Jump to content
Rotoworld.com Forums

AJJones

Members
  • Content Count

    206
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

About AJJones

  • Rank
    Rookie

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree that it is hard to measure and it weakens the argument for sure. However, he didnt make a subjective "I know it when I see it" argument. Proper ball placement is a ubiquitous concept in football. I think that is important to point out.
  2. This is pretty disingenuous. OP is clearly saying proper ball placement is the difference between elite and average or subpar accuracy. He could have articulated it a bit better, but his point is still valid in my view. Just because it isnt purely quantitative doesn't make it "not real".
  3. Fair. I would have drafted Watson number 1 because he was "my guy". I cannot say the same about Lamar. I guess the rest does not matter.
  4. I am not all over the place at all. I prefer Watson because I like Watson and prefer his "clutchness". Just because I say Lamar is better at something does not mean that Watson is inadequate. I think Lamar is a better QB prospect for the reasons I stated. Prospect, to me, clearly refers to evaluating the physical traits of the player -- regardless of how well that translates into success. If you had a different interpretation of the conversation then I hope that cleared things up. My position is firm.
  5. My eyes. Watson has an average arm and Jackson has a very good, but not amazing one. Allen would be an amazing arm. Arm strength is overrated though, in my opinion.
  6. Poise and decision making from the pocket. This is the trait that I think correlates the most with QB success and Lamar's jumps off the screen.
  7. I am actually one of Watson's biggest supporters here and would take him over Jackson every day of the week because of preference. I actually have been bashed on this site for how much I love Deshaun Watson. I think Jackson is a better traditional QB right now and in the future. I just want to be clear on my opinion, not that you have to agree with me.
  8. I agree with what you say about Watson, except that he is a more polished passer. That is just simply false. Watson was in a gimmicky offense and was not great at making reads when he had to make them. He did show anticipation, but so does Jackson. I cannot prove this, but I am 100% certain Jackson would put up similar, if not better, numbers if he switched places with Watson because he is a better passer. I am not sure the opposite is true. I would still draft both of these players -- this is no dig against Watson. Jackson's pocket prowess is just criminally undervalued.
  9. Care to share why? Player evaluations are inherently subjective. I do not think Waston is more accurate than Jackson, his arm is not as strong, he not as good from the pocket, and he is not as good a runner. Watson is a better passer on the run and better in clutch situations, but that is my subjective opinion of course.
  10. Jackson is a better prospect than Watson, but Watson has "it".
  11. Bunk? 59% is not high, but he was not in an offense that will get you 70%. Lamar has problems throwing passes beyond the hashes, mostly because of his mechanics. As stated before, not only is he advanced as a passer but he is very accurate throwing to the middle of the field.
  12. While velocity does not equal arm strength, I think it is the thing you are most interested in parsing out in the context of this discussion.
  13. Well for me, Gurley is the antithesis of Barkley as a runner. Amazing vision and foot work that maximizes his athleticism, which lets be frank, is not on Barkley's level. He is physical and tough to bring down. They both are good in the passing game, but Barkley is better. Gurley has an NFL game.
  14. I am biased because I love Gurley and his game, but I would put Barkley right there. I would draft Gurley first, but not because he is categorically better, just because I prefer his game.
  15. Pretty sure that difference is not statistically significant, but your artwork is very good. I specifically said per game, not per carry. I still stand by my point. Barkley is very good at many things, but he is not as good a runner as Adrian Peterson.
×
×
  • Create New...