win4ever

Writers \ Bloggers
  • Content count

    1,634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

win4ever last won the day on October 1 2015

win4ever had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,040 Neutral

About win4ever

  • Rank
    2nd Year Veteran

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

4,303 profile views
  1. I'd take him in a heartbeat.
  2. I thought he looked good, although I don't think he played the full game. I went by the Davis Webb tape for that game, and I didn't notice him out there on the field once it got ugly. I think he was coming back from injury and they took it safe with him once they were getting crushed. He had the same route issue where he gets inside leverage and then floats back a couple of times. The TD was on zone coverage where he just found a hole, but I thought he matched up well against Jones. He beat him a few times, and then got beat a few times, so it was a decent back and forth. I can't really tell from the game tapes because it's impossible to tell what coverage the defense was in most of the time. He definitely didn't get shut down by Jones, although there were a few occasions where Jones just physically pushed him off the route.
  3. Yeah, the system calls for a decent amount of safe passes, but they did take a good amount of shots down the field. I usually like to watch prospects against teams with good defenses and are technically sound, because any pro level athlete can beat guys that are starters on these low level teams. Just in this tape: He shows very good release on inside slants consistently at the start of the game. The very first play is a very good route, but notice the movement right before he turns around for the ball. He fakes out the defender with a slight shift to the outside, throws the defender off balance, which opens him up to run down the field. Although, in the NFL, he probably gets tackled before the end zone. Now, skip forward to about the 2:45 mark, and notice Thomas doing something similar, although it's in much more physical form. He has to run an in out, but right before he breaks, he moves to the outside a bit, before breaking in. This helps him get separation from the corner for the pass. Thomas is obviously covered better in the NFL than Hansen at college, but it's a subtle move that can pay dividends. Back to the Hansen tape, and where things might be concerning his route running. Fast forward to the 1:20 mark, and this is a major problem for Hansen in his routes. He gets off the line of scrimmage with inside leverage, and then he throws it away by drifting towards the sidelines. If you watch his tape, you will see this route numerous times. In college, the DBs aren't as physically gifted, so you can get away with it. However, in the NFL, the DB is going to take back inside leverage and all of a sudden the QB has to make the perfect over the shoulder pass on a play where the receiver achieved his goal of taking inside leverage. If you fast forward to the 2:50 mark, you will also see another issue with his routes. He turns up field in the route instead of a straight cut, which cuts off angles. He has to run straight into the opening to maintain his separation, otherwise the CB chasing him can cut down on the throwing angle and jump the route. He's forcing the hand of the QB to throw only a specific type pass here instead of taking advantage of Hansen's ability to get the inside leverage. If you fast forward to 4:40, you will see the defender do exactly that on a play where Hansen had inside leverage. However, when he started to move up field, it naturally closed the horizontal gap between him and the defender, which allowed the guy to swat the ball away. The last play on the tape is where he does win a contested pass, but he needs to get better at because he's trying to catch the ball through the defender. He needs to undercut this route when he locates this ball. but instead he catches it through the defender. He definitely shows potential, but he is also raw, which is pretty much the same thing people said about Thomas last year. Thomas made huge strides in his route running ability, and his ability to play the ball in the air last year. If Morton can make the same adjustments, then Hansen could surprise.
  4. I compared Bailey to him when he was drafted because he was in a similar system and all. Bailey: 5'11" - 193 lbs - 32.75 arm length- 9.8 hand size - 1.59 ten yard dash - 2.63 Twenty Yard Dash - 4.53 Forty - 34.5" vertical- 117" broad jump- 6.81 three cone drill - 4.09 twenty yard shuttle - 11 reps Hansen: 6'2" - 202 lbs - 32.12 arm length - 10.12 hand size - 1.56 Ten yard dash - 2.63 Twenty Yard Dash - 4.47 Forty - 35" vertical- 119" broad jump - 6.74 three cone drill - 4.13 twenty yard shuttle - 11 reps Besides the size, they were pretty identical. In his last year, he caught 21% of the overall passes thrown (Hansen 18%), 37% yards (Hansen 34%), and a ridiculous 56% of TDs thrown (Hansen 36%). The issue is of course that these are base statistics and we can't go deeper because websites like Reception Perception doesn't chart Bailey. It also helped Bailey that Austin was just so dynamic in college that other receivers just got less attention. We saw it with Dwayne Jarret at USC when Reggie Bush was in college, where he just had a great season with Bush around, and then regressed a bit going into the next year, when most players improve. With Hansen, we don't have the secondary dynamic guy, in fact that whole receiving core was remade last year. We also don't have a running threat like Geno Smith in the pocket (say what you want to say about Geno with the Jets- he was a stud in college) causing concern for defenses. I would love to see how often Bailey beat coverage and all, but can't find the information. ' I think Thomas is the best case scenario and Bailey is the worst case scenario. I think Bailey got hurt badly by being with the Rams because he mainly played with Austin Davis, Shaun Hill, Nick Foles, and Case Keenum.
  5. This is actually a concerning stat although it's a very short sample size. Watching his tape, he seemed to make well on contested catches. I would have loved to see more information on it, but it is concerning. Just from a personal scouting point, I thought he did well with difficult catches and using his body to block out defenders, but I also don't have all of his games.
  6. I think there are people that do spend time doing that, it just doesn't get as much attention. Same for sports as well, because information quells discussion. It's also not as fun, because politics on a macro level is corrupted. You are picking between Fitz, Geno, McCown and just hoping to tread water. The only place where a voter really has power is the micro level in the state/county level but there isn't time leftover to invest in it.
  7. Hansen is more advanced than Hill for sure. Although much like Hill, the one thing that really worries me is the system, and the adjustment period to get acclimated to the NFL. The other guy I compared Hansen to is Steadman Bailey, which I'm guessing is the worst case scenario here. Although I don't have success rate stats for him.
  8. I think he's lost value on every draft day trade based on the value chart. It's almost as if he doesn't even pay attention to the chart while making trades. He reminds me of guys in fantasy leagues that over-pay because they are hell bent on getting a certain player, and lose value in deals. If he picks the right players, then the lost value doesn't matter as much, but if it's hit or miss, then it comes back to bite him. I don't get the media love affair, where we have to announce that we will be dealing away Decker so we can trash any value he has. Or that we asked Marshall to an extension (signifying that we value him enough to have him here for future years) and then turning around and just dropping him. He asked for his release, but the Jets asked for an extension and got denied. If Marshall didn't want to placate to the Jets' needs, why should they do him a favor by dropping him? It's like we can't win, because Idzik was known to stick to his grounds on negotiations (Decker deal was a steal, and he got value for Revis coming off an injury) but he was horrible with the media, and screwed up his last draft. Macc seems to do better in drafts, but can't negotiate for his life.
  9. Thanks. I'm not so sure it's that vast. I went and looked at passing rating allowed based on the schedules faced. It's not the greatest stat to use, but I can't find any metric that measures pass defense for college thoroughly. So based on game logs of last their last year: Thomas: VTech (50th) Hawaii ((98th) Northern Illinois (39th) Surprised Western Michigan (79th) Indiana (71st) Maryland (107th) Penn State (26th) Rutgers (117th) Minnesota (18th) again surprised Illinois (28th) Michigan State (68th) Michigan (1st) Notre Dame (49th) If we add this up and divide it by 13, the average comes to 57.7 as the average ranking of defense faced. Hansen: Hawaii (114th) San Diego State (22nd) Texas (85th) Arizona State (122nd) Utah (41st) Oregon State (33rd) Washington (5th) Washington State (59th) Stanford (23) UCLA (6th) If we add this up and divide by 10, the average comes out to 51 as the average ranking of defense faced. Now this is the be all and end all of stats, but in terms of defensive rankings for passer ratings against, Hansen and Thomas are pretty neck and neck. I wish there was a secondary unit rating system, but I can't seem to find it. EDIT: https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/opponent-average-team-passer-rating?date=2017-01-10 Link for the website I used.
  10. I still don't get how we go absolutely nothing from the Marshall/Decker combo, while they were both on team friendly deals. I'm not saying these guys are true No. 1 anymore, but sure as heck are good No. 2 WRs with salaries that weren't horrible. Julius Thomas got a 7th round pick, and he's an injury prone, and severely overpaid TE. Marshawn Lynch has been out of football, and yet they got a draft round upgrade for him. We couldn't get anything for Marshall/Decker? I'm not saying I was expecting first round picks, but at least some late round pick. It's one of the worst qualities of Macc so far, because I think he's horrible at negotiating with other teams and players. He's pretty much lost value on all of his draft trades, and he's gotten bent over on salary negotiations. I think the only reason Decker settled for less money is because he lives in Nashville, his wife is pretty famous and they are financially set, and that team is on the rise. With Decker/Davis and having Mariota as the QB, I could see them being a sleeper this year.
  11. Wanted to add that this article mentions Thomas as a role model to how he will be used this season: http://breakingfootball.com/2017-nfl-draft-chad-hansen-scouting-report/ Also, wanted to add in some reception perception stats as well. Michael Thomas had a success rate of 69.4% against man coverage in college, while Chad Hansen had a success rate of 64.6%. Michael Thomas had a success rate of 77.1% against zone coverage in college, while Chad Hansen had a success rate of 83%. Michael Thomas had a success rate of 66.7% against press coverage in college, while Chad Hansen had a success rate of 67.3%. Michael Thomas had a success rate of 50% on contested catches in college, while Chad Hansen had a success rate of 25%. Also according to route tree, these are the routes that Thomas ran with the highest frequency in descending order: Curl, Slant, Nine, Post, Screen, Dig, Comeback, Out (tie with comeback), Flat, Corner Chad Hansen: Curl, Nine, Slant, Screen, Dig, Post, Comeback, Comeback, Flat, Corner, Out (He has a 0% here) http://www.thebackyardbanter.com/reception-perception-2016-nfl-draft-prospects-results.html https://www.thefantasyfootballers.com/articles/reception-perception-understanding-chad-hansens-narrow-limited-assignment/ Onto success rates vs. each routes: Michael Thomas had a 87.5% SRVC (success rate vs coverage) on screen passes, while Hansen had a success rate of 95.5%. Michael Thomas had a 75% SVRC on slat routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 82.2%. Michael Thomas had a 85.7% SVRC on curl routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 71.4%. Michael Thomas had a 85.7% SVRC on dig routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 76.9%. Michael Thomas had a 80% SVRC on post routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 75%. Michael Thomas had a 76.5% SVRC on nine routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 57.4%. Michael Thomas had a 50% SVRC on corner routes, while Hansen had a success rate of 50%. Michael Thomas had a 80% SVRC on out routes, Hansen did not run any out routes. Michael Thomas had a 20% SVRC on comeback routes, Hansen had a success rate of 80%. Michael Thomas had a 66.7% SVRC on flat routes, Hansen had a success rate of 75%. Michael Thomas went down on first contact 66.7% of his "in space" opportunities (15 total), while Hansen went down 60% of the time. Michael Thomas broke the first tackle 20% of the time, while Hansen broke the first tackle 40% of the time. Michael Thomas broke 2+ tackles on 13.3% of the plays, while Hansen has a 0% rate.
  12. The Chad Hansen pick was curious to me because I thought they would go a different direction, with Stewart already picked ahead of him. However, if you look further into the pick, it seems like a pick influenced by John Morton, who had great success with Michael Thomas. Stats: Michael Thomas: 56 catches, 781 yards, 9 TD, 13.9 YPC Chad Hansen: 92 catches, 1249 yards, 11 TD, 13.6 YPC However, they played in two completely different systems with QBs that have vastly different skill sets. The Buckeyes passed 324 times during Thomas' last year, and he caught 56 passes, so right around 17.3% of the attempts on offense. They threw for 2454 yards, of which 781 was caught by Thomas, or about 31.8% of the yards thrown. The Buckeyes threw 19 TDs, of which 9 was caught by Thomas, or a tremendous 47.4%. The Bears passed the ball a whopping 621 times during Hansen's last year, and he caught 92 passes, so around 14.8% of the attempts on offense. They threw for 4304 yards, of which 1249 was caught by Hansen, or about 29% of the yards thrown. The Bears threw 37 TDs, of which 11 were caught by Hansen, a rate of 29.7%. Unfortunately, Thomas also has a 3 game advantage in games played in their final season because Hansen only played in 10 games, while Thomas played in 13 games. I can't find snap counts, so I can't break it down per snap. However, if we go by the games then the averages come out to: Thomas: 4.3 receptions, 60 yards, .69 TD per games. Hansen: 9.2 receptions, 124.9 yards, 1.1 TDs per games While unscientific, to normalize those stats based on per attempt basis: Thomas has a 3 game advantage, but Cal only played 12 games last year. It's hard to equalize the stats without nitpicking. Hansen missed two games, or 12.5% of the season. So if we reduce the numbers based on the snaps missed, then it would come out a bit differently. The two games that he missed were the Oregon and USC games. In those games, Cal threw 114 passes, 658 yards, and 7 TDs. So those were the stats that Hansen weren't part of because he didn't play in the game. So, let's subtract 114 from 621, which equals 507 passes. Let's also subtract 658 yards from 4304, which equals 3646 yards. Also subtract 7 TDs from 37, which equals 30 TDs Now, let's see what Hansen's stats are on a per attempt basis for games that he did play. They threw 507 passes in games he played, and he caught 92 passes, which would be 18.1% (Thomas at 17.3%). They threw for 3646 yards, of which he caught 1249, thus he caught 34.2% of the yards thrown (Thomas at 31.8%). They threw for 30 TDs while Hansen was in there, of which he caught 11, which is 36.7% (Thomas at 47.4%). Physical attributes: Thomas: 6'3" - 212 lbs - 32.12 arm length - 10.5 hand size - 1.55 Ten yard dash - 2.63 Twenty Yard Dash - 4.57 Forty - 35" vertical - 126" broad jump - 6.8 three cone drill - 4.13 Twenty yard shuttle - 18 reps Hansen: 6'2" - 202 lbs - 32.12 arm length - 10.12 hand size - 1.56 Ten yard dash - 2.63 Twenty Yard Dash - 4.47 Forty - 35" vertical- 119" broad jump - 6.74 three cone drill - 4.13 twenty yard shuttle - 11 reps So one of the biggest knocks on Hansen is the limited route tree that he ran in college. In fact, the best article I have on it is from reception perception. https://www.thefantasyfootballers.com/articles/reception-perception-understanding-chad-hansens-narrow-limited-assignment/ Here is the relevant quote: Now, the same website did a breakdown of Thomas last year near the halfway point of the season. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/article.php?article=harmon_receptionperception_thomas16 Here is the relevant quote: So Thomas was used very much in the same way that Hansen was primarily used in college, which should mean that he could see the same type of systemic usage with Morton this year if he plays. This isn't to say Chad Hansen is the next Michael Thomas by any means. However, their production is somewhat close in their final year of college, their physical attributes are extremely similar, and Morton and the Saints utilized Thomas similarly to how Hansen was utilized in college. It's hard to just compare college stats because they do not play the same talent base nor the same system. The Air Raid system run by the Bears tends to inflate stats for receivers, so you have to take the stats with a grain of salt. The run first offense of OSU (especially with Barrett and Elliot in the backfield) also stifles the stats for Thomas. However, the counter argument is that defenses had to be prepared for the running game vs. OSU, which allowed favorable match ups to their receivers. I don't think Chad Hansen is Michael Thomas, and neither does the NFL when you realize where they were picked. However, they share very similar production, physical ability, and possible NFL route tree projection. The fact that Morton worked with Thomas last year should really help. Also keep in mind that Thomas played last year with a HOF caliber QB, while Hansen will likely be catching passes from QBs that would be happy to be called league average this season.
  13. It'll be interesting to see how defenses play Anderson, because he's a better route runner than Stephen Hill, but he's not consistently beating press coverage with safety help over the top. Last year, teams would dare the Jets to let Anderson beat them over the top because Fitz couldn't make that throw, and Petty kept going to that throw. I think the difference will be the second receiver in the lineup, because one of Stewart/Peake/Hansen has to step up and actually be reliable. If there is that second reliable piece, then these guys become interchangeable, and we can work in multiple groupings and keep guys fresh. I have no idea why we moved on from Decker so hastily. He's not a true No. 1, but he runs very good routes and catches the ball like a very good No. 2 guy. I would much rather evaluate the QB with Decker around to see how they progress, rather than have that extra roster spot. I understand, they are looking long term, but his contract was far from horrible, and we didn't get anything for him.
  14. Yeah, if we can get ASJ or Legget to be a legit threat, that also helps as well because Enunwa basically functioned as an H-back for so long. I'm excited to see Peake this year, because I think he was awfully raw last year after the injuries during college. If he can get going, it's a major mismatch with his size and speed.
  15. I think Enunwa can be really good, given more opportunities, but it remains to be seen how he does against No. 1 corners on a consistent basis. The past two years, they could move him around late, which led to much better match ups for him, than Marshall/Decker. Anderson has great down the field ability, but it also really depends on who our No. 2 receiver is. Last year, it was Enunwa (after Decker got hurt) and he was good enough to take attention away. However, one of Peake/Stewart/Hansen has to step up and be good as the No. 2, or Anderson is going to get the Stephen Hill coverage, with press cover and safety over the top. I think there is definitely potential there to be good, but it really depends on the other guys as well. I think Seattle does extremely well with receivers because they draft guys that are technically sound, and Wilson is great with accuracy (especially on the run when plays break down). However, they coach up the receivers extremely well there with technical stuff. In fact, I think one of my first posts here was arguing to take Kippy Brown from them. If Peake/Stewart/Hansen can be a decent No. 2, then we have the young core and talent we need to succeed. However, if we don't have that third piece, I think defenses can shut us down.