View Single Post
Old 11-16-2011, 03:52 PM   #5
SirClintonPortis
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBXVII View Post
Your right but a ton of other teams passed on them and we took them. I wonder why? Your right I think it was their grading system.
Players "fall" based on how much folks expect them to actually produce. For example, Haynesworth could produce like a perennial Pro-Bowler. But we only got a 5th rounder from the Pats because there was a legit chance that he might very well do nothing. Teams did not want to risk a 3rd rounder for absolutely nothing. Similarly, that's why Thomas and Kelly "fell" to us. Thomas for being lacking in knowledge. Kelly due to his injury risk.

Devin Thomas was a one year wonder in college. Thus, he had little knowledge of what WRs do at the pro level. But he was physically gifted. He was not expected to be an immediate impact guy because of this. But they thought he could pick up the game in a couple years. It obviously never happened.

Malcolm Kelly was a huge injury risk. But a workout with JC put him on their wanted radar because of chemistry. He also had size and hands and was more NFL-ready.

Essentially, it seems they(or just Vinny) ignored the red flags and probably believed the worst couldn't happen. Well, the worst did happen, and we know the results.


This is why I do not believe overemphasizing need is good strategy. It is factor in breaking a tie between two similarly good prospects. BUT there is a big temptation to overlook flaws just so filling the need is accomplished. If there are huge red flags, folks ought to have had the balls to "let them go" and pick a quality prospect elsewhere, even at a position of non-need like RB(Forte or Rice were there). Being able to let a good player walk and replace him seamlessly is a good thing in its own right: it means you addressed a need before it became one.

Of course, there is a subjective element in grading prospects. Some flaws aren't really big flaws at all, while others are huge. Trent Williams was had the more "flawed" profile than Okung, but it seems that under Shanahan, his question marks haven't popped up much during his time here. What was unsure about Trent to us was apparently not a big deal for Mike Shanahan.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".

Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.

The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 1.09727 seconds with 10 queries