Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Texans: Derek Stingley Jr.

steelbtexan said:
I wanted Caserio to pick Neal at #3 and Davis at #12 originally. Lovie decided that Stingley was the pick at 3 and if healthy that's a great pick. It's kinda early to say Davis will be better than Green, since Green hasn't played yet. Green is hardly chopped liver. I think he's going to be a great player in his own right.
Click to expand...
Neal is looking like another overhyped Alabama oline prospect. He's been avg at best playing right tackle. He's also been on the ground alot too. Its still early.
 
leebigeztx said:
Neal is looking like another overhyped Alabama oline prospect. He's been avg at best playing right tackle. He's also been on the ground alot too. Its still early.
Click to expand...
Most of them take a few years to prove out, which is why I didn't want to go with Neal @ #3
 
leebigeztx said:
Neal is looking like another overhyped Alabama oline prospect. He's been avg at best playing right tackle. He's also been on the ground alot too. Its still early.
Click to expand...
He got down from a little over 350 to 337 for the combine but my sources indicate that he went back to approximately 360 after. That is just too heavy for him to play outside.
 
badboy said:
He got down from a little over 350 to 337 for the combine but my sources indicate that he went back to approximately 360 after. That is just too heavy for him to play outside.
Click to expand...
Or he might be a typical Alabama offensive line like the rest that has played under Saban
 
leebigeztx said:
Neal is looking like another overhyped Alabama oline prospect. He's been avg at best playing right tackle. He's also been on the ground alot too. Its still early.
Click to expand...
So you've seen some of his preseaon action and you were definitely unimpressed ?
I dunno how is that OT that Cinci drafted (1st round) out of 'Bama a couple years ago ( had an knee and went IR his rookie year), doing lately ?
 
IDEXAN said:
So you've seen some of his preseaon action and you were definitely unimpressed ?
I dunno how is that OT that Cinci drafted (1st round) out of 'Bama a couple years ago ( had an knee and went IR his rookie year), doing lately ?
Click to expand...
Williams is a solid LT.

I haven't seen Neal play, but from what I've read he doing ok. Getting his feet wet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
maverick512000 said:
Question for @CloakNNNdagger after seeing Stingley on the field a few times now do you still have the same concerns regarding his long term ability to stay healthy or is it still to soon to tell? Basically anything to make you think we didn’t decide to bet it all on Stingley when a much safer bet, Sauce, was still in play.
Click to expand...
I've tried to avoid posting in this thread for the most part, as I pretty much already posted my honest thoughts on Stingley's college performance after his initial season, and the Lisfranc and how it may affect his NFL career. Although it should not be considered "G-d's word," it was not very well received by many. Certainly, there is too small of a sample size in preseason to make any definitive conclusions. With that said, I watched Stingley being beaten on a couple of plays. I noticed that he "apparently" was slow to react, but some of that appeared more obvious when he was required to push off of his left foot. There was one play where he looked pretty good, following the receiver and then affecting a pass defense on the ball. I don't know how much I can make of that play when John Wolford a backup QB with a 40 PFF rating, a .25 QPRand a QBR of 0.1 was throwing the ball to Landen Akers, the backup of the 3rd WR position.

Long-term ability to stay health is not going to be able to be predicted accurately by anything that Stingley has done in his "limited exposure." Long-term ability to stay healthy is more likely to be gauged by history of past players with similar (surgical) Lisfranc injuries and past long-term studies which I've described in earlier posts. It's important to understand that a surgical Lisfranc is considered a "wear down" injury.

As far as Stingley vs Sauce, both had positives and negatives. In contrast with Stingley, Sauce's stats in college progressively improved year-to-year. When given a choice, I would tend to go with the player without the major potentially long-term concerning injury.

Only time will tell.
 
maverick512000 said:
Basically anything to make you think we didn’t decide to bet it all on Stingley when a much safer bet, Sauce, was still in play
Click to expand...
There’s more to picking these guys than college stats & medical history.


The results of lisfranc is well known. If they picked Stingley over Sauce I don’t think it was because they were ignorant.

There may very well be something about Gardner that made them think he wasn’t as good a fit.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
I've tried to avoid posting in this thread for the most part, as I pretty much already posted my honest thoughts on Stingley's college performance after his initial season, and the Lisfranc and how it may affect his NFL career. Although it should not be considered "G-d's word," it was not very well received by many. Certainly, there is too small of a sample size in preseason to make any definitive conclusions. With that said, I watched Stingley being beaten on a couple of plays. I noticed that he "apparently" was slow to react, but some of that appeared more obvious when he was required to push off of his left foot. There was one play where he looked pretty good, following the receiver and then affecting a pass defense on the ball. I don't know how much I can make of that play when John Wolford a backup QB with a 40 PFF rating, a .25 QPRand a QBR of 0.1 was throwing the ball to Landen Akers, the backup of the 3rd WR position.

Long-term ability to stay health is not going to be able to be predicted accurately by anything that Stingley has done in his "limited exposure." Long-term ability to stay healthy is more likely to be gauged by history of past players with similar (surgical) Lisfranc injuries and past long-term studies which I've described in earlier posts. It's important to understand that a surgical Lisfranc is considered a "wear down" injury.

As far as Stingley vs Sauce, both had positives and negatives. In contrast with Stingley, Sauce's stats in college progressively improved year-to-year. When given a choice, I would tend to go with the player without the major potentially long-term concerning injury.

Only time will tell.
Click to expand...

disagree with all this..
 
thunderkyss said:
There’s more to picking these guys than college stats & medical history.


The results of lisfranc is well known. If they picked Stingley over Sauce I don’t think it was because they were ignorant.

There may very well be something about Gardner that made them think he wasn’t as good a fit.
Click to expand...
You're being overly kind and generous.
 
thunderkyss said:
There’s more to picking these guys than college stats & medical history.


The results of lisfranc is well known. If they picked Stingley over Sauce I don’t think it was because they were ignorant.

There may very well be something about Gardner that made them think he wasn’t as good a fit.
Click to expand...

While true its an awful big risk to take with your number 3 pick. Personally if I truly thought Gardner was that bad a fit and looked at Stingley's injury history I might have looked at a different pick period. Don't get me wrong I think Stingley is beyond talented and I hope he make Ramsey and Dion look like they were just amateurs. But that injury scares me as Texans have a horrible track record with guys getting over injuries and our medical team.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
I've tried to avoid posting in this thread for the most part, as I pretty much already posted my honest thoughts on Stingley's college performance after his initial season, and the Lisfranc and how it may affect his NFL career. Although it should not be considered "G-d's word," it was not very well received by many. Certainly, there is too small of a sample size in preseason to make any definitive conclusions. With that said, I watched Stingley being beaten on a couple of plays. I noticed that he "apparently" was slow to react, but some of that appeared more obvious when he was required to push off of his left foot. There was one play where he looked pretty good, following the receiver and then affecting a pass defense on the ball. I don't know how much I can make of that play when John Wolford a backup QB with a 40 PFF rating, a .25 QPRand a QBR of 0.1 was throwing the ball to Landen Akers, the backup of the 3rd WR position.

Long-term ability to stay health is not going to be able to be predicted accurately by anything that Stingley has done in his "limited exposure." Long-term ability to stay healthy is more likely to be gauged by history of past players with similar (surgical) Lisfranc injuries and past long-term studies which I've described in earlier posts. It's important to understand that a surgical Lisfranc is considered a "wear down" injury.

As far as Stingley vs Sauce, both had positives and negatives. In contrast with Stingley, Sauce's stats in college progressively improved year-to-year. When given a choice, I would tend to go with the player without the major potentially long-term concerning injury.

Only time will tell.
Click to expand...
Some folks are programmed to believe what they want to believe, regardless of what their eyes see, their ears hear, or what the experts are telling them.
 
maverick512000 said:
Based on what?
Click to expand...

based on the fact he’s a rookie….playing in a new system. Those 2 conditions alone probably factored more into him not being as crisp.

Aside from that In 1 part of his post he says “too small of a sample size” to predict or whatever…but later in the post he talks about a “slow reaction time”..on a few plays…something i didnt really see at all…i saw a little HESITATION…but that can be related to him not quite trusting what he’s seeing…something very common for rooks out there….not necessarily a physical limitation as Cloak infers…i stated way upthread that cb’s typically don’t stop on dimes like that when reacting up out of a backpedal…..unless they’re sitting up in a cover 2 gambling like a Marcus Peters…coaches coach it like that & thats what they want, but it typically doesnt happen like that for cb’s in games. WR routes are too sophisticated.

Aside from that Cloak downplays the play he did make when the reality is it was still “live” action….albeit being against a non starting qb in John Wofford. Baby steps.
 
Mr teX said:
based on the fact he’s a rookie….playing in a new system. Those 2 conditions alone probably factored more into him not being as crisp.

Aside from that In 1 part of his post he says “too small of a sample size” to predict or whatever…but later in the post he talks about a “slow reaction time”..on a few plays…something i didnt really see at all…i saw a little HESITATION…but that can be related to him not quite trusting what he’s seeing…something very common for rooks out there….not necessarily a physical limitation as Cloak infers…i stated way upthread that cb’s typically don’t stop on dimes like that when reacting up out of a backpedal…..unless they’re sitting up in a cover 2 gambling like a Marcus Peters…coaches coach it like that & thats what they want, but it typically doesnt happen like that for cb’s in games. WR routes are too sophisticated.

Aside from that Cloak downplays the play he did make when the reality is it was still “live” action….albeit being against a non starting qb in John Wofford. Baby steps.
Click to expand...

Ok but none of that explains why you are confident that he is fully healed and not an injury risk. So he had a great play in the preseason against a no name QB. Doesn’t mean he can go for 17 games.

Your disagreement seems to come strictly from a coaching point of view and rookie point of view. Neither of which has any part to play on if he will miss games due to injury.
 
maverick512000 said:
Ok but none of that explains why you are confident that he is fully healed and not an injury risk. So he had a great play in the preseason against a no name QB. Doesn’t mean he can go for 17 games.

Your disagreement seems to come strictly from a coaching point of view and rookie point of view. Neither of which has any part to play on if he will miss games due to injury.
Click to expand...

dude this is the NFL. The “risk of injury” and missing games due to injury is inherent with every single player every single week they step on the field..even if said player comes in with no health concerns…..Sauce could hit the field 1st week and get seriously injured. Does that then mean that the Jets made a mistake in drafting him? Does that then validate the Texans in selecting Sting over him? No…& No….which is even more reason why assessing him based on that is silly.

Bennie Joppru, Charles Rodgers..none of these guys had any major injury concerns coming out and neither guy could stay on the field b/c of injury once they got to the league. Hell i dont think Joppru even suited up for us once.
 
Mr teX said:
dude this is the NFL. The “risk of injury” and missing games due to injury is inherent with every single player every single week they step on the field..even if said player comes in with no health concerns…..Sauce could hit the field 1st week and get seriously injured. Does that then mean that the Jets made a mistake in drafting him? Does that then validate the Texans in selecting Sting over him? No…& No….which is even more reason why assessing him based on that is silly.

Bennie Joppru, Charles Rodgers..none of these guys had any major injury concerns coming out and neither guy could stay on the field b/c of injury once they got to the league. Hell i dont think Joppru even suited up for us once.
Click to expand...

It's all about risk assessment. True we never know the future, but are you suggesting that past injury history compared to no known significant injury history are one in the same - as in the odds of future injury are virtually identical?
 
Porky said:
It's all about risk assessment. True we never know the future, but are you suggesting that past injury history compared to no known significant injury history are one in the same - as in the odds of future injury are virtually identical?
Click to expand...

yup. Risk assessment is just a fancy way of saying educated guess. However from a practical standpoint all of these guys have relatively the same probability of sustaining a career ending or in the case of Sting, career-altering injury every time they step on the field.
 
Mr teX said:
yup. Risk assessment is just a fancy way of saying educated guess. However from a practical standpoint all of these guys have relatively the same probability of sustaining a career ending or in the case of Sting, career-altering injury every time they step on the field.
Click to expand...
When one comes in with a known degenerative injury, it's a lot tougher to have a lot of faith in that player. Odds are that Stingley will not be the player he should be in 5 years. You are hoping for more than 3-4 years of high level play from a #3 pick if he can provide that. Jury's out and only time will tell. CnD is a medical professional and has done much more research than you or I. His predictions have borne out enough times in the past that I think he's right. Have you seen or heard of any of the skill position players having an extended career after a Lisfranc injury?
 
IDEXAN said:
So you've seen some of his preseaon action and you were definitely unimpressed ?
I dunno how is that OT that Cinci drafted (1st round) out of 'Bama a couple years ago ( had an knee and went IR his rookie year), doing lately ?
Click to expand...
He was trash last year. We will see this year. Leatherwood was trash. All them 1st rd o-line guys in the 2000s were avg at best . Womack, Flucker, Smith, take your pick. Neal is struggling vs journeyman dlinemen
 
JB said:
When one comes in with a known degenerative injury, it's a lot tougher to have a lot of faith in that player. Odds are that Stingley will not be the player he should be in 5 years. You are hoping for more than 3-4 years of high level play from a #3 pick if he can provide that. Jury's out and only time will tell. CnD is a medical professional and has done much more research than you or I. His predictions have borne out enough times in the past that I think he's right. Have you seen or heard of any of the skill position players having an extended career after a Lisfranc injury?
Click to expand...

I guess the question needs to be asked, What exactly are you hoping for as an “extended career”? 8 years? 10 years? His predictions dont hold anymore weight than the Texans’ docs….. who likely chimed in on the Stingley injury with their expertise as well. We can say all we want about them, but the fact remains, they’re docs too. All these guys have degenerative something and no matter how hard you try to protect the body, ot will break down from something.

guys like Revis only really had 5-6 top level play years before he slid…after his ACL tear where he clearly wasnt the same guy afterwards. All told he played and extended 11 years tho.

None
 
Mr teX said:
yup. Risk assessment is just a fancy way of saying educated guess. However from a practical standpoint all of these guys have relatively the same probability of sustaining a career ending or in the case of Sting, career-altering injury every time they step on the field.
Click to expand...

Agreed,

Doc has a pretty good history when it comes to injuries and making educated guesses, particularly Lisfranc injuries. See: Schaub. With this said, I hope he's wrong and I think there's about a 20% chance he could be wrong on this, but I wouldn't bet on Stingley having the kind of career his talent level says he should have due to injury. BTW, why did it appear that the only choices at 1-3 were Stingley or Sauce?
 
JB said:
I can't believe you would say that knowing the Texans history. It's been bad since Bosselli and has not gotten any better since. How often have they cleared a player that wasn't ready?
Click to expand...

I guess some people go through life blind.

Ladies and gentlemen we've found a unicorn, a poster who believes in the Texans medical staff.
 
JB said:
When one comes in with a known degenerative injury, it's a lot tougher to have a lot of faith in that player. Odds are that Stingley will not be the player he should be in 5 years. You are hoping for more than 3-4 years of high level play from a #3 pick if he can provide that. Jury's out and only time will tell. CnD is a medical professional and has done much more research than you or I. His predictions have borne out enough times in the past that I think he's right. Have you seen or heard of any of the skill position players having an extended career after a Lisfranc injury?
Click to expand...

I know Doc hopes he's wrong.
 
leebigeztx said:
Neal is looking like another overhyped Alabama oline prospect. He's been avg at best playing right tackle. He's also been on the ground alot too. Its still early.
Click to expand...
I saw most of the 1st half of the Giants vs the Bengals, and Neal was fantastic. Got great push in the run game, and dominated his man on pass rushes. Picked up the only stunt I saw and pancaked another.rusher. Should have been the top pick in the draft.
 
JB said:
I can't believe you would say that knowing the Texans history. It's been bad since Bosselli and has not gotten any better since. How often have they cleared a player that wasn't ready?
Click to expand...

thats every team dude. Clowney bounced from 2-3 different teams after the Texans. So did Schaub. They had known degenerative injuries. Thats why alot of guys get outside opinions from guys like CND.

Reality of it is no doctor outside of the influence of the team would cosign these guys coming back to play a sport as violent as football if they had a real say in it. and they’d all recommend longer rest/recovery times from injuries if they could as well. But then ther’d be no football or bad football being played by bad players if docs had the final say on who should be drafted or not.
 
Mr teX said:
No more of a unicorn than you with all the ridiculous stances you take on various topics around here.
Click to expand...

Which ones would that be?

Lets start with my stance that Derrick is a perv and dumb. Man, I got that one wrong.
 
steelbtexan said:
Agreed,

Doc has a pretty good history when it comes to injuries and making educated guesses, particularly Lisfranc injuries. See: Schaub. With this said, I hope he's wrong and I think there's about a 20% chance he could be wrong on this, but I wouldn't bet on Stingley having the kind of career his talent level says he should have due to injury. BTW, why did it appear that the only choices at 1-3 were Stingley or Sauce?
Click to expand...
Very few of these guys have the career that their talent level say they should…injuries is just 1 of the reasons why that happens. Its why tge average NFL career is only 3.5 years.
 
Mr teX said:
i could name at least 6…your comment in the jamey rootes thread is just the most recent lol.
Click to expand...

You must have mistakenly read my comment, read my comment later that I just posted 15 mins ago in that thread. But I would like to see more.
 
Last edited:
maverick512000 said:
While true its an awful big risk to take with your number 3 pick. Personally if I truly thought Gardner was that bad a fit and looked at Stingley's injury history I might have looked at a different pick period.
Click to expand...
Common opinion around here. I can't imagine Nick & Lovie wouldn't think the same way.

So, imo, they're either morons or they know something we don't. Not about Gardner, but about Stingley since they picked him over anyone else.

I'm not ready to call them morons




yet
 
Mr teX said:
Very few of these guys have the career that their talent level say they should…injuries is just 1 of the reasons why that happens. Its why tge average NFL career is only 3.5 years.
Click to expand...
What I would like to know is what the avg career is for guys that have been picked in the top 5 over the last 10 yrs and how long have they played at a high level? I bet it's more than 3.5 yrs.
 
JB said:
When one comes in with a known degenerative injury, it's a lot tougher to have a lot of faith in that player.
Click to expand...
Would be nice if that was the argument. Go back & look at Porky's argument. Go back & look at Maverick's argument. They're worried about reinjury.

This should be about how much degeneration has affected his play, about how badly it will affect him & how soon.

Arguing about reinjury just proves they don't understand the situation.
 
steelbtexan said:
What I would like to know is what the avg career is for guys that have been picked in the top 5 over the last 10 yrs and how long have they played at a high level? I bet it's more than 3.5 yrs.
Click to expand...

Unless they are complete screw ups like say Justin Blackmon, teams will generally bend over backwards trying to “fix” them…& Just from that fact alone, The data would be skewed to begin with whether they played at a high level or not. No reason Sam Darnold should be still in the league…he’s trash. But here he is still battling for a starting position in his 6th year. Luke Joekel? Garbage, yet hes going into his 5th…6th year?
 
steelbtexan said:
What I would like to know is what the avg career is for guys that have been picked in the top 5 over the last 10 yrs and how long have they played at a high level? I bet it's more than 3.5 yrs.
Click to expand...

You can't really get a strong comprehensive avg career length when you're factoring in guys that only started playing a handful or less years ago. It constantly skews fewer and fewer by default.

By my count though only 17 out of the 50 top 5 picks of the last 10 years have played at what could be relatively agreed upon is a high level. And I gave some generous credit to a few guys - Lane Johnson, Brandon Scherff, Denzel Ward. And of course the jury's still out on the guys from the last 2 or 3 years, even though several of those look like clear busts already - Jeff Okudah, Clelin Ferrell, Sam Darnold.

There were some atrocious picks in the top 5 of these drafts. If Stingley plays at a legitimately high level for even 3.5 years he'd be well above the line versus the top 5's of the last 10 years.
 
steelbtexan said:
Which ones would that be?

Lets start with my stance that Derrick is a perv and dumb. Man, I got that one wrong.
Click to expand...
Nobody knew he was a perv. Show us where you predicted that. You just didn’t like him period.

Now if Doc worked for the Texans would he tell the them to stay away from players like Stingley? Or would he do exactly what the Doctors who works for these NFL teams do?
 
Last edited:
Mr teX said:
I guess the question needs to be asked, What exactly are you hoping for as an “extended career”? 8 years? 10 years? His predictions dont hold anymore weight than the Texans’ docs….. who likely chimed in on the Stingley injury with their expertise as well. We can say all we want about them, but the fact remains, they’re docs too. All these guys have degenerative something and no matter how hard you try to protect the body, ot will break down from something.

guys like Revis only really had 5-6 top level play years before he slid…after his ACL tear where he clearly wasnt the same guy afterwards. All told he played and extended 11 years tho.

None
Click to expand...

Seriously you are using the Texans medical staff to help your case? Have we ever, in the last 10 years seen good judgement or had good things to say about them? It is literally one of the few things we all agree on, least I thought it was, how bad they are.
 
thunderkyss said:
Would be nice if that was the argument. Go back & look at Porky's argument. Go back & look at Maverick's argument. They're worried about reinjury.

This should be about how much degeneration has affected his play, about how badly it will affect him & how soon.

Arguing about reinjury just proves they don't understand the situation.
Click to expand...

You are splitting hairs, we are all talking about the same thing and worried about the same thing. That is that he doesn’t play to the level a number 3 overall should play at due to injury past, present or future. You can call it reinjury, you can call it degeneration but the result is the same.
 
Texansballer74 said:
Nobody knew he was a perv. Show us where you predicted that. You just didn’t like him period.

Now if Doc worked for the Texans would he tell the them to stay away from players like Stingley? Or would he do exactly what the Doctors who works for these NFL teams do?
Click to expand...
I said he was selfish and not as good as posters around here thought he was. I staniby this. I also said he was dumb in a game thread. (an emotional moment after a dumb play and I shouldn't have said that) turns out that was the truth.
 
steelbtexan said:
I said he was selfish and not as good as posters around here thought he was. I staniby this. I also said he was dumb in a game thread. (an emotional moment after a dumb play and I shouldn't have said that) turns out that was the truth.
Click to expand...

you’re stretching and contorting your statements….as always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top