Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panthers snaps by youth versus the rest of the NFL

Bartin

By Bartin,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Bartin Collaborator

Bartin

Posted
Posted

Came across this from overthecap.com where they have assigned a valuation to the number of snaps played by drafted players in the first four years of their rookie contracts in a sortable table for every year since 2011 which is coincidentally the first year Ron became coach. It's also when the new CBA began which is why the site chose that year as a start point. So I thought it would be interesting to note where Ron and the staff have ranked at playing youth versus veterans against the rest of the NFL given how often it is said that Ron never plays young guys and always prefers vets.

I should note that this is not solely a metric that shows preference to vets vs youth as it also will factor in how well teams hit on players in the draft.

https://overthecap.com/rookie-class-evaluation/

Here is where the Panthers rank in the NFL for most snaps by players on a rookie contract since 2011:

2011 - 13th

2012 - 10th

2013 - 20th

2014 - 5th

2015 - 23rd

2016 - 27th

2017 - 24th

2018 - 15th

Overall - 19th

So we are pretty squarely in the middle of the pack in the NFL. There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

    So...do we like rookies now? Or do we still hate them? Or is it, some rookies yea, and some rookies nah? Inquiring minds and all that.

It appears the less rookies we start the better our record is according to those rankings. Still skewed, because if you have a stud for a rookie - this means nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

It appears the less rookies we start the better our record is according to those rankings. Still skewed, because if you have a stud for a rookie - this means nothing.

 

    I don't think that is what it means at all. All that shows is the amount of playing time. Not where the team ended up.

 

    This is the qualifier in the OP. "There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half."

 

    We are in the middle of the pack where it comes to playing rookies. So I guess it means we don't hate em. We just aren't in love with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    I don't think that is what it means at all. All that shows is the amount of playing time. Not where the team ended up.

 

    This is the qualifier in the OP. "There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half."

 

    We are in the middle of the pack where it comes to playing rookies. So I guess it means we don't hate em. We just aren't in love with them.

Compare the season's record based on our rookie play time ranking..... That's how I got the answer I got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
run-run-pass-punt Rising Star

run-run-pass-punt

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Bartin said:

 There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half.

So in other words, find and put good players on the field, whether green or seasoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • strato
      The running back situation....

      By strato · Posted

      okay I found this and it sounds like my hopes for the first surgery being not such a great job seems like it could be actual reality.  I only hoped because that would give a better chance for recovery and ia a possible scenario so I just thought it could be possible. Had no real evidence of it. But I’ll be damned.    This is a detailed report of Brooks’ surgery and the condition of his knee after the failed repair.     https://x.com/jmthrivept/status/2055743129408704806?s= Sparked by some very good questions by @CoachspeakIndex, here’s some info on Jonathon Brooks: 1. Speculation that the first graft/ACLR by Dr. Cooper didn’t “take” or at least was too lax, leading to failure and re-tear. Brooks dealt with issues cutting, progressing in his rehab into the early stages of 2024 and then re-tore it late 2024, requiring a second ACLR in January 2025 (essentially revision). Notably, CAR prolonged Brooks’ rehab process through Sept-Oct due to issues progressing into the next stages of rehab. 2. Second surgery performed by Dr. Neal ElAttrache, who has extensive experience with revisions. He did a double bundle technique, harvesting graft from Brooks’ left patellar tendon and a strip of his right IT Band (his right patellar tendon had been utilized for the prior graft in 2023. The double bundle technique significantly increases rotational stability of the knee, leading to a stronger and more secure graft/reconstruction. Also to note, Brooks’ surgery wasn’t significantly delayed, meaning that the tunnels from his prior ACLR were in good shape and they didn’t need to perform bone grafts to fill in (would have delayed 2nd surgery by 5-6 months). Essentially, reading the tea leaves tells me that everything else except for the graft itself was still in good quality within his knee. Good sign for future.  3. Typically, you see a performance increase anywhere from 16-20 months post-revision. Brooks will be ~21 months out from his second surgery by the time Week 1 hits. His knee should be more stable and stronger this time around, with adequate time for healing and return to all movement patterns. I’m not viewing this situation as a typical “Player __ had TWO ACL tears, he’s cooked” situation. Rather, I’m viewing it as the first procedure failed, but the second procedure is significantly stronger and should allow him to return to form this time around. I don’t know why it posted as a link but there it is.  
    • Captain Morgan
      OTA's

      By Captain Morgan · Posted

      Jackie, any more reps tomorrow, or is that it for this session?  thanks for the work
    • WUnderhill
      Myles Garrett Traded to Rams

      By WUnderhill · Posted

      How can you say they aren’t trying to win now with all the moves made in free agency? Or is trading first round picks the only way to be win now? I’d be fine never trading another first round pick again, win now be damned.
×
×
  • Create New...