfect match for him. 

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Yeah, man I was mostly commenting about how some on here are a bit arrogant.  I don't think you are.  

 

You were joking about "imbalance of posters" (which has an agenda BTW), and I just took the joke in a little bit of a different direction.

 

I've been wrong in my day plenty.  I have said on here numerous times that I wanted the Colts to draft Ryan Leaf.

 

As far was stats go, I think guys are trying to make it look like football stats are kinda like the new baseball stats.   I don't think they are.  The Baseball stats are pretty reliable (who would have ever thought that we would start teaching guys to basically swing as hard as the can at pretty much every ball with an uppercut swing/), I think fooball is infinitley more complex than baseball or basketball or really any other sport that i can think of when trying to use certain stats to be definitive about certain things.  

I like to joke with echo chamber type of people.  They crack me up.  You seem reasonable though occastionally humorless ;)

 

I didn't know you were joking. I sometimes get whooshed by online sarcasm, but I didn't detect a trace of it in that post. So my bad.

 

I don't think my post was agenda based. It was pointing out that fans tend to overreact, especially when things don't happen the way they want them to. The OP is an example. 

 

Like you, I've been wrong plenty. I just referenced my pre-draft thoughts on DK Metcalf. I didn't want him, and he's exploding right now. I think he's being deployed perfectly in Seattle, so credit to their staff and QB. I'm also recognizing that our offense isn't really emphasizing good route runners, so having someone like DK run rub routes in our offense might be more valuable than I previously acknowledged. Just an example...

 

As for stats, yes, I think sometimes people go too far with stats. They don't always apply in football the way they do in baseball, where there are fewer variables and much larger sample sizes. Still, advanced statistical analysis has had a dramatic impact on the NFL in the last decade plus, much of it for the better.

 

For example, analysis has long said that NFL coaches are way too conservative on 4th down, and they push the run in ways that limit the efficiency of the offense overall. And now, you see coaches more willing to go for it on 4th down, especially in the dead zone between the 35 and 50 yard line where a punt is more likely to result in a touchback. Teams went from being 55% run heavy to being 60% pass heavy. And offenses are way more efficient than they were before this enlightenment. (Some of that has to do with the QB renaissance at all levels of football, but college programs were going spread offense and throwing more ahead of the NFL's shift, so you could argue that QB prospects are better prepared to succeed in the NFL than they were 15 years ago. Go watch Texas Tech in the late 2000s. Or look up some of Colt Brennan's records.)

 

I don't want my team to make decisions based on a stat chart. But they have their place in the game, and even the old school coaches who push back against advanced stats are falling in line with the trends. 

 

Last thing, the echo chamber annoys me, just about as much as people who dismiss popular thinking as just being a product of an echo chamber. It's a fallacy to say that an opinion is right just because it's popular, but it's just as wrong to assume that people who hold a popular opinion have not reached that conclusion on their own. 

 

/rant

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Zoltan said:

 

Just going off your logic you also can't assume that they won't be better than all of those players you listed, its an unknown. I would also argue that a player like Metcalf would not be good in our offense and having a player like Wilson is the perfect match for him. 

That's true, but I have the proof that those guys are already hits. I can prove that. They have reached a certain level already. It would be up to Campbell and Pittman to prove themselves to be as good as them for your scenario to be true. They have the burden of proof to prove themselves. The WRs I've mentioned have already proven themselves. 

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I didn't know you were joking. I sometimes get whooshed by online sarcasm, but I didn't detect a trace of it in that post. So my bad.

 

I don't think my post was agenda based. It was pointing out that fans tend to overreact, especially when things don't happen the way they want them to. The OP is an example. 

 

Like you, I've been wrong plenty. I just referenced my pre-draft thoughts on DK Metcalf. I didn't want him, and he's exploding right now. I think he's being deployed perfectly in Seattle, so credit to their staff and QB. I'm also recognizing that our offense isn't really emphasizing good route runners, so having someone like DK run rub routes in our offense might be more valuable than I previously acknowledged. Just an example...

 

As for stats, yes, I think sometimes people go too far with stats. They don't always apply in football the way they do in baseball, where there are fewer variables and much larger sample sizes. Still, advanced statistical analysis has had a dramatic impact on the NFL in the last decade plus, much of it for the better.

 

For example, analysis has long said that NFL coaches are way too conservative on 4th down, and they push the run in ways that limit the efficiency of the offense overall. And now, you see coaches more willing to go for it on 4th down, especially in the dead zone between the 35 and 50 yard line where a punt is more likely to result in a touchback. Teams went from being 55% run heavy to being 60% pass heavy. And offenses are way more efficient than they were before this enlightenment. (Some of that has to do with the QB renaissance at all levels of football, but college programs were going spread offense and throwing more ahead of the NFL's shift, so you could argue that QB prospects are better prepared to succeed in the NFL than they were 15 years ago. Go watch Texas Tech in the late 2000s. Or look up some of Colt Brennan's records.)

 

I don't want my team to make decisions based on a stat chart. But they have their place in the game, and even the old school coaches who push back against advanced stats are falling in line with the trends. 

 

Last thing, the echo chamber annoys me, just about as much as people who dismiss popular thinking as just being a product of an echo chamber. It's a fallacy to say that an opinion is right just because it's popular, but it's just as wrong to assume that people who hold a popular opinion have not reached that conclusion on their own. 

 

/rant

Nice post Superman. One of your best.

[Zoltan]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

That's true, but I have the proof that those guys are already hits. I can prove that. They have reached a certain level already. It would be up to Campbell and Pittman to prove themselves to be as good as them for your scenario to be true. They have the burden of proof to prove themselves. The WRs I've mentioned have already proven themselves. 

 

I disagree that Johnson, Claypool or Hardman are proven, Hardman hasn't had enough reps or pressure to perform as a starter. Claypool has only 23 receptions 7 coming from a poor eagles defense, and Johnson has been nonexistent except for two games. They all lack consistent performance, which at least my definition of a hit would be consistently good play.

[Nickster]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I didn't know you were joking. I sometimes get whooshed by online sarcasm, but I didn't detect a trace of it in that post. So my bad.

 

I don't think my post was agenda based. It was pointing out that fans tend to overreact, especially when things don't happen the way they want them to. The OP is an example. 

 

Like you, I've been wrong plenty. I just referenced my pre-draft thoughts on DK Metcalf. I didn't want him, and he's exploding right now. I think he's being deployed perfectly in Seattle, so credit to their staff and QB. I'm also recognizing that our offense isn't really emphasizing good route runners, so having someone like DK run rub routes in our offense might be more valuable than I previously acknowledged. Just an example...

 

As for stats, yes, I think sometimes people go too far with stats. They don't always apply in football the way they do in baseball, where there are fewer variables and much larger sample sizes. Still, advanced statistical analysis has had a dramatic impact on the NFL in the last decade plus, much of it for the better.

 

For example, analysis has long said that NFL coaches are way too conservative on 4th down, and they push the run in ways that limit the efficiency of the offense overall. And now, you see coaches more willing to go for it on 4th down, especially in the dead zone between the 35 and 50 yard line where a punt is more likely to result in a touchback. Teams went from being 55% run heavy to being 60% pass heavy. And offenses are way more efficient than they were before this enlightenment. (Some of that has to do with the QB renaissance at all levels of football, but college programs were going spread offense and throwing more ahead of the NFL's shift, so you could argue that QB prospects are better prepared to succeed in the NFL than they were 15 years ago. Go watch Texas Tech in the late 2000s. Or look up some of Colt Brennan's records.)

 

I don't want my team to make decisions based on a stat chart. But they have their place in the game, and even the old school coaches who push back against advanced stats are falling in line with the trends. 

 

Last thing, the echo chamber annoys me, just about as much as people who dismiss popular thinking as just being a product of an echo chamber. It's a fallacy to say that an opinion is right just because it's popular, but it's just as wrong to assume that people who hold a popular opinion have not reached that conclusion on their own. 

 

/rant

 

I don't watch hardly any college ball, and I love the draft but I do very little "pre draft" research.  

 

But isn't Pittman supposed to be the precise route running type?

[Shadow_Creek]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I didn't know you were joking. I sometimes get whooshed by online sarcasm, but I didn't detect a trace of it in that post. So my bad.

 

I don't think my post was agenda based. It was pointing out that fans tend to overreact, especially when things don't happen the way they want them to. The OP is an example. 

 

Like you, I've been wrong plenty. I just referenced my pre-draft thoughts on DK Metcalf. I didn't want him, and he's exploding right now. I think he's being deployed perfectly in Seattle, so credit to their staff and QB. I'm also recognizing that our offense isn't really emphasizing good route runners, so having someone like DK run rub routes in our offense might be more valuable than I previously acknowledged. Just an example...

 

As for stats, yes, I think sometimes people go too far with stats. They don't always apply in football the way they do in baseball, where there are fewer variables and much larger sample sizes. Still, advanced statistical analysis has had a dramatic impact on the NFL in the last decade plus, much of it for the better.

 

For example, analysis has long said that NFL coaches are way too conservative on 4th down, and they push the run in ways that limit the efficiency of the offense overall. And now, you see coaches more willing to go for it on 4th down, especially in the dead zone between the 35 and 50 yard line where a punt is more likely to result in a touchback. Teams went from being 55% run heavy to being 60% pass heavy. And offenses are way more efficient than they were before this enlightenment. (Some of that has to do with the QB renaissance at all levels of football, but college programs were going spread offense and throwing more ahead of the NFL's shift, so you could argue that QB prospects are better prepared to succeed in the NFL than they were 15 years ago. Go watch Texas Tech in the late 2000s. Or look up some of Colt Brennan's records.)

 

I don't want my team to make decisions based on a stat chart. But they have their place in the game, and even the old school coaches who push back against advanced stats are falling in line with the trends. 

 

Last thing, the echo chamber annoys me, just about as much as people who dismiss popular thinking as just being a product of an echo chamber. It's a fallacy to say that an opinion is right just because it's popular, but it's just as wrong to assume that people who hold a popular opinion have not reached that conclusion on their own. 

 

/rant

look i only wrote this topic outta anger for CB not doing anything after the trade deadline. Felt he could have at least brought someone in to help our dead last running game. but then you have to ask yourself just who could they have brought in? crazycolt said it best, maybe Ballard did look but nothing was pleasing to the eye

 

 

[Nickster]

3 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

look i only wrote this topic outta anger for CB not doing anything after the trade deadline. Felt he could have at least brought someone in to help our dead last running game. but then you have to ask yourself just who could they have brought in? crazycolt said it best, maybe Ballard did look but nothing was pleasing to the eye

 

 

 

They should have signed Bell IMO.  I also would have tried to sign Brown.  They have the money, and these are the two most talented guys available.  I think Bell would absolutely flourish in this system with PR as QB using the short game and the outside zone stuff we can't really run well right now.

 

Both of these moves are free of draft capital, and we still have some money to use I think.  

 

[crazycolt1]

11 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Nice post Superman. One of your best.

Yes. subjective in a good way. 

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

look i only wrote this topic outta anger for CB not doing anything after the trade deadline. Felt he could have at least brought someone in to help our dead last running game. but then you have to ask yourself just who could they have brought in? crazycolt said it best, maybe Ballard did look but nothing was pleasing to the eye

 

Understood. I hope you see the irony, though.

[Superman]

24 minutes ago, Nickster said:

But isn't Pittman supposed to be the precise route running type?

 

Not really, he's a decent route runner with room to improve. (I don't think DK will ever be a good route runner, but he's so big, fast and physical that if they use him the right way, he can still be productive.) 

 

Also, he hasn't been playing. 

[Nickster]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Not really, he's a decent route runner with room to improve. (I don't think DK will ever be a good route runner, but he's so big, fast and physical that if they use him the right way, he can still be productive.) 

 

Also, he hasn't been playing. 

I like the Pittman pick even less then.  What is he supposed to be good at?

 

Eessh.  The more I read the less I like.  He's big is his main attribute.  

[Yoshinator]

22 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Yes. subjective in a good way. 

I never said I was the best or smartest poster on the forum. I just said I was the most honest and real.  

[Yoshinator]

34 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

I disagree that Johnson, Claypool or Hardman are proven, Hardman hasn't had enough reps or pressure to perform as a starter. Claypool has only 23 receptions 7 coming from a poor eagles defense, and Johnson has been nonexistent except for two games. They all lack consistent performance, which at least my definition of a hit would be consistently good play.

Claypool is a rookie. He has had more of a limited sample size than the others. He has just done incredible and shown huge production when given the opportunity. Johnson has been pretty consistent in his opportunities as well. I will agree he's had some inconsistencies in games, but he had a solid rookie year and a couple good games this year. A concussion stopped his progress for the most part and Claypool getting opprtunities. Hardman is probably a product of his team, but he does well when needed and can easily replicate Hill in the speed department, so he's invaluable. Those guys are on the lower end of the list, but as of now, they are more proven than Campbell and Pittman. They would be a no1 or no2 WR on the Colts.

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Claypool is a rookie. He has had more of a limited sample size than the others. He has just done incredible and shown huge production when given the opportunity. Johnson has been pretty consistent in his opportunities as well. I will agree he's had some inconsistencies in games, but he had a solid rookie year and a couple good games this year. A concussion stopped his progress for the most part and Claypool getting opprtunities. Hardman is probably a product of his team, but he does well when needed and can easily replicate Hill in the speed department, so he's invaluable. Those guys are on the lower end of the list, but as of now, they are more proven than Campbell and Pittman. They would be a no1 or no2 WR on the Colts.

I think Johnson is going to end up being the class of this field.  He and Brown.  Brown is pretty much already there.

[lollygagger8]

18 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:

When polian was in office he built a great offense with Peyton, Marvin, Wayne, etc but always had that lacking drive when it came to putting a great defense together. Fast forward to Ballard and now we have the opposite issue. A great Defense with very lacking drive in the WR, TE, and RB department. i mean i dont like to rant but how to you let a trade deadline go by and not do anything to help out our weakest area at the moment? Mack is out for the season and Taylor (at this point) is not getting the job done so why not trade for a RB who could have helped us along side of Wilkins? we have big games ahead of us and wont get very far if were going to only rely on Rivers arm alone just saying.

[Zoltan]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Claypool is a rookie. He has had more of a limited sample size than the others. He has just done incredible and shown huge production when given the opportunity. Johnson has been pretty consistent in his opportunities as well. I will agree he's had some inconsistencies in games, but he had a solid rookie year and a couple good games this year. A concussion stopped his progress for the most part and Claypool getting opprtunities. Hardman is probably a product of his team, but he does well when needed and can easily replicate Hill in the speed department, so he's invaluable. Those guys are on the lower end of the list, but as of now, they are more proven than Campbell and Pittman. They would be a no1 or no2 WR on the Colts.

But you only mentioned their potential, which is ironic because they have the same likelihood of being busts as Pittman and Campbell, I always liked the take out someones best game and worse game then you have a better picture of the player and if you do that with Hardman, Claypool and Johnson They are okay but not proven or a hit. 

[gspdx]

This has been a fun post to read! Personally I am glad Ballard didn't try to go find an over prices guy as the trade deadline neared.  I can't blame him for the injuries either.  And I have never seen Ballard wobble so I am assuming he has pretty good balance.

 

I live in Spokane and get to watch the Seahawks every week.  They are a fun team to watch and I will have to say Metcalf is a stud!  Not perfect by any means and has room to grow but I would love to see him with the horseshoe on his helmet.  Pretty sure that will never happen though.