While I do like H/W/S...I'm critiquing Joyner on his play...that I've witnessed for 3 seasons. That has coaches wanting him moved to FS. If he was as good as you say, I'd think the new staff would keep him in his same role. Yet, his replacement is signed outta FA....I'm sure he wasn't targeted around the redzone because of the other weak links in the secondary. Stats don't tell the whole story in the secondary... but several do paint a picture...you like the 8.5 yards per reception. Not sure why...I like the % of completed passes allowed...the number of 3rd down conversions allowed....pass break ups...oh yea, my favorite is interceptions...
That's fallacious logic for two reasons. First, being an above average to good slot CB doesn't mean he won't be a better FS. If he's a better FS, it makes perfect sense to sign a guy like Nickell Robey on the cheap and move Joyner, which kills two birds with one stone. I've been saying for years that Joyner is a better FS. Second, this is a new scheme with new responsibilities (i.e., it's not the same role). Joyner's skill-set might not (and likely doesn't) fit the new scheme at slot CB as well as it did Williams's bend but don't break defense.
Yes, I like yards per reception and TDs allowed. I also like completion percentage allowed. All combine to tell me how effective a CB is in his role. We played a bend but don't break defense under GW. Thus, completion percentage allowed is going to tend to be high for our DBs. Thus, the question of whether they're doing their job or not will be answered by yards per reception allowed and TDs allowed. Joyner's metrics clearly show that he was doing his job. A yards per reception stat of below 10 is outstanding. And only allowing one TD on the year is also outstanding.
You can fixate on pass break-ups and interceptions, but I prioritize not allowing TDs over interceptions. You claim that teams targeted weaker links in the red-zone. Would that be players like Trumaine Johnson? Because Tru allowed four TDs on the year compared to Joyner's one.
As for third down conversions allowed, feel free to look for yourself where the Rams ranked over the past two years:
https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-third-down-conversion-pct
https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-third-down-conversion-pct?date=2016-02-08
If Joyner was such a weak link, why weren't teams able to successfully pick on him on third downs? That's when teams often go to the slot WR.
Well, I can see what Joyner is....I don't really know what Randolph is, but I've got a good feeling. Some can tell a lot about guys in preseason...some can't see anything....or make up what they think they're seeing. I don't know if Joyner was a better FS than Randolph in college? I don't....I mostly saw Joyner do what he's doing now...man to man....seemed grabby back then too. And again, Joyner played with more pro's on his side than Randolph. That just implies...to me...that Joyner had an easier time in college...on his defense. If Joyner is playing slot corner well, I'd hate to see what happens if his play drops off.
No, you really can't see what Joyner is. You're blind to what Joyner is because you judged the book by its cover. You decided that Joyner didn't have the athletic attributes that you think are necessary to succeed, and you wrote him off because of it. You ignore information that contradicts that perspective of him and prioritize information that backs it.
And yes, you do have a good feeling about Randolph because he has the exact H/W/S attributes that you think should make him great. Again, you're judging a book by its cover.
Champ, I like and respect you, but you have a tendency to make a determination on the worth of a player based on his physical attributes and refuse to come off of it.(both for guys who have the attributes and guys who don't)
