Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Time Kibitzer

Members
  • Posts

    6,376
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

106 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Parts Unknown

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Seattle Seahawks

Recent Profile Visitors

11,618 profile views
  1. That just depends. I don't regret drafting Luck in all my devy leagues after his RS freshman season, when his stats didn't necessarily warrant the selection. That's a best case scenario though. Once or twice per decade. Most picks aren't going to work out that well. In shallow one round dev leagues, I almost always spend my picks on a RB or WR. These positions are mainly about physical talent. If a guy has NFL caliber physical traits and all of the basic position-specific skills, he's probably going to end up being a pretty good prospect. Physical ability is important for QBs, but probably not to the same extent. I think NFL success is more about the mental skills and intangibles, which are hard to gather from a stat sheet. I didn't watch many of Hack's complete games last season, but I was definitely intrigued based on his 5* reputation out of high school and his early statistical success. I haven't watched any games of his this year and have no opinion on why he's regressing. One thing I will say is that he's not a Luck level athlete. Doesn't have anywhere near the mobility and evasiveness. He seems to be shaded more towards Bradford or Foles. Pure pocket guy. That could make him easier to defend, but doesn't really explain why he isn't dominating in college. I sort of buy the OL excuse because that's an important variable, but at the end of the day I always expect an NFL caliber QB to carve up college defenses. It's shooting fish in a barrel for players with that kind of ability, even if their OL is shoddy. So for me I'd be pretty worried about Hackenberg's consistent struggles this year. It doesn't mean he can't bounce back, but it throws up a big red flag. I'm pretty sure I've written my thoughts on this subject on these forums before, but I think the stat sheet is arguably more important for QBs than any other position. Having great college stats definitely isn't a guarantee of future success in the NFL, but I see it as basically a minimum requirement; much moreso than for RBs, WRs, and TEs. Almost all QBs drafted in the early rounds who had a poor CMP% and/or a poor YPA in college ended up disappointing in the NFL. Boller, Freeman, Gabbert, Ponder, Locker, Glennon, and Logan Thomas from this past draft are some names that come to mind at the moment. If Hackenberg has a 65% CMP%, 9.0 YPA, 3.0 TD/INT ratio next season I'll change my tune immediately, but at the moment despite his 'success' last year his stat sheet suggests NFL success is far from an inevitably for him, which is the same thing I was saying about him at the end of last season when he was being hyped as the inevitable #1 pick when he declares. Hackenberg doesn't look much different statistically than these two guys I've compared him to. Can you tell which one he is? These numbers are after their Sophomore seasons. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3V0yJsCAAACMPD.jpg One of them went #1 overall and the other went #11. I'd guess he's the one with the ####ty stats but all of them have ####ty stats.
  2. That just depends. I don't regret drafting Luck in all my devy leagues after his RS freshman season, when his stats didn't necessarily warrant the selection. That's a best case scenario though. Once or twice per decade. Most picks aren't going to work out that well. In shallow one round dev leagues, I almost always spend my picks on a RB or WR. These positions are mainly about physical talent. If a guy has NFL caliber physical traits and all of the basic position-specific skills, he's probably going to end up being a pretty good prospect. Physical ability is important for QBs, but probably not to the same extent. I think NFL success is more about the mental skills and intangibles, which are hard to gather from a stat sheet. I didn't watch many of Hack's complete games last season, but I was definitely intrigued based on his 5* reputation out of high school and his early statistical success. I haven't watched any games of his this year and have no opinion on why he's regressing. One thing I will say is that he's not a Luck level athlete. Doesn't have anywhere near the mobility and evasiveness. He seems to be shaded more towards Bradford or Foles. Pure pocket guy. That could make him easier to defend, but doesn't really explain why he isn't dominating in college. I sort of buy the OL excuse because that's an important variable, but at the end of the day I always expect an NFL caliber QB to carve up college defenses. It's shooting fish in a barrel for players with that kind of ability, even if their OL is shoddy. So for me I'd be pretty worried about Hackenberg's consistent struggles this year. It doesn't mean he can't bounce back, but it throws up a big red flag. I'm pretty sure I've written my thoughts on this subject on these forums before, but I think the stat sheet is arguably more important for QBs than any other position. Having great college stats definitely isn't a guarantee of future success in the NFL, but I see it as basically a minimum requirement; much moreso than for RBs, WRs, and TEs. Almost all QBs drafted in the early rounds who had a poor CMP% and/or a poor YPA in college ended up disappointing in the NFL. Boller, Freeman, Gabbert, Ponder, Locker, Glennon, and Logan Thomas from this past draft are some names that come to mind at the moment. If Hackenberg has a 65% CMP%, 9.0 YPA, 3.0 TD/INT ratio next season I'll change my tune immediately, but at the moment despite his 'success' last year his stat sheet suggests NFL success is far from an inevitably for him, which is the same thing I was saying about him at the end of last season when he was being hyped as the inevitable #1 pick when he declares.
  3. That's a lot less true these days than just several years ago. And usually it takes more than statistical mediocrity to get as much hype as he's had, even for a true freshman. Here are the last 19 first round QBs and their true freshman performance. Bortles - Redshirted. Manziel - Redshirted. Bridgewater - 64.5%, 7.2 YPA, 1.17 TD : INT Manuel - 65.1%, 7.7 YPA, 0.33 TD : INT Luck - Redshirted. RGIII - 59.9%, 7.8 YPA, 5.00 TD : INT Tannehill - Redshirted. Weeden - Redshirted. Newton - Played sparingly (12 pass attempts in first two seasons). Locker - 47.3%, 6.3 YPA, 0.93 TD : INT Gabbert - Played sparingly (13 pass attempts as a freshman). Ponder - Played sparingly (18 pass attempts as a freshman). Bradford - Redshirted. Tebow - Played sparingly (33 pass attempts as a freshman). Stafford - 52.7%, 6.8 YPA, 0.54 TD : INT Sanchez - Redshirted. Freeman - 51.9%, 6.6 YPA, 0.4 TD : INT Ryan - Redshirted. Flacco - Played sparingly (4 pass attempts as a freshman). So among all the recent elite QB prospects: - 68.4% either redshirted or played sparingly in their first year out of high school. - Of the few who received extensive playing time, the averages were: 56.9% completions, 7.1 YPA, 1.40 TD : INT (completely skewed by RG III's outlier). All that being the case, there's a very strong argument that Hackenberg's true freshman season of 58.9% completions, 7.5 YPA, and 2.00 TD : INT was actually far ahead of the performance curve even compared with eventual elite prospects at the position. Most first round QBs did not even play significant minutes as true freshmen. Of those who did, only RGIII had arguably better numbers than Hackenberg, and he did that as a dual threat on 267 pass attempts whereas Hackenberg had 392 pass attempts and presented no running threat. So there's absolutely nothing wrong with Hackenberg being hyped after a year like that. In fact, he absolutely SHOULD have been hyped after a year like that. What's happened since then is a different story... Guess I was wrong, I didn't realize all those guys' freshman seasons were following redshirt seasons. Still, I think it's ill-advised to treat a QB as an elite prospect before they put up an elite statistical season.
  4. That's a lot less true these days than just several years ago. And usually it takes more than statistical mediocrity to get as much hype as he's had, even for a true freshman.
  5. Eh, not sure I completely agree with Rotoworld there on Hackenberg. The OLine is definately the main issue. They were absolutely terrible for most of the season. Hack has some mobility but he's really a pocket QB and with no pocket and no running game due to terrible blocking, he got killed. Now, the last couple of games were against lesser defenses and the line got an injured Sr OG back and looked better. The running game was better as well. But Hackenberg still played a bit afraid and didn't stride into throws or trust his reads. Next year there will be more bodies and everyone will be more experienced, so I expect him to have a better year. But he still doesn't fit Franklin's offense very well. So the question is whether NFL teams think they can get him back to where he was last year, as an outstanding pro style QB, or whether he has been David Carr level ruined from all the abuse this season. He wasn't great last year either imo, definitely overrated. 59% CMP%, 7.54 YPA, 2/1 TD/INT ratio, those numbers certainly didn't scream NFL prospect.
  6. I appreciate the arts more than most, but I'd have to agree Rothko is pretty much the worst.
  7. Travis Rudolph WR for Florida State looks like a player. Starting to get some real playing time now as a true freshman, and his YAC ability is pretty obvious. Looks skinny though, and he might not have the frame to max out over 210lbs at 6'2, but definitely still someone to keep an eye on.
  8. Chubb looks phenomenal. I wouldn't disagree that he's a better prospect than Gurley. Though Gurley's proven to be an asset in the passing game whereas Chubb hasn't proven that, but he's still got 2 years after this one to prove that.
  9. Goff's not draft eligible is he? Obviously he's been fantastic so far, but I don't find it surprising that a non-draft eligible guy who's 5 games into his first dominant season, who plays on the west coast, and who doesn't have a signature win against a big opponent yet, that he hasn't got much media hype. If he continues this level of play throughout the year, and especially if he can get a big win or 2, he'll have plenty of hype going into next season I would guess.
  10. The Colts spread the ball a lot, but they also throw 40+ times a game. Hilton's basically averaging 10 targets a game and 6-7 receptions a game. He's a pretty damn consistent option who also has the ability to blow up at any time. Lot's to like about him right now.
  11. Hackenberg has been getting a tonne of love for a while now. And as I said last year, it's impressive and all how he's so young and already 'looks' the part, but he put up mediocre numbers last year and so far this year, albeit still early, he hasn't showed any progress at all. I'd stay the hell away from him in fantasy at this stage.
  12. His appearance on Weekend Update was the only time I laughed all night. I was just relieved to have someone who could read from a prompter. Che was brutal. Chalk it up to first time jitters I guess. Yeah that was as bad as I can recall ever seeing. Uncomfortably terrible. Wasn't Lorne or some article saying he had awesome chemistry with the other guy? Not an ounce was seen yesterday anyway.
  13. Only saw the one game, but Robinson didn't strike me as that great of a prospect despite his numbers. Big time body catcher, not much in the open field besides running in a straight line, pretty skinny. He's still young though and it was really only 1 game, so plenty of opportunity for him to change my mind.
×
  • Create New...