WR Logic---I like this fr Everett11

[-X-]

Too much risk for me with a high pick. Even if you didn't spend much capital on the munckin you have built your roster around a injury hole waiting to happen. What happens when you think you're set at a position? I think you look to spend your resources elsewhere and when he does get injured where are you?

I know how you feel about that, but the league is filled with exceptions to that rule. Santana Moss, Steve Smith, DeSean Jackson, Eddie Royal, Wes Welker, etc. Austin is a small guy, and I never wanted the Rams to draft him, but I personally don't think he's any more "prone" to injury than any other receiver. His ability to stay healthy all throughout college was actually a green flag. But if it turns out that he rolls his ankle every time someone grabs it (per your observation) and twists it, then I guess you'll have fulfilled your prophecy.

 

[Alan]

It's not a prophecy, it's a fear and a lower percentage play IMO.

 

[scifiman]

That's true but the fact that #56 is much bigger than Tavon is a factor in the forces involved IMO. Tavon's leg is like a small twig compared to the weight that #56 brings to bear on it and this might/would have had a greater impact on his knee than would be the case had the leg been bigger and stouter. We don't know the answer to that but it doesn't change the fact that A) the laws of physics are always there, B) Contrary to earlier speculation, Tavon is not able to avoid bad/dangerous hits and C) it's just a fact that a smaller player is more susceptible to injury.

Smaller players will always, as a rule, be quicker and more agile in small spaces than bigger players. There's a good reason why the NFL isn't filled with these smaller players and it all has to do with susceptibility to injuries. It's my personal belief, backed up by no data whatsoever, that most of these players suffer injuries that weed them out of the equation in HS and College long before they get to the NFL.

Draft one at a great risk IMO. As you pointed out, even big strong players like Jackson are highly susceptible to injures and why would you want to increase that risk? Especially with a high pick. If you draft player like the Tyrann in the 4th round and he doesn't last that long then it's a small loss and doesn't cost your program that much and if he somehow manages to stay healthy then you've got yourself a gem.

Too much risk for me with a high pick. Even if you didn't spend much capital on the munckin you have built your roster around an injury hole waiting to happen. What happens when you think you're set at a position? I think you look to spend your resources elsewhere and when he does get injured where are you?

This can and does happen with bigger players too but you know me -X-, I like to go with the decisions that have the math and physics on my side. I would never gamble in Vegas but I wouldn't mind owning a casino.

And Bradford is what 6'4" and tore his own knee up running. Size has nothing to do with these things. Fran Tarkenton did just fine. What about Desean Jackson? What about Drew Brees? This size issue should have been put to rest a long time ago. Big guys, small guys and medium guys all get injured playing this game and you can not give any meaningful factual data that the smaller player in the nfl gets hurt more often than a bigger ones do.

 

[Alan]

scifiman with meaningless data:
And Bradford is what 6'4" and tore his own knee up running. Size has nothing to do with these things. Fran Tarkenton did just fine. What about Desean Jackson? What about Drew Brees? This size issue should have been put to rest a long time ago. Big guys, small guys and medium guys all get injured playing this game and you can not give any meaningful factual data that the smaller player in the nfl gets hurt more often than a bigger ones do.

Someone eventually wins every lottery too. Should you base your retirement plans on that option?

I can't give any meaningful factual data because I've made no effort to compile any. Nor will I try too. Where is your data that would enable us to "put this matter to rest a long tome ago"? The issue of size always comes up with smaller players and why do you think that is? Just to provide you and others with something to deride? What's one of the main concerns about Manziel? Isn't his perceived slightness of frame one of the biggest?

There are many things I could say that would support my contention, some of which I've laid out in the past during similar discussions. None of them involves the injury data on the players in the NFL, except anecdotal examples like the ones you've used to support your contention. That would be a herculean endeavor that I'll leave others to undertake. My contention is derived from what I know of the human body and the physics involved. I'll make no attempt to try and explain them to you as that would also be a herculean task unless you're already familiar with and have a basic understanding of those forces. If you do know and understand those forces and still disagree with my contention then we'll just have to live with this difference of opinion. You'll join a huge list of posters who disagree with many of my positions so welcome to the community.

The laws of physics are immutable. At least in this universe.

 

[Zaphod]

Quantum or classical? And what about string theory or however you would link the two? Couldn't resist.

Would you consider Givens big? I don't, but he doesn't get injured often. I understand they are different players, but my point is that I believe it depends on the role and the player more than size. To me, the biggest risk to TA is going to come from taking big hits across the middle, and self inflicted from those amazing high speed direction changes. Yes, I believe that last year was a fluke.

For what it's worth, I was also super annoyed that they traded up for Tavon Austin. I'm also not a fan of paying big money for a tight end that can't block. Now, I just try to figure out how they can best use the resources they have, because what's done is done and it gives me hope to think of what could be.

Also, I'm definitely in the camp that believes that he may be a LOT more effective as a flanker than fighting for balls in the slot.

 

[Alan]

Zaphod liking string:
Quantum or classical? And what about string theory or however you would link the two? Couldn't resist.

Would you consider Givens big? I don't, but he doesn't get injured often. I understand they are different players, but my point is that I believe it depends on the role and the player more than size. To me, the biggest risk to TA is going to come from taking big hits across the middle, and self inflicted from those amazing high speed direction changes. Yes, I believe that last year was a fluke.

For what it's worth, I was also super annoyed that they traded up for Tavon Austin. I'm also not a fan of paying big money for a tight end that can't block. Now, I just try to figure out how they can best use the resources they have, because what's done is done and it gives me hope to think of what could be.

Also, I'm definitely in the camp that believes that he may be a LOT more effective as a flanker than fighting for balls in the slot.

String theory is so passe in my mind. I'm more concerned with my rubber band theory. I fully expect the universe to snap back like a rubber band after the energy generated by the big bang is dissipated. Be ready.

Where I think you're making a mistake is in looking at individual players. I prefer to look at the big picture rather than the small one. Averages always include outliers on both ends of the spectrum. The smart money always goes with the percentages in the long run.

 

[Zaphod]

String theory is so passe in my mind. I'm more concerned with my rubber band theory. I fully expect the universe to snap back like a rubber band after the energy generated by the big bang is dissipated. Be ready.

Where I think you're making a mistake is in looking at individual players. I prefer to look at the big picture rather than the small one. Averages always include outliers on both ends of the spectrum. The smart money always goes with the percentages in the long run.

And I always preferred to imagine a black hole finding it's way to being a big bang in another universe, but of course that would still be expansion save for the unknown ratio of dark matter in other universes

I don't deny that, but to a coach, when it comes time to make the best of what they have, they look at the individuals and their roles hard. Or rather, from our perspective at this point in time, all we really can do is hope that our coach does exactly that.

 

[Alan]

Zaphod conflating black holes with worm holes:
I don't deny that, but to a coach, when it comes time to make the best of what they have, they look at the individuals and their roles hard. Or rather, from our perspective at this point in time, all we really can do is hope that our coach does exactly that.

Of course each case is unique but you should weigh the increased injury risk into your calculations. It is just one of the factors but all else being equal I would stay away from the munchkins if possible. I didn't like the Austin pick but that was because of the 2nd round pick it cost us and not because of his size.

 

[Zaphod]

Of course each case is unique but you should weigh the increased injury risk into your calculations. It is just one of the factors but all else being equal I would stay away from the munchkins if possible. I didn't like the Austin pick but that was because of the 2nd round pick it cost us and not because of his size.

Same reason I hated the pick.