tazinib1 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 Marcus Trufant? Didn't he go on IR with a chronic back injury? Not a wise investment IMO. I believe he missed a large portion of 2009 with the same back problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Nicks would look good in a Cowboys uniform Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) He's included on this listFootball's Future free agent list (DB) Yeah, I've looked at a few different lists and every single one has Porter in the top 10 CBs and Carl Nicks as the undisputed top G. You know, I don't mind being called a homer and I will be the first to admit that I have a man-crush on the majority of our players, but I can't really say I appreciate it here. Come on, give some credit where it is due. Nicks is arguably the best guard in football right now, period. And while Porter may not be tops in this class I'll bet Peyton Manning & Brett Favre both wish they'd never seen him on the field. He played injured for a good part of the season so he had a down year & that's one of the knocks on him, but if you look at his total body of work he's still a very good CB. FWIW, I REALLY hope other teams think like you because I'd be overjoyed to have both these guys back. Edited January 24, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 #55 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Yeah, I've looked at a few different lists and every single one has Porter in the top 10 CBs and Carl Nicks as the undisputed top G. You know, I don't mind being called a homer and I will be the first to admit that I have a man-crush on the majority of our players, but I can't really say I appreciate it here. Come on, give some credit where it is due. Nicks is arguably the best guard in football right now, period. And while Porter may not be tops in this class I'll bet Peyton Manning & Brett Favre both wish they'd never seen him on the field. He played injured for a good part of the season so he had a down year & that's one of the knocks on him, but if you look at his total body of work he's still a very good CB. FWIW, I REALLY hope other teams think like you because I'd be overjoyed to have both these guys back. I hope you get Nicks back as well. I never said he wasn't one of the best, I just think Mathis is better. They are the top 2 LG's in the NFL so not really sure if it matters who is 1 and who is 2. As far as getting Nicks back, I think its gonna cost you guys a mint unless he gives you a hometown discount. I'd be surprised to see that happen though. And I'm just giving you smack about being a homer. You're one of my favorite Huddlers...but cmon...Tracy Porter? Really? ProFootballFocus has him rated #91 overall. Whats that tell you? Edited January 24, 2012 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coordi88 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 you called #2 a clog and i think you meant cog thats all i got Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 you called #2 a clog and i think you meant cog thats all i got fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebartender Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 ProFootballFocus I took my stats from both CBS and nfl.com. I can't believe both sites have the exact same incorrect stats. Which stats does Pro Football Focus disagree with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 I took my stats from both CBS and nfl.com. I can't believe both sites have the exact same incorrect stats. Which stats does Pro Football Focus disagree with? All of them. PFF is the leading stat site within miles of CBS and probbaly NFL.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I agree SH. Id like Finnegan too or any 3 of the top guys (cb) available. Newman couldnt cover a penny with a bed sheet Edited January 25, 2012 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebartender Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 All of them. PFF is the leading stat site within miles of CBS and probbaly NFL.com Can you please post the stats you have? I really find it hard to believe that CBS and NFL are both off on their stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 Can you please post the stats you have? I really find it hard to believe that CBS and NFL are both off on their stats. What stat do you want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I took my stats from both CBS and nfl.com. I can't believe both sites have the exact same incorrect stats. Which stats does Pro Football Focus disagree with? All of them. PFF is the leading stat site within miles of CBS and probbaly NFL.com Can you please post the stats you have? I really find it hard to believe that CBS and NFL are both off on their stats. I think what we have here is a failure to communicate....if you are pulling stats from CBS and NFL.com I am guessing you are talking about the actual stats LOGGED by the NFL....Taz is talking about RATINGS that PFF puts out...PFF has some nice stuff but I take it with a grain of salt the same as I would any projections from a fantasy site etc....what I really like from PFF is that they provide snaps played for players...but their stats, Tackles, assists, sacks etc are based off their game charting which means that they are not listing the OFFICIAL NFL STATS, but instead what they are seeing/charting...their charting isn't 100% correct because they don't have access to All-22 tape, they watch the TV feeds and chart from that...and at times they may have a LB with 2 solos and 6 assists when his official NFL Stat Line was 5 solos and 3 assists....so because of that I don't rely on their stats, outside of snaps played (even though those aren't 100% either...for one they include a penalty as a snap played, and it most certainly isnt...and they also can't see all 11 players on some plays so they are also estimating/guessing...but they are close enough on snaps played for it to have value)....as for their RATINGS, well like I said, I take them with a "grain of salt", just like I would fantasy projections from any competing site...i mean it is no different then thehuddle having Ray Rice projected for 135 with 3TDs and say CBS having him at 85 and 1... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Can you please post the stats you have? I really find it hard to believe that CBS and NFL are both off on their stats. what are we gargling on again? Edited January 26, 2012 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) What stat do you want? how about tackles, assists & sacks for Bunkley I am willing to bet without even looking at any site that PFF will differ from CBS, ESPN,NFL and even MFL which will all probably be exactly the same EDIT: here I did it.... NFL.com 33 solo/10 assist/0 sacks Yahoo 33/10/0 CBS 33/10/0 ESPN 33/10/0 PFF.com 40/12/1 Edited January 26, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Like I said, maybe he re-invented himself in Denver. To be fair I didn't see much of the Denver games. I did however have the displeasure of watching him do pretty much nothing for 5 years in Philly. The only reason he lasted so long here was because Reid doesn't like to admit when he is wrong with a 1st round pick IMO. And just a quick look at the stats I wonder how Pro Football Focus ranked him as the #3 DT. The stats sure don't justify that ranking. He was 10th overall in tackles for DTs (which surprises me that he was that high) but he had no sacks, no forced fumbles, etc. I will say that the effectiveness of a DT isn't/can't really be measured by the number of tackles and sacks that they get...most schemes need them to eat up blockers so that their LBs stay clean and make plays...yes there are guys like Suh that are disruptive and get to the QB, but just because a DT doesn't put up gaudy numbers like Suh did in his rookie year doesn't mean that they aren't doing a good job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 I think what we have here is a failure to communicate....if you are pulling stats from CBS and NFL.com I am guessing you are talking about the actual stats LOGGED by the NFL....Taz is talking about RATINGS that PFF puts out...PFF has some nice stuff but I take it with a grain of salt the same as I would any projections from a fantasy site etc....what I really like from PFF is that they provide snaps played for players...but their stats, Tackles, assists, sacks etc are based off their game charting which means that they are not listing the OFFICIAL NFL STATS, but instead what they are seeing/charting...their charting isn't 100% correct because they don't have access to All-22 tape, they watch the TV feeds and chart from that...and at times they may have a LB with 2 solos and 6 assists when his official NFL Stat Line was 5 solos and 3 assists....so because of that I don't rely on their stats, outside of snaps played (even though those aren't 100% either...for one they include a penalty as a snap played, and it most certainly isnt...and they also can't see all 11 players on some plays so they are also estimating/guessing...but they are close enough on snaps played for it to have value)....as for their RATINGS, well like I said, I take them with a "grain of salt", just like I would fantasy projections from any competing site...i mean it is no different then thehuddle having Ray Rice projected for 135 with 3TDs and say CBS having him at 85 and 1... Thanks Kegz...but I take PFF more than a grain of salt. And I'm sure NFL teams do as well...they are the most complete analisis on the market...bar none. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 how about tackles, assists & sacks for Bunkley I am willing to bet without even looking at any site that PFF will differ from CBS, ESPN,NFL and even MFL which will all probably be exactly the same EDIT: here I did it.... NFL.com 33 solo/10 assist/0 sacks Yahoo 33/10/0 CBS 33/10/0 ESPN 33/10/0 PFF.com 40/12/1 Those are great Fantasy stats...but I posted his true value. Ya might wanna stroll up a few pages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 (edited) Those are great Fantasy stats...but I posted his true value. Ya might wanna stroll up a few pages. you mean these? Had to do some digging but Bunkley is rated as the #3 overall DT in the league with a 24.1 rating. His pass rush is less than to be desired with 0 sacks, 1 QB hit and only 5 QB pressures, but his run defense is top shelf. His 32 solo stops ranks 5th overall and his 37 solo tackles rank 8th. Like I said, PFFs "Stats" are NOT the official NFL stats...they get their stuff from game charting and they use TV to do so, not the All-22...just on that alone they cannot be as correct as they would need to be for the NFL to use them...the reason I say to take their "RATINGS" with a grain of salt because it is based on what they see and their models that they use....basically, not much different than getting fantasy projections from multiple fantasy sites...don't get me wrong, I love what PFF puts out, but you can't take it all as the gospel, and as far as being the most complete on the market bar none I am sure that the guys at http://footballoutsiders.com/ & http://www.advancednflstats.com/ might have something to say about that...and like I said, I love the stuff that PFF puts out, I just don't think you can take them as the end all be all with their RATINGS...also fwiw, I don't know if you remember but when PFF first went pay they were way expensive and that didn't include the player participation stats that I think was something like $1600 for those stats...I think it is safe to say that they thought they would be able to market the player participation stats to scouts or NFL teams...the fact that they now just charge $29 and don't even have player participation stats available any more says that model didn't work...so yeah, while I love them as a resource that doesn't mean that I take them as the gospel, hence taking them with a grain of salt. Edited January 26, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Heck just looking at Bunkley you can see that they aren't 100% on even what they publish: this page has him with 37 solos, 9 assists and 0 sacks https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/by_po...&numgames=1 this page has him with 40 solos, 12 assists and 1 sack https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/by_pl...p;playerid=2959 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebartender Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 I will say that the effectiveness of a DT isn't/can't really be measured by the number of tackles and sacks that they get...most schemes need them to eat up blockers so that their LBs stay clean and make plays...yes there are guys like Suh that are disruptive and get to the QB, but just because a DT doesn't put up gaudy numbers like Suh did in his rookie year doesn't mean that they aren't doing a good job. That is why I said in all fairness I hadn't watched Bunkley that much in Denver. But I think you would agree with me that when he was with the Eagles he was no where near a top 5 DT and I think it is a stretch to say he was even a very good DT. I would say more like average to maybe slightly above-average, but that is a stretch. That was my only point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 I will be watching with interest. Ted Thompson has a reputation for being inactive in FA, but he does grab a defensive player every couple of years, and the Packers certainly need one, and have cap space available. I'd love to see somebody sell Mario Williams on being the next Reggie White. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 So Taz plays fantasy football based on fantasy stats. That explains a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slugs3511 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Mario Manningham is a Free agent......Think the G men will keep him with the emergence of Cruz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 So Taz plays fantasy football based on fantasy stats. That explains a lot. Give me some credit once in your life. I'd love to see you post a top 30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.