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!

     

Greg Little


Snake

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, mc52beast said:

Why were they subbing Little/Williams? It’s not even close, Little needs to start. 

it took Amini getting a serious injury for Ron to ever put Andrew Norwell in, then after Norwell left he immediately re-signed Amini.

he values consistency over talent on the o-line. he's heard people talking about o-lines having to gel so he thinks "oh i can just get any old o-linemen and as long as he plays long enough he'll gel and be real good."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ted Ginn Jr.'s Hands said:

This situation has to be frustrating for Daryl too.  He is on a one year prove it deal that will impact his future earnings, yet Ron keeps trotting him out to play a position he is not adept at playing.  Let him play guard over Van Roten and see what he can do.

Williams wants to be a LT so he can get paid like a LT. Only problem is he sucks at LT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, mc52beast said:

Why were they subbing Little/Williams? It’s not even close, Little needs to start. 
 

But of course this is Ron we’re talking about 

We wanted to telegraph whether we were running or passing. Little is the far better pass protector but Williams is a very good run blocker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Snake said:

Williams wants to be a LT so he can get paid like a LT. Only problem is he sucks at LT. 

Not sure e if it's him or the staff. He's a solid RT. He'd probably be a good OG. He's not even a roster caliber LT. Our best OL is probably Williams at LG with Little and Moton manning the OT spots. I don't know why we're so resistant to playing our best possible lineups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We wanted to telegraph whether we were running or passing. Little is the far better pass protector but Williams is a very good run blocker.

That’s what I was telling everyone watching the game.  But at this point I will put up with Little’s run blocking and not having my Qb’s beheaded.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...