Tour2ma Posted January 31, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 yea I was really expecting a higher grade. Garrett has a 7.63 Tunsil has a 7.61 Williams Leonard has a 7.53 Clowney has a 7.5 grade Not quite the once in a generation talent we have been led to believe. Are you saying they are coming too frequently to be "generational"? If so then I'd argue they are not the same player... some not the same position. Similarities pretty much start and end with Garrett and Clowney. Williams is a different breed of DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 I still think Garrett should have a higher grade or we need to stop throwing around the "generational" tag so willy nilly when it comes to him. Isn't this the highest grade in years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 If Garrett turns into what Clowney now is for Houston (without going thru the injury years), the Browns fans will be elated. Once Watt went down most expected Clowney to drop off, but it went exactly opposite way. He got better. And as for the QB ratings Prescott only got 5.4, but some of us here were saying early on before the draft that he had that one great intangible, a proven winner under pressure. How the Browns QB guru missed that and took a huge leap for Kessler is still totally baffling to me. It's why I have little faith in Hugh and the FO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Isn't this the highest grade in years? By less than a tenth of a point - Tunsil was a 7.61, Garrett is a 7.63. Nothing in that grade points to Garrett being a truly game-changing, can't miss, you're stupid if you don't take this guy prospect. For reference, the grading tiers on NFL.com state the 7.5 - 7.99 tier as a "Future All-Pro". Impressive, absolutely. But they still have two higher tiers, 8-9 being a "Perennial All Pro" while 9-10 is "Once-In-A-Lifetime" player. Nobody has scratched those tiers under this new grading scale - meaning that Garrett isn't far removed as a prospect from Leonard Williams or Laremy Tunsil, according to NFL.com. Given the choice, I'd still select Wentz over Tunsil or Winston over Williams. Being that these grades are set on a standard score system for the past 4 years and that Trubisky (as it stands now) has the highest score among ALL QB's since Luck/RG3, I'm not sure how we can rationalize passing on him at #1....save for him measuring in at 6'0", running a 5.5 40 and piecing together two terrible throwing workouts. I wish it weren't the case because I really want Garrett, but if Trubisky has even a meh combine showing, we probably have to take him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 31, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 If Garrett turns into what Clowney now is for Houston (without going thru the injury years), the Browns fans will be elated. Once Watt went down most expected Clowney to drop off, but it went exactly opposite way. He got better. And as for the QB ratings Prescott only got 5.4, but some of us here were saying early on before the draft that he had that one great intangible, a proven winner under pressure. How the Browns QB guru missed that and took a huge leap for Kessler is still totally baffling to me. It's why I have little faith in Hugh and the FO. I'll give us a pass on Dak fot a couple reasons... the DUI... thanks to your boy we only go after choir boys now. lack of continuity... the way to have seen through the DUI and then be able to appreciate Dak the player, was to have watched him grow over a three-year period. It was his trajectory that took me from "like the player" to this guy has a real chance to be something. Out FO certainly was not in that position. Hue? With Andy as starter on AJ McC on deck, I doubt he was looking very hard. As for Clowney...he's like a stock market relief rally. When the bad news slows and the market turns it often feels a lot better than it really is. Jadaveon had a good year, not a great one. If we go Garrett, you'd better hope he comes out of the gate than Clowney's third season. I'd add a bold-faced, all-caps "we know where you live," but Z just addressed that in his quarterly dressing down of Ghoolie... Timing is everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 31, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 I wish it weren't the case because I really want Garrett, but if Trubisky has even a meh combine showing, we probably have to take him. Pretty sure if he tests positive for meth at the combine tha... Oh... nevermind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Myles Garrett is .02 points higher in grade than Laremy Tunsil was last year. Mitch has a higher grade than Goff or Wentz did last year. aswell as a higher grade than jameis winston and mariota Hell according to this site he is the best QB coming out since 2012 and his comparison is Matt Stafford. Going by that we would be completely foolish not to draft him #1 overall NFL.com was using a different rating system starting in 2013. So how do you know he's not even better than the 2012 guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Being that these grades are set on a standard score system for the past 4 years and that Trubisky (as it stands now) has the highest score among ALL QB's since Luck/RG3, I'm not sure how we can rationalize passing on him at #1....save for him measuring in at 6'0", running a 5.5 40 and piecing together two terrible throwing workouts. I met Mitch during his senior year in HS, and I can say he was taller than me (I'm 6'1"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 NFL.com was using a different rating system starting in 2013. So how do you know he's not even better than the 2012 guys? You can somewhat align the two grading scales based on their own provided definitions of the tiers. It's not perfect, but it's pretty spot on for the most part if you look at the distribution of talent throughout the years. They haven't had anybody graded as a generational prospect since 2013, and it's kind of not even close. 2012 and 2013 were bad years for some guys that were supposed to be borderline generational players - Joeckel, Fisher, Richardson, etc. After that, they changed their scales and haven't rated anyone above "Pro Bowler" (which could be argued as the 85-95 tier on their old scale). EDIT: whoops, you were talking about Mitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 31, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Does anyone have a link to their methodology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.