Awful------Bad-----Average----Good----Awesome

 

I would consider "not that good" a negative statement, therefore you must consider that bad.

Average is average, in itself, self-explanatory.

Therefore not that good and average are different.

And while they might not be much different, they are different, at all.

 

"much different" and "different at all" are different in themselves as well.

 

Soooooo... you lose.

I think.

 

I never lose.  I already clarified like two pages ago that I think he is "probably somewhere around average".  Whether or not having that caliber of player in our starting lineup is going to equate to more wins; that's up for discussion I guess.

---

Definitely.  You hook up with a chick and she tells her friends you're not that good.  ..... That would really suck  !!

 

You hook up with a chick and she tells her friends that you were average.   While not the best compliment, once can certainly live with that remark.

 

Next time I'll use your "hook up with a chick" metric when analyzing players.

 

That way there is no confusion.

---

Emmanuel Sanders had 44 catches in 3rd year. Pretty good for a young guy and he looked good while doing it.


Nelson 45 catches in 3rd year. Again, pretty good. Also a 2nd round pick and probably starts on one team for duration of career. Not similar to Skuta at all. Not a story about a guy who "came on late" like you are trying to say.


That is typical progression for most receivers. Nothing un-ordinary about it.


Sorry Romo became a star for Dallas in his 4th season. My point still stands. Year 3 vs year 4 is not a huge difference.


As for Bennett.. Ya I stand by what I already said; he has been contributing for every team he played for. He was a highly regarded talent in the draft, a physically gifted freak. Adequate production early for a TE2 and started many games in first 4 years at DAL, Productive full time starter for NYG in 5th, best years in CHI.

Your criticiism of Skuta was based on his starts, not his production. So you are trying to apply a double standard to the players mentioned who also had limited starts at the begining of their careers.

 

Skuta had over 30 tackles his third season, and for an OLB that plays at the LOS, that is significant production. So his production is actually comparable to the players I have mentioned.

 

The three year production increase is not a trait unique to receivers like you are trying to claim, it is a common trait for all positions outside of maybe RB.

 

BTW, the players I mentioned are just from the 2015 pro bowl. You expand the pool to all players in the NFL, not just pro bowl players, and the number of high quality players with limited starts early in their careers grows exponentially.

---

Scoota is Prob Owl

---

Make the Jags Great Again
Blake Bortles......YOU'RE FIRED!
Dave Caldwell.....YOU'RE FIRED!

Your criticiism of Skuta was based on his starts, not his production. So you are trying to apply a double standard to the players mentioned who also had limited starts at the begining of their careers.

 

Skuta had over 30 tackles his third season, and for an OLB that plays at the LOS, that is significant production. So his production is actually comparable to the players I have mentioned.

 

The three year production increase is not a trait unique to receivers like you are trying to claim, it is a common trait for all positions outside of maybe RB.

 

BTW, the players I mentioned are just from the 2015 pro bowl. You expand the pool to all players in the NFL, not just pro bowl players, and the number of high quality players with limited starts early in their careers grows exponentially.

 

Most of those tackles are probably special teams.  Having a double standard for LBs and WRs is reasonable since, for example, a 3rd string (non-starting) receiver plays more than a backup LB.  So a lack of starts for a LB is more telling than a lack of starts for a receiver.

 

Even if I give you every player on that list as a "late bloomer" (which I wouldn't because most on that list aren't, and they are not similar comparisons to a guy like Skuta), that's like 20%.  So even at those generous odds, these types of players are exceptions.

 

I mean, are you saying a player who plays so sparingly in the first several years of their career is more likely than not to become a legit impact player? That doesn't seem right.

---

Guys clearly these examples aren't similar at all.


When he said players who don't start early in their careers don't become successful what he meant was outside linebackers who play close to the line but don't start for 4 years, who aren't drafted in the first 4 rounds of a draft that falls on an odd year, on a team from the West Coast coached by a coach who leaves in an even year, and whose last name is reminiscent of a small two wheeled motor cycle.


All other comparisons are invalid.

---

LOL

This thread ...


Every time I see the thread title I just feel like the whole premise is so premature it makes my head spin.


We have know idea what we've got in Skuta yet.

---

Most of those tackles are probably special teams.  Having a double standard for LBs and WRs is reasonable since, for example, a 3rd string (non-starting) receiver plays more than a backup LB.  So a lack of starts for a LB is more telling than a lack of starts for a receiver.

 

Even if I give you every player on that list as a "late bloomer" (which I wouldn't because most on that list aren't, and they are not similar comparisons to a guy like Skuta), that's like 20%.  So even at those generous odds, these types of players are exceptions.

 

I mean, are you saying a player who plays so sparingly in the first several years of their career is more likely than not to become a legit impact player? That doesn't seem right.

You are looking at this the wrong way.

 

Players who are late draft picks that get limited playing time are more likely to never amount to anything, but that changes when that player starts doing things that earns him more playing time. At that point, the odds of them being a good player increases tremendously.

 

You are no longer dealing with a player who has never done anything to show their value. You are now dealing with a player that has had time to develop and prove themselves as something more than just a late rd draft pick.

---

Guys clearly these examples aren't similar at all.

When he said players who don't start early in their careers don't become successful what he meant was outside linebackers who play close to the line but don't start for 4 years, who aren't drafted in the first 4 rounds of a draft that falls on an odd year, on a team from the West Coast coached by a coach who leaves in an even year, and whose last name is remin iscent of a small two wheeled motor cycle.

All other comparisons are invalid.

I think you're absolutely incorrect. He can come up with far more caveats than that. You'll never be as good at this.

---

LOL

This thread ...


Every time I see the thread title I just feel like the whole premise is so premature it makes my head spin.


We have know idea what we've got in Skuta yet.

Badger does.

---

I think you're absolutely incorrect. He can come up with far more caveats than that. You'll never be as good at this.

He never loses.



Never!

---

Most of those tackles are probably special teams.

 

 

How do you even think up this crap? Special teams tackles are listed separately in their own category. Tackle counts are strictly defensive. Moreover, if he did have that many ST tackles, that would make him perhaps the best special teams ace in the entire league.

---

'02

Badger does.

 

Lowercase 'b'.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Definitely.  You hook up with a chick and she tells her friends you're not that good.  ..... That would really suck  !!

 

You hook up with a chick and she tells her friends that you were average.   While not the best compliment, once can certainly live with that remark.

Shoot... if I hook up with a chick it's gonna be the best 3 minutes of her life!

:woot:

---

Sorry for the hypothetical


Assume Skuta has an average year nothing great nothing bad


Would you prefer Skuta next year or Jaylon Smith??

---

Sorry for the hypothetical


Assume Skuta has an average year nothing great nothing bad


Would you prefer Skuta next year or Jaylon Smith??

Well Smith won't be available at pick 32 after we win the Super Bowle

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

Dear God, help us all because of a 6 page thread about a free agent pickup who's being evaluated after ONE PRESEASON GAME BEHIND NOT EVEN ALL OF OUR STARTERS. Seriously, if you provide a well thought out analysis, which is most likely entirely inaccurate, because if you were really a "great eye for talent", then just log out, and not come back for at least a week. You think you can do better than the coaches? Go on up there and get a job then!!

 

 

Let this thread DIE. 

---