Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: Deja Vu?

  1. #51
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,904
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    So?

    Jon Beason has played 84 games compared to Timmons' 110. Still, Beason has 61 more tackles than him and 1 more INT. Timmons has more sacks and FFs. Just saying that maybe Timmons is a bit overvalued in the eyes of Steelers fans.

    Timmons is not a bust and is a good player but people here make him out to be a future HOFer and he's not even remotely close to that. He's good.... nothing more, nothing less.
    Its easy to rack up tackles when your team stinks

  2. #52
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,195
    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz View Post
    Its easy to rack up tackles when your team stinks
    Posluszny has been doing it his whole career
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  3. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    So?

    Jon Beason has played 84 games compared to Timmons' 110. Still, Beason has 61 more tackles than him and 1 more INT. Timmons has more sacks and FFs. Just saying that maybe Timmons is a bit overvalued in the eyes of Steelers fans.

    Timmons is not a bust and is a good player but people here make him out to be a future HOFer and he's not even remotely close to that. He's good.... nothing more, nothing less.
    A MIKE backer is supposed to have guady tackle numbers

  4. #54
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    Posluszny has been doing it his whole career
    More sacks and forced fumbles??? Pffft... whatever.

    Those tackles 5 yards downfield are game changers tho...

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    how about this?
    you provide links to all the draft sites that had timmons listed before pick 20 and i'll try to find some that have him going later. whoever comes up with less, loses.
    we can make a wager on it. you in?
    Your challenge is flawed.
    There is an inherent problem with using draft sites to judge a player a reach.
    The true professionals are the scouts and GMs on teams NOT the guessing gurus. What other TEAMS WILL DO may not match what gurus say.

    We have to look all the way back to.........This seasons Steeler 1st round pick for proof.

    ALMOST EVERYBODY on this site thought it a reach based on what gurus said. NEARLY ALL OF THEM had Mosely RANKED HIGHER.

    If we wanted Shazier we could have surely moved back?

    THEN we find out Shazier would have been snapped up WITH THE VERY NEXT PICK. That team had no interest in Moseley.

    We drafted a guy who is not only much faster much more athletic HE WAS MUCH MORE PRODUCTIVE in college. But MOSELEY is the household name.

    We KNOW two teams like Shazier despite the gurus. Dallas was so excited that they could not wait for our pick to tell him.

    For all we know today THE CONSENSUS OF NFL TEAMS is that Shazier was higher.

    SIMILARLY WITH TIMMONS you cannot assume he was a reach just because gurus had him slated FOR JUST A FEW PICKS LATER IN THE SAME ROUND. If YOUR SCOUTS think he is BPA at a position you cannot assume other teams don't see what you see.

    If YOU LIKE A PLAYER at that slot, YOU CANNOT ASSUME OTHER TEAMS HAVE IT WRONG and you can get him later.

    Two scenarios where you trade down. You are happy with any of SEVERAL PLAYERS and you know you will get one of them. Or teams ahead of us don't need the position you want (that is risky because of trade possibilities).

    Other than that if you love a guy at a position, you gotta take him because YOUR SCOUTING and the scouts of EVERYONE ELSE do the evaluating and ain't looking at what Kiper says.

    We are happy to have Timmons and we HAVE NO IDEA if he would have been available later.

    You cannot call him a reach.
    Last edited by Captain Lemming; 07-07-2014 at 11:55 AM.

  6. #56
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Lemming View Post
    Your challenge is flawed.
    There is an inherent problem with using draft sites to judge a player a reach.
    The true professionals are the scouts and GMs on teams NOT the guessing gurus. What other TEAMS WILL DO may not match what gurus say.

    We have to look all the way back to.........This seasons Steeler 1st round pick for proof.

    ALMOST EVERYBODY on this site thought it a reach based on what gurus said. NEARLY ALL OF THEM had Mosely RANKED HIGHER.

    If we wanted Shazier we could have surely moved back?

    THEN we find out Shazier would have been snapped up WITH THE VERY NEXT PICK. That team had no interest in Moseley.

    We drafted a guy who is not only much faster much more athletic HE WAS MUCH MORE PRODUCTIVE in college. But MOSELEY is the household name.

    We KNOW two teams like Shazier despite the gurus. Dallas was so excited that they could not wait for our pick to tell him.

    For all we know today THE CONSENSUS OF NFL TEAMS is that Shazier was higher.

    SIMILARLY WITH TIMMONS you cannot assume he was a reach just because gurus had him slated FOR JUST A FEW PICKS LATER IN THE SAME ROUND. If YOUR SCOUTS think he is BPA at a position you cannot assume other teams don't see what you see.

    If YOU LIKE A PLAYER at that slot, YOU CANNOT ASSUME OTHER TEAMS HAVE IT WRONG and you can get him later.

    Two scenarios where you trade down. You are happy with any of SEVERAL PLAYERS and you know you will get one of them. Or teams ahead of us don't need the position you want (that is risky because of trade possibilities).

    Other than that if you love a guy at a position, you gotta take him because YOUR SCOUTING and the scouts of EVERYONE ELSE do the evaluating and ain't looking at what Kiper says.

    We are happy to have Timmons and we HAVE NO IDEA if he would have been available later.

    You cannot call him a reach.
    it is not flawed.
    the poster that i challenged stated that timmons was projected to go mid first round. this poster used non steeler draft scout rankings to make such a statement so it only makes sense to use non steeler draft scout sites for the challenge.
    1) CB D Dennard
    2) OLB R Shazier
    3) DE J Ellis
    4) WR M Bryant
    5a) OG D Yankey
    5b) OLB J Tripp
    6a) RB D Archer
    6b) NT D McCullers
    7) WR J Janis

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    it is not flawed.
    the poster that i challenged stated that timmons was projected to go mid first round. this poster used non steeler draft scout rankings to make such a statement so it only makes sense to use non steeler draft scout sites for the challenge.
    I see your point, the argument is valid......with regard to that ONE STATEMENT. Since draft rating by gurus was his argument too I stand corrected

    Nevertheless, I contend that my argument is valid as far as your original central point that he was picked early. I have proven that guru projections do not tell us how other TEAMS rank a player. If some guru has a dude ranked a hand full of picks lower does not mean a player was picked too early.
    Last edited by Captain Lemming; 07-07-2014 at 12:49 PM.

  8. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    I'm not sure how thats relevant to the discussion...
    Redoing the draft matters in that results after the fact tell you whether a pick was a good one where he was picked. Where gurus slotted a player is what is irrelevant to the larger point of my thread (yes "I" started this "discussion).

    In fact it adds to MY original point. GURUS who had Timmons ranked lower have been proven wrong along with the rest of us.
    Those same "experts" had Moseley higher than Shazier which is why some question the Shazier pick.

    While only time will tell with any draft pick here is my point:
    The team was proven correct about Timmons and Shazier is a MUCH BETTER PROSPECT than Timmons was at this point in every conceivable way. He was picked at the same point in the draft. It is FOOLISH to question the pick of Shazier at 15 based on that fact.
    Last edited by Captain Lemming; 07-07-2014 at 01:18 PM.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by squidkid View Post
    it is not flawed.
    the poster that i challenged stated that timmons was projected to go mid first round. this poster used non steeler draft scout rankings to make such a statement so it only makes sense to use non steeler draft scout sites for the challenge.
    That's what YOU asked for!

    Where I went wrong was in entertaining your flawed premise...

    In perpetuating the flawed premise, we could look at the draft grades...

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...m-2007/page/23

    11. Lawrence Timmons, OLB, Pittsburgh Steelers (15th Pick)
    http://walterfootball.com/draft2007GRADE.php

    Good Moves: I thought it would be Lawrence Timmons or Paul Posluszny at No. 15. The Steelers went with the former. I have no problem with that
    http://www.footballsfuture.com/2007/afcgrades.html

    Worst Pick: None. Lawrence Timmons and Woodley were great picks
    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...m-grades_N.htm

    Pittsburgh Steelers ***
    It was a little surprising the Steelers didn't grab Jon Beason, but they still solved a linebacker need with Lawrence Timmons and have an excellent track record of drafting correctly there.
    http://www.docsports.com/2007/nfl-draft-grades.html

    Pittsburgh (B+) - I think their first five selections range from solid to spectacular.

  10. #60
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,413
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Lemming View Post
    While only time will tell with any draft pick here is my point:
    The team was proven correct about Timmons and Shazier is a MUCH BETTER PROSPECT than Timmons was at this point in every conceivable way. He was picked at the same point in the draft. It is FOOLISH to question the pick of Shazier at 15 based on that fact.
    No doubt about it. I agree that Shazier is a much better prospect than Timmons.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •