PDA

View Full Version : LZ Speaks!


Jackie Chiles
04-26-2010, 01:36 AM
Been waiting on this for a while, read it slowly and savor it, won't be long until we have all read and re-read every piece of info on every prospect we drafted.

http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/2010/04/post_151.html

I'd comment but I'm taking my own advice and haven't read it yet.

beerlover
04-26-2010, 01:55 AM
really accurate. yes I was one of those who kept plugging him about Tate, in which he always replied "nothing special".

right on down the line I can agree. Dickerson is the closest thing to a steal for the Texans while Sharpton had more value because it was a weak inside LB draft.

badboy
04-29-2010, 09:19 AM
Zerline and I have same concerns about Jackson, but here's hoping we are wrong. I don't the Kareem will be a bust but remains to be seen if he can stick with WR down the field. I think good passings QBs will test him early and often.

Goldensilence
04-29-2010, 09:59 AM
Zerline and I have same concerns about Jackson, but here's hoping we are wrong. I don't the Kareem will be a bust but remains to be seen if he can stick with WR down the field. I think good passings QBs will test him early and often.

For what its worth: had it been Kyle Wilson or McCourty they would've been tested early and often as well too.

Hopefully, Wilson will be healthy enough to at least start the season and we can have some sort of help over the top at FS. I'm not counting on him staying healthy though.

El Tejano
04-29-2010, 10:07 AM
I think this is dead on, although I like the Jackson and Tate picks. The Dickerson observation is cool and if he doesn't work out....he's a 7th rounder. Exactly what would've been the case if we took a QB at that spot.

thunderkyss
04-29-2010, 10:09 AM
Been waiting on this for a while, read it slowly and savor it, won't be long until we have all read and re-read every piece of info on every prospect we drafted.

http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/2010/04/post_151.html

I'd comment but I'm taking my own advice and haven't read it yet.

I'm commenting now.
It's stupid. Seriously, how many of you were in school and had a teacher pass out tests to you with grades already in red marker on them before you even got to take the test?

I hate it when people say this. It shows they have absolutely no clue what the purpose of the draft grade is. If it doesn't matter, why do we care so much who we get? Why don't we just roll the dice, throw a dart, or let the commish decide who we get.

We don't do any of that crap, because it matters. We're not "grading" the players so much, as we are grading the teams, and how well they addressed their teams future with the information and situation they had on draft day.

beerlover
04-29-2010, 10:37 AM
I think this is dead on, although I like the Jackson and Tate picks. The Dickerson observation is cool and if he doesn't work out....he's a 7th rounder. Exactly what would've been the case if we took a QB at that spot.

interesting specificly to me is I wanted Rusty Smith in the 7th (went 6th rd. to Tennessee) then a WR in 5th. along with Blair White, Dickerson @ WR was rated in this range while the QB class just wasn't as deep. so you don't force positions of need just because that's what you need at the moment you take the bpa on your big board. I realize the WR position is an area of strength, but it won't stay an area of strength unless you steadily work to improve your talent, Dickerson accomplishes that.

I saw the Texans picked up QB Tyler Sheehan, Bowling Green as undrafted free agent. He is 6030 225 very productive four year starter with passer rating of 137.13 & threw over 4,000 yds. I can live with that lets see if he can make the PS & develop into a decent back-up.

Ole Miss Texan
04-29-2010, 10:47 AM
interesting specificly to me is I wanted Rusty Smith in the 7th (went 6th rd. to Tennessee) then a WR in 5th. along with Blair White, Dickerson @ WR was rated in this range while the QB class just wasn't as deep. so you don't force positions of need just because that's what you need at the moment you take the bpa on your big board. I realize the WR position is an area of strength, but it won't stay an area of strength unless you steadily work to improve your talent, Dickerson accomplishes that.

I saw the Texans picked up QB Tyler Sheehan, Bowling Green as undrafted free agent. He is 6030 225 very productive four year starter with passer rating of 137.13 & threw over 4,000 yds. I can live with that lets see if he can make the PS & develop into a decent back-up.

Couldn't agree more. You don't fill needs with late round prospects. Typically, later round guys take longer to develop than the guys taken earlier. Gotta take the best players available because in the long run you've got your team full of better talent vs. passing on the higher talent, filling needs with late round guys and the overall talent on your team diminishes. We're thinking long term development (L/T is a relative term, in the NFL it could be 2-3 years).

I for one would much rather grab a guy in the 6th round for example that you had rated as a 4th rounder, than reach on a position of need like FS. For one you're getting a worse player and two it's unlikely that player can beat out your current starter so your not using him anyways.

badboy
04-29-2010, 11:02 AM
interesting specificly to me is I wanted Rusty Smith in the 7th (went 6th rd. to Tennessee) then a WR in 5th. along with Blair White, Dickerson @ WR was rated in this range while the QB class just wasn't as deep. so you don't force positions of need just because that's what you need at the moment you take the bpa on your big board. I realize the WR position is an area of strength, but it won't stay an area of strength unless you steadily work to improve your talent, Dickerson accomplishes that.

I saw the Texans picked up QB Tyler Sheehan, Bowling Green as undrafted free agent. He is 6030 225 very productive four year starter with passer rating of 137.13 & threw over 4,000 yds. I can live with that lets see if he can make the PS & develop into a decent back-up.I agree Sheehan is an interesting pick up but I know absolutely nothing about Bowling Green or it's offense/schedule.

El Tejano
04-29-2010, 01:04 PM
I realize the WR position is an area of strength, but it won't stay an area of strength unless you steadily work to improve your talent, Dickerson accomplishes that.
ie...Indy drafting Anthony Gonzalez,Austin Collie, and Pierre Garcon

I saw the Texans picked up QB Tyler Sheehan, Bowling Green as undrafted free agent. He is 6030 225 very productive four year starter with passer rating of 137.13 & threw over 4,000 yds. I can live with that lets see if he can make the PS & develop into a decent back-up.

That dude can play. He looks a little led foot though sometimes.

dc_txtech
04-29-2010, 03:27 PM
Round 2 Ben Tate, RB, Auburn
Z-Report Top 100: 89
Z-Report Says: Obviously, I wasn't quite as high on Ben Tate as the Texans were, but most of you who read this blog know that. However, I wasn't in love with Toby Gerhardt for this system either so trading back to the end of the second round, picking up an extra pick and getting one of the RBs who actually does fit this system was a solid move for Rick Smith and the Texans. I don't think Tate always plays to his timed speed and I also don't think we see that blazing speed until he's in the open field. I think he needs to learn to play to his speed, but that can be coached. I contacted a scout who has to evaluate RBs for his team and he said about Tate, "He's not a physical runner that breaks tackles consistently. Could be a great pick as I love productive SEC runners."

Is this a typo?

rmartin65
04-29-2010, 03:55 PM
Round 2 Ben Tate, RB, Auburn
Z-Report Top 100: 89
Z-Report Says: Obviously, I wasn't quite as high on Ben Tate as the Texans were, but most of you who read this blog know that. However, I wasn't in love with Toby Gerhardt for this system either so trading back to the end of the second round, picking up an extra pick and getting one of the RBs who actually does fit this system was a solid move for Rick Smith and the Texans. I don't think Tate always plays to his timed speed and I also don't think we see that blazing speed until he's in the open field. I think he needs to learn to play to his speed, but that can be coached. I contacted a scout who has to evaluate RBs for his team and he said about Tate, "He's not a physical runner that breaks tackles consistently. Could be a great pick as I love productive SEC runners."

Is this a typo?

I dont think so. That is what I see in him, and I got grilled for it. But hey, the FO got who they wanted. Lets see if they made the right choice.

dc_txtech
04-29-2010, 04:01 PM
I dont think so. That is what I see in him, and I got grilled for it. But hey, the FO got who they wanted. Lets see if they made the right choice.

So he isn't physical, doesn't break tackles, and doesn't have elite speed? I haven't watched a lot of the guy but I sure hope LZ is wrong on this one.

badboy
04-29-2010, 04:05 PM
I dont think so. That is what I see in him, and I got grilled for it. But hey, the FO got who they wanted. Lets see if they made the right choice.I think Tate's value will be quick burst through a hole like Slaton but maybe a tad harder to bring down. I will be interested if they have Slaton on field same time as Tate.

rmartin65
04-29-2010, 04:06 PM
So he isn't physical, doesn't break tackles, and doesn't have elite speed? I haven't watched a lot of the guy but I sure hope LZ is wrong on this one.

Eh. He has speed, but does not play to it. He has the size, and will break some tackles, but he does not do it on a consistent basis. To many times I saw him good stuffed by one guy.

Also, whoever is thinking of posting a highlight video of Tate, please don't. They are called highlight videos for a reason.

badboy
04-29-2010, 04:11 PM
Eh. He has speed, but does not play to it. He has the size, and will break some tackles, but he does not do it on a consistent basis. To many times I saw him good stuffed by one guy.

Also, whoever is thinking of posting a highlight video of Tate, please don't. They are called highlight videos for a reason. ^Snicker^

dc_txtech
04-29-2010, 04:19 PM
Eh. He has speed, but does not play to it. He has the size, and will break some tackles, but he does not do it on a consistent basis. To many times I saw him good stuffed by one guy.

Also, whoever is thinking of posting a highlight video of Tate, please don't. They are called highlight videos for a reason.

Yeah, I know he ran a solid 40 time. I was just referring to the LZ article.

Ole Miss Texan
04-29-2010, 04:55 PM
Tate is ideal for the ZBS, the one-cut and go type of runner. He's got a quick burst and can accelerate quickly. Most see his size (220lbs) and assume he's a bowling ball type that barrels through people but he really doesn't run with that style.

He reminds me a lot of a bigger Steve Slaton. Both are a good fit for this offense. They're able to cut upfield, accelerate through the hole, they'll keep their legs moving, they're quick but not overly fast (they'll get caught from behind). They're not going to consistently run people over and break all sorts of tackles but I like their chances when hitting DB's head on. Again, this is the type of RB our system wants.

gtexan02
04-29-2010, 04:57 PM
Its actually funny because Slaton has turned into quite the tackle breaker. That ws actually his biggest problem, because as he fought for those extra 2 yards, people would strip the ball away

infantrycak
04-29-2010, 06:11 PM
Its actually funny because Slaton has turned into quite the tackle breaker.

Yes he has.

I think the scout's opinion fails in having an unstated condition - for a guy as big as he is he doesn't consistently break tackles as much as you would expect. People look at a Steve Slaton and don't expect him to break tackles so when he does it is looked at as a bonus vs. for a guy like Tate anything short of Earl Campbell is a disappointment. Oh and highlight video, yada, yada, but he broke 8 tackles on just one run.

76Texan
04-29-2010, 06:27 PM
Yes he has.

I think the scout's opinion fails in having an unstated condition - for a guy as big as he is he doesn't consistently break tackles as much as you would expect. People look at a Steve Slaton and don't expect him to break tackles so when he does it is looked at as a bonus vs. for a guy like Tate anything short of Earl Campbell is a disappointment. Oh and highlight video, yada, yada, but he broke 8 tackles on just one run.

darn straight!