Jump to content


ZWK

Member Since 14 Jul 2008
Offline Last Active Today, 11:44 AM
*****

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Save $ on cell service -- Ting Mobile / Solavei (+ other MVNOs)

08 April 2014 - 07:37 PM

 

Thanks for running this thread, Hulk! Can you give me a recommendation?

 

I'm looking for something cheap. I want to get a new smartphone & plan for about 150 minutes, 15 texts, and 250mb per month (probably a bit less on average). Slight preference for Verizon based on the network in my area & for traveling within the US, but all the main carriers seem to be at least passable in my area.

 

I've looked at a few of the options you mentioned, and so far it looks like Zact is the best deal (with Ting not too far behind, especially if my usage dips below 100min or 100mb).  What does your massive spreadsheet say?

Ring Plus Mobile will get it done for you for just $9.99.  Its Sprint coverage w/ LTE.  They have a somewhat limited phone selection but a couple decent options.

 

For Verizon coverage you'd be looking at Ready Mobile for $25, and it would only be 3G, no LTE.

 

PS: Its not 1 spreadsheet anymore.  Its a database built from over 100 spreadsheets.  Sheesh, need to get this website up and running already.

 

Thanks!

 

It looks like Ring Plus doesn't sell any phones - you have to bring your own Sprint device. Do you know where a good place is to buy Sprint phones without a contract?  Ring Plus has a lookup tool which shows all of the phones they'll accept, but it doesn't make a very good starting place for a phone search.


In Topic: [Dynasty] 2014 Draft Prospects

08 April 2014 - 07:07 PM

 

For those of you who track these metrics (I'm one of you); do record both combine and pro-day results or just one or the other?  If it's the latter, which do you choose? 

 

I don't want to record both because I like to create customized calculations while looking for trends, so I think I've been going with combine exclusively (if both were done).  If they only did a pro-day, then I use that by default.  I feel like the combine may be more accurate if only because it seems to always be the worst of the two times, hence, the possibility of home school favoritism with the measurements.

 

I ignore pro days altogether unless a prospect does a drill that he didn't do at the combine.  The combine is a level playing field.

 

Pro-days are non-standard timing (sometimes with friendly timers), non-standard shoes/clothes, wet/cold/hot/dry/fast turf/long grass, different equipment, no days of interviews/medical exams beforehand, fewer nerves, etc etc. etc.  

 

What about the jumps?


In Topic: [Dynasty] 2014 Draft Prospects

08 April 2014 - 07:06 PM

 

If Robinson had put up his pro day numbers (4.47 40, 42" vert, 131" broad, 208 lb.) at the combine, he would be 3rd in my purely quantitative WR ratings (instead of 6th).

 

you could say that about almost any player - Pro day numbers are almost always better.

 

 

Name three.

 

Did anyone improve at their 40 & jumps as much as Robinson did (assuming these numbers hold up)?  De'Anthony Thomas is the only one who comes to mind - he cut 0.11 off his 40 time according to nflds, but his jumps were basically unchanged.  (Latimer also blew up his pro day, but that was after missing the combine.)

 

Out of my top 10 (by the numbers) WRs, Davante Adams is the only other one I know of who improved noticeably at his pro day.  He allegedly cut his 40 time by .08 seconds, which would be enough to move him up a spot or two (from 8th to either 6th or 7th, depending on whether we're also counting Robinson's pro day).

 

These reports have Robinson adding 3" to his vertical, 4" to his broad jump, and cutting 0.13 sec from his 40.  Even if I add 0.05 sec back to his 40 time (making it 4.52, to account for questionable timekeeping) and downgrade him for his drop in weight, that's still an extremely impressive improvement and enough to push him past Cooks into 3rd place in my ratings.


In Topic: [Dynasty] 2014 Draft Prospects

08 April 2014 - 05:19 PM

If Robinson had put up his pro day numbers (4.47 40, 42" vert, 131" broad, 208 lb.) at the combine, he would be 3rd in my purely quantitative WR ratings (instead of 6th).


In Topic: Post Combine Rankings

06 April 2014 - 10:47 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beckham at 9 seems way low.

I'm not a fan of his low TD production.  Also from a probability standpoint, there will only be "so many" short WRs who develop into WR1s from this group and since I have both Lee and Cooks ahead of him, that bumps him down a bit.  I use a combination of probability, tape and metrics to rank players all pretty evenly.  The chances of this class producing three different 5'10 WRs who become WR1 is going to be very low.  My goal when drafting players is to acquire elite players - I'm not going for safe.  Not sure if that makes any sense to you but it does to me :)

 


If you're going for elite players and want to increase your chances of hitting, you should just cross off all "small" WRs. You especially should put Moncrief ahead of Lee, since he's basically just a bigger version of a "great athlete with great measurables who can't catch".

 

I think Lee can catch though, that's why he's ahead of Moncrief.  Lee is also a Biletnikoff winner.  Lee dominated right from the start and was hobbled this past season.  Way more proven production from Lee.
 
Every player is measured individually by me but I take everything into account, including historical trends etc… I do think the new NFL is allowing for more variance among what makes up a WR1.  It's becoming more common to have small WRs produce elite stats.  I'm not just a "metrics" analyst.  Everything matters, essentially.

 


Lee and Moncrief are both bodycatchers. Neither guy "can catch".  Lee dominated right from the start as 19/20-year old Freshman.  Moncrief was 20 right before the start of his Junior season.

 

Proven production?  Uh...using total stats is very misleading.  Their "production" is very similar if you're looking at the correct, meaningful stats/metrics: https://pbs.twimg.co...Gu-CMAAbby3.png

 

They are both also weak in the RedZone.

 

Give the the bigger and younger version.  That's Moncrief.

 

 

Lee's 2012 receiving stats were way better than Moncrief's (and 2012 was the best statistical season for each of them).

 

Lee accounted for 47% of his team's receiving yards and had better efficiency numbers (e.g., yards per target) than Moncrief despite his heavy usage. He was 2nd in the nation in number of 40+ yard receptions and 3rd in receiving TDs. I have about a dozen different receiving metrics in this spreadsheet, many of which are per target or relative to the team's totals, and in 2012 Lee outperformed Moncrief on all but one of them (Moncrief had 42% of his team's receiving TDs vs. 36% for Lee, but Lee had more TDs and a larger percentage of his team's total offensive TDs).

 

I have Lee ranked ahead of Cooks as the most productive college receiver in this draft class. (That does not mean that he is my top WR prospect in this draft class, just that he had the most total career production on stats which I suspect are predictive of NFL success. There are also issues of size, speed, hands, etc. to take into account.)

 

 

I prefer to compare players based on age, not "year".

 

I was comparing them based on their best season - Lee's statistically best season (which was 2012) vs. Moncrief's statistically best season (which was 2012). Lee's was a lot better. Lee's second best statistical season (2011) was also a lot better than Moncrief's second best statistical season (2013), and it was even better than Moncrief's statistically best season (2012).