2014 Official Draft Thread

[Formula 21]

I guess you missed my earlier discussion in which the size difference between Verrett and Revis was addressed in greater detail.

To address some of your points, the information I have is that Verrett came in at 69 inches even while Revis came in at 71.375 inches. Verrett's arms are 30.625 inches and Revis' arms are 32.375 inches. The difference in length is 4.125 inches. I previously represented that difference as 4", so it appears that I may have even slightly understated it.

Further, Revis is about 15+ pounds heavier and simply has a bigger body than Verrett does.

For the above reasons, I do not see Verrett and Revis as presenting similar body types in terms of the range of NFL CBs. Verrett is plainly a small CB, both in height and in body type, whereas Revis is an average sized CB.

I agree with you that a small size advantage held by a WR against a CB may not matter all that much. What I am talking about is the possibility that a big size advantage might matter. In the passing game, the smaller CB, even if he is standing right next to the WR, cannot cover the entire catch radius of the larger receiver. Also, the larger receiver can use his body to shield. These advantages are significantly reduced when we change from a small player with Verrett's size to a player with average CB size like Revis.

I don't think Verrett will have much size related difficulty defending average or smaller receivers, but there is the one area of potential weakness against the bigger receivers.

Also, and I do not think this has been discussed enough, Verrett's small size and short arm length is likely to hurt him against the run, especially against bigger, stronger and more adept run blocking WRs.

These are legitimate concerns that should downgrade a player that would otherwise be a first round pick to being a second round pick. Seriously, I will be shocked if anyone takes Verrett in the first round. I think he represents value in the second round.

I love it when arm lengths are measured to the thousandths of an inch. Now that's precision. And a big ass micrometer.

[Yubaking]

You're right, it is stunning. But what's stunning is that you think if a WR uses technique to position his body, a CB couldn't possibly use technique to prevent that happening. You said technique is irrelevant in the case where a WR uses his body to shield the ball from the defender, and that's just plain wrong. The CB would employ his technique to try to either prevent or overcome that.

Yes, I was not under the assumption that Verrett, when confronted with a larger WR, would just sit on the field and quit. Of course, he will try to use technique and every physical asset that he has to stop a play. But there will be instances in which his size will render even perfect technique used by him irrelevant, instances that would not exist of he were bigger/taller.

Do you recall Harold Carmichael? How did he frequently succeed in the NFL? The Eagles threw him high balls and he caught them. At 6'8", he enjoyed a large height advantage over most CBs, even average sized CBs. His advantage over average sized CBs is about the same advantage that today's bigger receivers have over Verrett. I saw Harold Carmichael play, his size was his main advantage over other players and it mattered a lot. You are just fooling yourself if you think that Verrett's diminutive size will not be a factor against bigger receivers.

A little size difference is something that teams would have a more difficult time exploiting. A huge size difference is much easier to exploit. And I will say it again, plays will happen in those matchups on which Verrett's technique will not matter. He can do everything just right to the very best of his ability and it will not matter. The WR will catch the ball anyway. His technique will be rendered irrelevant in those instances.

That weakness plus his size related deficiencies in run defense make him a second round pick in my view. When he gets taken in the second round, you will know why.

[Yubaking]

I love it when arm lengths are measured to the thousandths of an inch. Now that's precision. And a big ass micrometer.

They were only measured to an eighth of an inch. I converted the fractions to decimals.

[Steve]

They were only measured to an eighth of an inch. I converted the fractions to decimals.

Mathematical illteracy at it's finest.

Now here is a good question, how do they measure length? Is it to the tips of which finger, and where on the shoulder do they measure too? How about do they use a tape measure along the arm, in which case, how do they remove the size of the arm?

The point of all this is you are splitting hairs. When you are running down the field pumping your arms, leaning forward, twisting, turning,jump, stumbling.... it doesn't matter. Those are hypothetical lengths, from arbitary points and they don't reflect real world conditions on the field. So why the hell do you think it is so important?

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

I disagree with your description of "technique".

Neat. I disagree with your one dimensional definition of CB technique.

Whether basketball defenders had Verrett's speed, etc. is irrelevant. I never said I was a professional level athlete. The point was about size, catch radius and body position among similar level athletes and the impact that a difference in size may have.

You seem to be confusing technique and athletic skills. I spoke to technique elsewhere. I used athletic skills to break down your personal anecdote and analogy, which as Steve pointed out is useless for more reasons than should actually be discussed.

I never said Gates was all physical--not even close to what I said. I indicated that Gates does a good job of using his body to shield defenders from the ball. That does not mean that he does not do other things well. For you to suggest that that is what I meant is just illogical.

But you only spoke to the one skill. So how do we assess how valuable that one skill is in his success?

I never said that all anyone needed was a tall receiver to excel--not even close to what I said.

I never said that. But in trying to construct a valid argument, you place so much emphasis on height and size discrepancies that you ignore a lot of other factors. The same was true on your Gates discussion. You're so desperate to make your point (and have it accepted) you simply reduce the argument to a single dimension and ignore a lot of other factors. That probably stems from beginning with a totally fallacious, not-evidence-based thesis.

I indicated that Verrett might be susceptible to the challenges presented by taller receivers because he is small. I think the list of big receivers that you named that did not have great careers in the NFL may have had better results if they got to match up against small framed 5'9" CBs every week. Such a DB match up would be pretty ideal for them--as good as it is going to get anyway.

Seriously? Verrett may have some issues. Like every other player. But where he has some deficiencies, he may also make up for them with technique--which is not simply coverage as you seem to define it, but it includes things like jamming guys at the line and re-routing receivers to disrupt their routes and the play's timing as well as the things Steve mentioned--intelligence, speed, quickness, leaping ability, ball skills, etc. Your reductive analysis of Verrett is about his height and size, only. And has been said more times than can be counted, assessment of CBs (like other players) ought to be multivariate. You have already counterproductively used the examples of Brees and Wilson to demonstrate the sheer stupidity of doing that. I am not sure why you are therefore lobbying so strenuously for it.

I never said those lesser WRs actually got to play against diminutive CBs every week, did I?

Unbelievably tiresome.

You ask how many tall receivers excel at going up to get the ball. Again, it is the wrong question and it ignores the point of my discussion. How would Floyd, Jackson, et cetera do going up against a 5'9" CB on high balls? I would bet on them and not on the 5'9" CB. That's the point.

When you don't get the point, you really shouldn't condescend to others about them not getting the point. Just a handy-dandy tip for you. WRT to Floyd and Jackson, the question is why they aren't even more dominant bc they have a serious size advantage on nearly every CB in the NFL. I get the point that a size advantage can create mismatches. But not every pass is a jump ball, not every QB can hit those passes--Rivers is arguably the best in the NFL-- and those mismatches can sometimes be overcome with technique, speed, leaping ability, intelligence, and ball skills. That's my point. You're all on size. I would argue and I think many would agree that these other variables come in to play.

The rest of your post is your usual amateur GM, draftnik crap. You were horribly wrong on Allen last year and this is all in the same vein. Utterly ridiculous.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

I would have nightmares if Telesco attempted to bring that soft, pussy Colts type dumb ass Tampa-2 defense to our team. The thought of watching other teams shove it up our asses on the ground in the playoffs like teams did so many times to those Colts teams disgusts me. The approach is just about 180 degrees opposite of the big, physical and intimidating defense I would want us to have.

Like the 2012 Chargers defense.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

If that is what happened with Buster Davis, then my view of A.J. just took an even bigger hit than it did with the pick itself. How in the heck is an NFL GM not ready if a player he likes gets drafted. If he likes the player, isn't it possible that some other team likes him? There is so much time between picks in an NFL draft, a GM should never have to scramble and should be ready with contingency plans. I couldn't imagine anything like that happening. That wouldn't even happen to an owner in my fantasy baseball league's draft with a 90 second limit between picks.

Fantasy sports is indicative of where you're coming from. That's pretty obvious.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Um, dude, that's called technique. (sigh)

:lol2:

[Yubaking]

I've heard it say that football is a game of inches, but never of hundredths of inches. I would say that by basing your arguments on measurements of such level of precision you've lost all credibility, only you lost that several months ago.

Reading comprehension much? Apparently not. I did not base my argument on hundredths of inches. Steve was suggesting that the difference may have been less than 2" between Revis and Verrett in terms of height due to rounding off and was further suggesting that I did not look at arm length.

I provided the information to show that the fractions of an inch actually went the other way--the difference was even greater than, not less than, the figure to which I had rounded.

It is not the fractions of an inch that matter in the discussion either, but the several inches of difference in total length and different body types that do have an impact.

I said that already, of course, more than once, but there's than darn pesky reading comprehension thing again.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

In related news, there are 21 days, 10 hours and 54 minutes until the NFL draft.

Fuuuuck.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

. I would prefer a CB that is not small as well, if all else is fairly equal.

Right. I and others have said that. But in the case of a Verrett is all else equal?

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Further, Revis is about 15+ pounds heavier and simply has a bigger body than Verrett does.

When Revis was drafted in 2007, he weighed 196 lbs. That's a 7 pound difference.