View Full Version : Chris Carter on I.R./Marshall McFadden now on Active Roster/Jamie McCoy back on P.S.

RuthlessBurgher

11-15-2012, 02:59 PM

Steelers Make Transactions

Posted 14 minutes ago

The Steelers made a number of roster moves today that included promoting linebacker Marshall McFadden to the active roster from the team’s practice squad. McFadden will wear No. 40.

McFadden spent the first 10 weeks of the 2012 season on the team’s practice squad. He originally was signed to the team’s offseason roster on January 18, 2012.

To make room for McFadden on the active roster, the Steelers placed linebacker Chris Carter on the team’s Reserve/Injured List with an abdominal injury. Carter saw action in eight games this season, making his first three career starts.

The Steelers also signed tight end Jamie McCoy to the team’s practice squad. McCoy will wear No. 80.

http://www.steelers.com/news/article-1/Steelers-Make-Transactions/f4292497-d0d5-4126-977d-e9b628d52575

NW Steeler

11-15-2012, 03:25 PM

It's looking more and more like OLB is becoming a high draft need next year as well.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 03:48 PM

It's looking more and more like OLB is becoming a high draft need next year as well.

don't we have Jason Worilds waiting in the wings? ;)

Oviedo

11-15-2012, 03:48 PM

It's looking more and more like OLB is becoming a high draft need next year as well.

Coin flip between OLB, ILB and Safety. Can you have a three sided coin??????

Oviedo

11-15-2012, 03:50 PM

don't we have Jason Worilds waiting in the wings? ;)

Maybe he shouldn't be in the wings. Doesn't he have more QB pressures and sacks than Harrison? Was Harrison even on the field against the Chiefs? Can't recall hearing his name called once during the game.

Oviedo

11-15-2012, 03:52 PM

Can anyone tell me what the heck they see in McCoy that they keep him around? Really hard for me to believe he is the best talent on the street available with PS eligiability.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 03:55 PM

Maybe he shouldn't be in the wings. Doesn't he have more QB pressures and sacks than Harrison? Was Harrison even on the field against the Chiefs? Can't recall hearing his name called once during the game.

well, then we have our future starting OLBs in place with Woodley and Worilds and Chris Carter as the main backup.

in that case, why would we waste a high draft choice on an OLB when we have so many other pressing needs at ILB, S, WR etc. that need to also be filled?

pittpete

11-15-2012, 06:27 PM

Harrison was a non factor in the game against the Chiefs

Hope I'm wrong, but he's got nothing left to give

Oviedo

11-15-2012, 06:39 PM

Harrison was a non factor in the game against the Chiefs

Hope I'm wrong, but he's got nothing left to give

Unfortunately I don't think you are wrong. I posted a couple of weeks ago that there is no way his knee is going to get right practicing and playing on it every week. He just doesn't look like he can generate any power with his legs compared to what was normal for him.

Bottomline is he won't be playing here next year for his full salary. Keep him for the vet minimum or move on.

NW Steeler

11-15-2012, 07:02 PM

Harrison looks cooked. The Chiefs were not the first team to run right at Woodley and wont be the last. We need another stud OLB to replace Harrison, cuz' I think you guys are right in that he will be a salary cap cut next year.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 07:19 PM

Harrison looks cooked. The Chiefs were not the first team to run right at Woodley and wont be the last. We need another stud OLB to replace Harrison, cuz' I think you guys are right in that he will be a salary cap cut next year.

you don't have confidence that our former 2nd round draft choice Jason Worilds can be that stud OLB to replace Harrison?

NW Steeler

11-15-2012, 07:37 PM

From my very amateur and unqualified eye, I haven't seen anything from Worilds that would make me think that, no.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 08:12 PM

From my very amateur and unqualified eye, I haven't seen anything from Worilds that would make me think that, no.

although I believe Worilds would be okay as a pass rushing specialist, I also don't believe he is the long-term answer as an every down OLB to replace James Harrison.

fordfixer

11-15-2012, 08:56 PM

Coin flip between OLB, ILB and Safety. Can you have a three sided coin??????

http://www.statisticool.com/3sided.htm

Constructing a fair 3 sided coin 3/21/05

For a 2 sided coin, the kind we are all familiar with, being "fair" means that P(Heads) = P(Tails) = .5. What would a 3 sided coin look like? Can a 3 sided coin be made "fair" so P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3? And how do we know fairness can even be obtained? This informal paper explores these questions.

A 3 sided "coin" can take several shapes. I put "coin" in quotes because it won't be a coin as we commonly use the term. Here are several possible ways a 3 sided coin look, with their outcomes, Heads, Tails, and Sides, labeled.

The first 3 sided coin I thought of was a long triangular prism. In the first version, each long face is an outcome, and the triangular edges could be rounded to prevent the coin from landing on the ends. In the second version, each triangular end is an outcome, and the long faces collectively count as one outcome.

Some real life examples of this are the delicious Toblerone chocolate bars, and a ruler (which is not delicious).

One could also make a 3 sided dreidel (please forgive my Paint skills!).

Another example is a die with opposite sides painted the same colors to count as the same outcome.

As interesting as these shapes are, I was more interested in maintaining the coin shape as much as possible, so I chose to focus on a right circular cylinder.

Here is a diagram of a right circular cylinder, our 3 sided coin

David Boll made some postings on this topic on internet newsgroups, and I contacted him around 1998, saying that I'd be interested in flipping the coins he made.

Here are the coins, or varying heights, that he made, with a quarter for reference

The coins, going from left to right, not including the quarter: h = .5r, h = .75r, h = r, and h = 1.334r. David sent me the coins, and I ended up flipping three of these coins over 10,000 times total! From the data, it was determined that the coin where h = r was the most fair, with P(Sides) = 1240/3800 = .326. In David's own experiments, he obtained P(Sides) = 319/1000 = .319. Intuitively this makes sense, because having h = r makes the coin more die-like. However, the results could have been flukes.

It is important to note that it is not too clear how to fairly flip such a coin because we now have more than one axis of rotation to think about. When I flipped them, I tossed them, one at a time, as haphazardly as I could into a wall, and then the coin would fall on to a short carpet, sort of like rolling dice in a game of craps.

I set out to explore the mathematics behind these 3 sided coins. But first, what reason do we have in thinking fairness, that is, P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3, can be obtained?

For a 2 sided coin, h is small (see the quarter above), and therefore P(Sides) is very small. Conversely, think of a Pringles can, where h is very large, thus making P(Sides) very large. Therefore, it stands to reason that there is high probability that some h exists between the extremes where P(Sides) is "just right".

In Frederick Mosteller's Fifty Challenging Problems in Probability, Problem 38 reads (paraphrasing using my terminology of "height" for "thick" and "Sides" for "edge")

What height should a coin be to have a 1/3 chance of landing on Sides?

The story goes, the great mathematician John von Neumann solved this problem in his head and provided an answer to three decimal places, all in less than half a minute! Going by von Neumann's remarkable work, I tend to believe that story.

The solution: put the coin in a sphere, with the center of the coin being the center of the sphere, then select a random point on the surface of the sphere. Draw a straight line from this point to the center, and if that line hits the side of the coin, the coin can be considered to have landed on Sides.

Mosteller writes that a theorem from solid geometry simplifies this problem. Apparently when parallel planes cut a sphere, they produce an "orange-peel-like band" between the planes. This band is called a "zone". The surface area of a zone is proportional to the distance between the planes, and therefore our coin should have a height 1/3 of the sphere's height.

Let R be the radius of the sphere and r the radius of the coin. The Pythagorean Theorem gives

R2 = r2+(1/9)R2

Solving for (2/3)R, which is h, gives

(2/3)R = (sqrt(2)/2)r

or h ~ .707r

Therefore, to obtain P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3, construct the coin so h = .707r. This theoretical result is surprising because it does not coincide with the experimental result of the best performing coin being where h = r. In fact, when I originally flipped the coins I obtained P(Sides) = 138/3800 = .046 using a coin where h = .75r, and David obtained P(Sides) = 88/800 = .11.

The discrepancies could be due to statistical flukes, the material of the coin, the material of where the coin was landing, the flipping method, the mathematical theory being too simple, or some combination of these.

For a detailed discussion of 3-sided coins, I strongly recommend the article Teaching Bayesian Model Comparison With the Three-Sided Coin by Scott Kuindersma and Brian Blais in The American Statistician, August

well, then we have our future starting OLBs in place with Woodley and Worilds and Chris Carter as the main backup.

in that case, why would we waste a high draft choice on an OLB when we have so many other pressing needs at ILB, S, WR etc. that need to also be filled?

You can't tell me you still think Adjepong and particularly Carter are our future. Carter was handed the starting OLB job, and flopped as badly as you can flop. I agree with a previous poster, who said Harrison has been largely invisible in his return. He has.

But Carter was invisible before that.

To think, we've basically played 10 man football this whole season... and Adjepong still can't get on the field, makes me have even less faith in him.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 10:02 PM

http://www.statisticool.com/3sided.htm

Constructing a fair 3 sided coin 3/21/05

For a 2 sided coin, the kind we are all familiar with, being "fair" means that P(Heads) = P(Tails) = .5. What would a 3 sided coin look like? Can a 3 sided coin be made "fair" so P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3? And how do we know fairness can even be obtained? This informal paper explores these questions.

A 3 sided "coin" can take several shapes. I put "coin" in quotes because it won't be a coin as we commonly use the term. Here are several possible ways a 3 sided coin look, with their outcomes, Heads, Tails, and Sides, labeled.

The first 3 sided coin I thought of was a long triangular prism. In the first version, each long face is an outcome, and the triangular edges could be rounded to prevent the coin from landing on the ends. In the second version, each triangular end is an outcome, and the long faces collectively count as one outcome.

Some real life examples of this are the delicious Toblerone chocolate bars, and a ruler (which is not delicious).

One could also make a 3 sided dreidel (please forgive my Paint skills!).

Another example is a die with opposite sides painted the same colors to count as the same outcome.

As interesting as these shapes are, I was more interested in maintaining the coin shape as much as possible, so I chose to focus on a right circular cylinder.

Here is a diagram of a right circular cylinder, our 3 sided coin

David Boll made some postings on this topic on internet newsgroups, and I contacted him around 1998, saying that I'd be interested in flipping the coins he made.

Here are the coins, or varying heights, that he made, with a quarter for reference

The coins, going from left to right, not including the quarter: h = .5r, h = .75r, h = r, and h = 1.334r. David sent me the coins, and I ended up flipping three of these coins over 10,000 times total! From the data, it was determined that the coin where h = r was the most fair, with P(Sides) = 1240/3800 = .326. In David's own experiments, he obtained P(Sides) = 319/1000 = .319. Intuitively this makes sense, because having h = r makes the coin more die-like. However, the results could have been flukes.

It is important to note that it is not too clear how to fairly flip such a coin because we now have more than one axis of rotation to think about. When I flipped them, I tossed them, one at a time, as haphazardly as I could into a wall, and then the coin would fall on to a short carpet, sort of like rolling dice in a game of craps.

I set out to explore the mathematics behind these 3 sided coins. But first, what reason do we have in thinking fairness, that is, P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3, can be obtained?

For a 2 sided coin, h is small (see the quarter above), and therefore P(Sides) is very small. Conversely, think of a Pringles can, where h is very large, thus making P(Sides) very large. Therefore, it stands to reason that there is high probability that some h exists between the extremes where P(Sides) is "just right".

In Frederick Mosteller's Fifty Challenging Problems in Probability, Problem 38 reads (paraphrasing using my terminology of "height" for "thick" and "Sides" for "edge")

What height should a coin be to have a 1/3 chance of landing on Sides?

The story goes, the great mathematician John von Neumann solved this problem in his head and provided an answer to three decimal places, all in less than half a minute! Going by von Neumann's remarkable work, I tend to believe that story.

The solution: put the coin in a sphere, with the center of the coin being the center of the sphere, then select a random point on the surface of the sphere. Draw a straight line from this point to the center, and if that line hits the side of the coin, the coin can be considered to have landed on Sides.

Mosteller writes that a theorem from solid geometry simplifies this problem. Apparently when parallel planes cut a sphere, they produce an "orange-peel-like band" between the planes. This band is called a "zone". The surface area of a zone is proportional to the distance between the planes, and therefore our coin should have a height 1/3 of the sphere's height.

Let R be the radius of the sphere and r the radius of the coin. The Pythagorean Theorem gives

R2 = r2+(1/9)R2

Solving for (2/3)R, which is h, gives

(2/3)R = (sqrt(2)/2)r

or h ~ .707r

Therefore, to obtain P(Heads) = P(Tails) = P(Sides) = 1/3, construct the coin so h = .707r. This theoretical result is surprising because it does not coincide with the experimental result of the best performing coin being where h = r. In fact, when I originally flipped the coins I obtained P(Sides) = 138/3800 = .046 using a coin where h = .75r, and David obtained P(Sides) = 88/800 = .11.

The discrepancies could be due to statistical flukes, the material of the coin, the material of where the coin was landing, the flipping method, the mathematical theory being too simple, or some combination of these.

For a detailed discussion of 3-sided coins, I strongly recommend the article Teaching Bayesian Model Comparison With the Three-Sided Coin by Scott Kuindersma and Brian Blais in The American Statistician, August

thank you very much ff, this has been amazingly helpful! :Boobs

phillyesq

11-15-2012, 10:17 PM

Harrison was a non factor in the game against the Chiefs

Hope I'm wrong, but he's got nothing left to give

I thought he was fine in run defense. Yes, I'd like to see more from him rushing the passer, but he has been good against the run.

Also, it's likely no coincidence that Timmons started playing better after Harrison returned.

hawaiiansteel

11-15-2012, 11:27 PM

Can anyone tell me what the heck they see in McCoy that they keep him around? Really hard for me to believe he is the best talent on the street available with PS eligiability.

McCoy is the backup H-back/FB for Will Johnson along with being able to play TE. we all know how Tomlin loves position flexibility...

papillon

11-15-2012, 11:42 PM

I thought he was fine in run defense. Yes, I'd like to see more from him rushing the passer, but he has been good against the run.

Also, it's likely no coincidence that Timmons started playing better after Harrison returned.

And, teams seem to be very right handed all of a sudden and it probably isn't a coincidence that the defense has started to look like a playoff caliber defense since Harrison has been back on the field.

Pappy

hawaiiansteel

11-16-2012, 12:47 AM

I thought he was fine in run defense. Yes, I'd like to see more from him rushing the passer, but he has been good against the run.

Also, it's likely no coincidence that Timmons started playing better after Harrison returned.

not to mention Casey Hampton seems to also be playing a lot better lately, most likely because his knee is feeling better. a strong NT holding his ground and occupying blockers has got to help an ILB immensely...

Keyplay1

11-16-2012, 08:06 AM

Good move! This will slide A. Robinson up a notch, and add depth at ILB since Sylvester has been inactive the past 2 games. McFadden might be the best option available at ILB if one was necessary.

Carter played very little lately anyway. He had 1 punt downed and 1 ST tackle assist during the past 4 game winning streak.

Marshall McFadden played very well in the pre-season. I suppose he will be on the ST's. Wouldn't it be nice if he caused a ST turnover or something. Oh, btw, someone better remind him not to hold or do any blocking in the back if he is on any of those teams. Otherwise, one and done!:D

steelblood

11-16-2012, 12:04 PM

Coin flip between OLB, ILB and Safety. Can you have a three sided coin??????

I agree that those are probably the top three needs.

However, the Steelers like to take BPA. If Keenan Lewis or Max Starks leave, you could even take a CB or an OT in the first. Mike Adams and Marcus Gilbert together will get Ben killed (and Gilbert can't stay healthy). This is a great CB draft. Ask Baltimore how important it is to have lots of healthy corners. If Lewis leaves and Ike's talent starts to fade, we will be very thin.

Oviedo

11-16-2012, 12:16 PM

I agree that those are probably the top three needs.

However, the Steelers like to take BPA. If Keenan Lewis or Max Starks leave, you could even take a CB or an OT in the first. Mike Adams and Marcus Gilbert together will get Ben killed (and Gilbert can't stay healthy). This is a great CB draft. Ask Baltimore how important it is to have lots of healthy corners. If Lewis leaves and Ike's talent starts to fade, we will be very thin.

I think after Ben's injury another OT could very well be in the mix if a highly rated one is on the board.

You are right about never having enough CBs but we have a better set of options there now than we may have had in the past 5-7 years. Even if Lewis leaves and they won't let him. Our situation at Safety is far more dire plus drafting in the bottom 25% of the draft like we usually do will get you the top ranked or second best safety in the draft. I still say as Ike Taylor's skill degrades it is possible he becomes our Free Safety of the future.

RuthlessBurgher

11-16-2012, 05:02 PM

Why would Ike make a good free safety of the future? He's not a big hitter like Clark, and with those hands he's certainly no ballhawk back there. His base salary next year is $6 million and it's $7 million in 2014 (plus the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus adding to the cap hit). If he's not a top notch corner, he won't be here at all at those prices.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.