(12-23-2019, 09:14 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:07 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you think it wasn't a BAP pick?
a. Flacco was clearly on his way out
b. BAP picks are the rarest of mammals in the draft forest - every pick is a combination of value and need and true BAP picks are as rare as a pygmy, albino, snow leopard. They almost never occur.
So you don't actually know. Not that it really matters, no one ever admits to passing up better players to fill roster spots and not crowd other position groups, but they clearly do it. Remember Reggie Williams with Roethlisberger on the board?
However the Ravens are an excellent example of maximizing value in everything they do. What did they give up for Peters? At most one first round pick, and he's a pro bowl level young cb.
(12-23-2019, 09:24 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:14 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]a. Flacco was clearly on his way out
b. BAP picks are the rarest of mammals in the draft forest - every pick is a combination of value and need and true BAP picks are as rare as a pygmy, albino, snow leopard. They almost never occur.
So you don't actually know. Not that it really matters, no one ever admits to passing up better players to fill roster spots and not crowd other position groups, but they clearly do it. Remember Reggie Williams with Roethlisberger on the board?
However the Ravens are an excellent example of maximizing value in everything they do. What did they give up for Peters? At most one first round pick, and he's a pro bowl level young cb.
Bruh. You're wrong.
They targeted Lamar in that draft and gave up two 2nd round picks to go get him after they had traded down, drafted a TE and got nervous they may miss Lamar.
QB was a position of need - Newsome and DeCastro had a plan to revamp the offense - and Lamar was their guy.
Back on topic:
I don't think Tony Khan will be the next GM, but I bet he has the new GM's ear more readily than he has in the past.
(and I guarantee they'll select players using a combination of value and need and they won't just select the highest rated player on their board regardless of position.)
(12-23-2019, 09:34 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:24 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]So you don't actually know. Not that it really matters, no one ever admits to passing up better players to fill roster spots and not crowd other position groups, but they clearly do it. Remember Reggie Williams with Roethlisberger on the board?
However the Ravens are an excellent example of maximizing value in everything they do. What did they give up for Peters? At most one first round pick, and he's a pro bowl level young cb.
Bruh. You're wrong.
They targeted Lamar in that draft and gave up two 2nd round picks to go get him after they had traded down, drafted a TE and got nervous they may miss Lamar.
QB was a position of need - Newsome and DeCastro had a plan to revamp the offense - and Lamar was their guy.
Back on topic:
I don't think Tony Khan will be the next GM, but I bet he has the new GM's ear more readily than he has in the past.
(and I guarantee they'll select players using a combination of value and need and they won't just select the highest rated player on their board regardless of position.)
So they thought he was so good they couldn't risk hoping he'd fall further in the draft.
We can't know after the fact, but you can tell need drafters because of the bad players they take to fill roster spots, not the best players they take that also fill needs.
(12-23-2019, 09:45 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:34 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Bruh. You're wrong.
They targeted Lamar in that draft and gave up two 2nd round picks to go get him after they had traded down, drafted a TE and got nervous they may miss Lamar.
QB was a position of need - Newsome and DeCastro had a plan to revamp the offense - and Lamar was their guy.
Back on topic:
I don't think Tony Khan will be the next GM, but I bet he has the new GM's ear more readily than he has in the past.
(and I guarantee they'll select players using a combination of value and need and they won't just select the highest rated player on their board regardless of position.)
So they thought he was so good they couldn't risk hoping he'd fall further in the draft.
We can't know after the fact, but you can tell need drafters because of the bad players they take to fill roster spots, not the best players they take that also fill needs.
You are struggling here.
The GM and his assistant GM formulated a specific plan to rebuild their offense. Among their NEEDS was a NEED to replace their QB with a new one. They identified a QB who they projected would fall and present value.
He did fall. When they got nervous that he wouldn't fall far enough they traded away two VALUABLE picks to get the QB that they NEEDED.
They needed a QB. They predetermined a specific QB to pick. They traded up to get him. This is so opposite of your mythical notion of BAP it's ridiculous.
(12-22-2019, 09:26 AM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]I would be pretty shocked if he came back as the GM too. I think it'll be either an EVP role where he is essentially a non dictatorial Coughlin overseer of the entire football operations, or he'll come back as the head of an expanded and uncastrated analytics department
This right here.
Probably why he's been shadowing Tommy. TC was no spring chicken, either, so even if the excrement stayed out of the fan, they had to be planning for his departure sooner than later.
I see what he's done with AEW helping out greatly in that area, too.
(12-23-2019, 09:45 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:34 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Bruh. You're wrong.
They targeted Lamar in that draft and gave up two 2nd round picks to go get him after they had traded down, drafted a TE and got nervous they may miss Lamar.
QB was a position of need - Newsome and DeCastro had a plan to revamp the offense - and Lamar was their guy.
Back on topic:
I don't think Tony Khan will be the next GM, but I bet he has the new GM's ear more readily than he has in the past.
(and I guarantee they'll select players using a combination of value and need and they won't just select the highest rated player on their board regardless of position.)
So they thought he was so good they couldn't risk hoping he'd fall further in the draft.
We can't know after the fact, but you can tell need drafters because of the bad players they take to fill roster spots, not the best players they take that also fill needs.
I have no idea how you still don't understand how the draft works.
The players teams select are a combination of who they think is the best player available AND what they think they need on the roster, whether thats a need this year, next year or further down the line. Its been explained to you hundreds of times by now
(12-22-2019, 08:22 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-22-2019, 12:12 AM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]I mean...maybe if the FO had listened to the analytics it might be different.
Agreed.
If Tony Khan is in the mix for a GM spot or just an increased role in personnel steering, then I think it will be because he can point to specific instances over the years where his analytics were ignored to the team's detriment.
sidenote: I think it's funny that some folks believe Tony Khan has spent this many years analyzing and evaluating NCAA and NFL player performance and somehow knows nothing about football. He could probably take 80% of this board to school on X's and O's at this point.
I think you may be exaggerating Tony’s experience a bit. No doubt he has more experience in FO and the business-side of football, but I’d be surprised if he’s capable of schooling most diehard fans. Coaches spend decades learning about the X’s and O’s, and they spend much of their time doing it. While it isn’t absolutely necessary, Tony doesn’t even have experience playing football, and I’d be surprised if the coaches are spending time teaching him how to review players and plays as they do. Being good at this job requires a lot of time, and it’s hard to imagine Tony dedicated enough of it when he’s splitting it between football, soccer, and wrestling (and whatever else).
(12-23-2019, 12:54 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 09:45 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]So they thought he was so good they couldn't risk hoping he'd fall further in the draft.
We can't know after the fact, but you can tell need drafters because of the bad players they take to fill roster spots, not the best players they take that also fill needs.
I have no idea how you still don't understand how the draft works.
The players teams select are a combination of who they think is the best player available AND what they think they need on the roster, whether thats a need this year, next year or further down the line. Its been explained to you hundreds of times by now
I know how the draft works perfectly fine, and almost every team does it entirely wrong. The Jaguars have done it especially wrong for a long time.
(12-23-2019, 01:25 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 12:54 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]I have no idea how you still don't understand how the draft works.
The players teams select are a combination of who they think is the best player available AND what they think they need on the roster, whether thats a need this year, next year or further down the line. Its been explained to you hundreds of times by now
I know how the draft works perfectly fine, and almost every team does it entirely wrong. The Jaguars have done it especially wrong for a long time.
I love the way you troll. Not many people know how to do it well, the key is being subtle and you have it down path. A true grandmaster.
(12-23-2019, 01:19 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ] (12-22-2019, 08:22 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Agreed.
If Tony Khan is in the mix for a GM spot or just an increased role in personnel steering, then I think it will be because he can point to specific instances over the years where his analytics were ignored to the team's detriment.
sidenote: I think it's funny that some folks believe Tony Khan has spent this many years analyzing and evaluating NCAA and NFL player performance and somehow knows nothing about football. He could probably take 80% of this board to school on X's and O's at this point.
I think you may be exaggerating Tony’s experience a bit. No doubt he has more experience in FO and the business-side of football, but I’d be surprised if he’s capable of schooling most diehard fans. Coaches spend decades learning about the X’s and O’s, and they spend much of their time doing it. While it isn’t absolutely necessary, Tony doesn’t even have experience playing football, and I’d be surprised if the coaches are spending time teaching him how to review players and plays as they do. Being good at this job requires a lot of time, and it’s hard to imagine Tony dedicated enough of it when he’s splitting it between football, soccer, and wrestling (and whatever else).
Tony claims to have been a diehard (analytical) fan since childhood (he was predicting super bowl victors on his local radio station in eighth grade) and on through his college years at Illinois where he began dabbling in analytics. He has run an analytics firm since 2012.
How exactly is he supposed to have analyzed situational football statistics if he doesn't know the x's and o's?
I think you are underestimating the work he's put into this endeavour.
The "never playing football" thing has been debunked a hundred times over by successful coaches and executives that never played.
But to your point - Tony briefly coached a college intramural football team when he was a senior in high school. Their regular coach was his mentor and asked him to fill in while he was ill. I doubt that was haphazardly doled out to a kid who wasn't already student of the game.
I find it unwise to make assumptions about a person's knowledge and understanding of a topic based on a personal perception formulated with limited scope.
(12-22-2019, 02:53 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-22-2019, 02:45 PM)Talented Kalamari Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not saying he couldn’t teach me about football. Heck, there’s honestly a good chance he knows more than I do. I’m just a fan, I’m not naive enough to think I’m any kind of expert. Maybe he could kick [BLEEP] and be a great GM, I don’t know. I’m just saying that my gut feeling tells me that someone else who’s been around the game longer, involved in the league in other roles, maybe even a former player might be a better fit. But I’m only stating my opinion.
So you're talking out of your [BLEEP]
OK, got it.
I can talk out of my [BLEEP] and still do a better job at posting than most self proclaimed “experts” on this board. Keep it moving
(12-23-2019, 01:25 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 12:54 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]I have no idea how you still don't understand how the draft works.
The players teams select are a combination of who they think is the best player available AND what they think they need on the roster, whether thats a need this year, next year or further down the line. Its been explained to you hundreds of times by now
I know how the draft works perfectly fine, and almost every team does it entirely wrong. The Jaguars have done it especially wrong for a long time.
You have the most apt name on the board, that's for sure
(12-23-2019, 01:41 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 01:19 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]I think you may be exaggerating Tony’s experience a bit. No doubt he has more experience in FO and the business-side of football, but I’d be surprised if he’s capable of schooling most diehard fans. Coaches spend decades learning about the X’s and O’s, and they spend much of their time doing it. While it isn’t absolutely necessary, Tony doesn’t even have experience playing football, and I’d be surprised if the coaches are spending time teaching him how to review players and plays as they do. Being good at this job requires a lot of time, and it’s hard to imagine Tony dedicated enough of it when he’s splitting it between football, soccer, and wrestling (and whatever else).
Tony claims to have been a diehard (analytical) fan since childhood (he was predicting super bowl victors on his local radio station in eighth grade) and on through his college years at Illinois where he began dabbling in analytics. He has run an analytics firm since 2012.
How exactly is he supposed to have analyzed situational football statistics if he doesn't know the x's and o's?
I think you are underestimating the work he's put into this endeavour.
The "never playing football" thing has been debunked a hundred times over by successful coaches and executives that never played.
But to your point - Tony briefly coached a college intramural football team when he was a senior in high school. Their regular coach was his mentor and asked him to fill in while he was ill. I doubt that was haphazardly doled out to a kid who wasn't already student of the game.
I find it unwise to make assumptions about a person's knowledge and understanding of a topic based on a personal perception formulated with limited scope.
Most of the analytics is math. My impression was that it’s based on numbers and stats which most people have access to. I do believe, if done properly, it has a place in scouting. I’d even bet he’s pretty good at it but I’m not sure that makes him an X’s and O’s kind of guy.
The whole not having played football comment was only to emphasize that I don’t think he has experience evaluating players, and he doesn’t have the benefit of learning the sport (and what’s expected) while playing. I don’t believe it’s necessary; I’m just saying it’s another missing piece for him.
I’m not foolish enough to think I can school most coaches or GMs—even the Gus Bradley and Gene Smith types. As bad as they were, they’ve been doing this all their life, and their lives were likely 100% football. I just don’t think that describes Tony, and I think that’s what it takes to be good at that job.
I don’t think Tony is stupid. I think i just doubt he’s good enough to do anything (at this moment) involved in evaluating talent successfully.
(12-23-2019, 01:41 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 01:19 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]I think you may be exaggerating Tony’s experience a bit. No doubt he has more experience in FO and the business-side of football, but I’d be surprised if he’s capable of schooling most diehard fans. Coaches spend decades learning about the X’s and O’s, and they spend much of their time doing it. While it isn’t absolutely necessary, Tony doesn’t even have experience playing football, and I’d be surprised if the coaches are spending time teaching him how to review players and plays as they do. Being good at this job requires a lot of time, and it’s hard to imagine Tony dedicated enough of it when he’s splitting it between football, soccer, and wrestling (and whatever else).
Tony claims to have been a diehard (analytical) fan since childhood (he was predicting super bowl victors on his local radio station in eighth grade) and on through his college years at Illinois where he began dabbling in analytics. He has run an analytics firm since 2012.
How exactly is he supposed to have analyzed situational football statistics if he doesn't know the x's and o's?
I think you are underestimating the work he's put into this endeavour.
The "never playing football" thing has been debunked a hundred times over by successful coaches and executives that never played.
But to your point - Tony briefly coached a college intramural football team when he was a senior in high school. Their regular coach was his mentor and asked him to fill in while he was ill. I doubt that was haphazardly doled out to a kid who wasn't already student of the game.
I find it unwise to make assumptions about a person's knowledge and understanding of a topic based on a personal perception formulated with limited scope.
That goes both ways.
It is more likely he doesn't know [BLEEP].
You people think so highly of all people in the NFL when some of them are hot garbage at their jobs (Bradley, Gene Smith, etc). They are not gods, they are not geniuses, they are regular people that have made a career out of football.
If I am Shad Khan and I know my son has the knowledge and is more than capable to do the GM job, at the very least I give him a chance for a couple of years, I don't care what the people/fans think because if he does a good job people will shut up about it. IMO there is a reason why Tony is not the GM, it only seems he has some lame made up job that has had no impact whatsoever.
(12-23-2019, 01:30 PM)TearExtractor Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 01:25 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I know how the draft works perfectly fine, and almost every team does it entirely wrong. The Jaguars have done it especially wrong for a long time.
I love the way you troll. Not many people know how to do it well, the key is being subtle and you have it down path. A true grandmaster.
What part of the statement is wrong?
(12-23-2019, 01:56 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not foolish enough to think I can school most coaches or GMs—even the Gus Bradley and Gene Smith types. As bad as they were, they’ve been doing this all their life, and their lives were likely 100% football. I just don’t think that describes Tony, and I think that’s what it takes to be good at that job.
I don’t think Tony is stupid. I think i just doubt he’s good enough to do anything (at this moment) involved in evaluating talent successfully.
I can't speak to Tony or other GMs, but I've always felt on the whole, there was a severe lack of talent at the GM and front office level. Not because the people in those jobs aren't always capable but just due to the limited pool of people eligible for those roles. How many people in the world have the opportunity to become the GM of a team? Very very few. In most cases you need to have been a player at some level, that got into coaching or scouting, and then worked their way up. How many people played college ball? Of those how many went into coaching or scouting? Very very small numbers. Anytime you pick from a small pool of candidates, the talent pool becomes extremely thin. Now admittedly I think scouting is a bit of an art combined with a lot of luck. So the intelligence aspect is somewhat negated in that regards. But over time, luck is spread equally and those with an intelligent process or design (combining old fashioned scouting with modern analytics, maximizing draft picks through trades, utilizing compensatory picks, etc..) should come out ahead.
Long story short I think there are tons of really smart capable people, with zero football experience, that would ultimately make much better GMs / front office staff than those currently employed in those roles.
(12-23-2019, 02:07 PM)iHaunting Raven Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 02:05 PM)JagsFansince1995 Wrote: [ -> ]What do you mean "YOU PEOPLE?"
![[Image: d12.jpg]](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/539/748/d12.jpg)
Most people here lol
lol. On topic, i'm open to anyone who can bring positive change. I don't care if it's the old guy that sleeps by the river in some ghost town.
(12-23-2019, 02:24 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-23-2019, 01:56 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not foolish enough to think I can school most coaches or GMs—even the Gus Bradley and Gene Smith types. As bad as they were, they’ve been doing this all their life, and their lives were likely 100% football. I just don’t think that describes Tony, and I think that’s what it takes to be good at that job.
I don’t think Tony is stupid. I think i just doubt he’s good enough to do anything (at this moment) involved in evaluating talent successfully.
I can't speak to Tony or other GMs, but I've always felt on the whole, there was a severe lack of talent at the GM and front office level. Not because the people in those jobs aren't always capable but just due to the limited pool of people eligible for those roles. How many people in the world have the opportunity to become the GM of a team? Very very few. In most cases you need to have been a player at some level, that got into coaching or scouting, and then worked their way up. How many people played college ball? Of those how many went into coaching or scouting? Very very small numbers. Anytime you pick from a small pool of candidates, the talent pool becomes extremely thin. Now admittedly I think scouting is a bit of an art combined with a lot of luck. So the intelligence aspect is somewhat negated in that regards. But over time, luck is spread equally and those with an intelligent process or design (combining old fashioned scouting with modern analytics, maximizing draft picks through trades, utilizing compensatory picks, etc..) should come out ahead.
Long story short I think there are tons of really smart capable people, with zero football experience, that would ultimately make much better GMs / front office staff than those currently employed in those roles.
Exactly. Smart people generally aren't in football and until recently there was very little innovation. The front office spots have 32 spots and are filled from either the management or scouting side. If you took high IQ people and thought them the ins and outside of football for 1-2 seasons, they could develop game plans that we haven't seen before and tailor it to the players on the team.
Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk