Matthew Slater

mgteich said:

You analysis seems weak. Presuming that rookies ALL stay on the team for four years is silly, at best.

Click to expand...

MG - How is it weak? Because I used an EXAMPLE to show how most teams are currently at or above the worthless 70% claim that Brady6 made?

mgteich said:

If you believe that the age of our team is average (like most others), then say so.

If you believe that the number of players on patriot rookie contracts is average, then say so.

Click to expand...

I did say so, MG.

mgteich said:

The patriots do indeed have a young team, although Brady6 probably overstates a bit.{/quote]

He doesn't say squat about the age of the team..
================

mgteich said:

Finally, do you truly believe that there are lots of special-teams only players (other than kickers, punters and returners) who make more than Slater? If so, say so. It seems that is the issue that you guys have arguing about.

Click to expand...

The ISSUE is this fictitious list that Brady6 claimed existed. He set the parameters for said list and then couldn't be bothered to actually provide said list. And, since then, he's bounced all over the place, doing anything he could to not provide said list.

Maybe you should focus on that since it's the heart of the issue..

Click to expand...

DaBruinz said:

No. YOU are the one who made the claims that Slater wasn't inexpensive and that he had the highest cap hit of any "core four special teams player in the NFL who doesn't take any offensive or defensive snaps". That was YOUR claim. Back it up or shut up already.

Click to expand...

I did say that, because it is true, he is paid better than any other is player is in the NFL that does what he does on special teams. Are you disputing that? I am still waiting for you to show a player who does what he does that is paid more, I have been waiting for 3 days now, all I get is your endless spin but nothing else. Unless you can show a player that makes more than him, or a lot of them for that matter your suggestion that he is inexpensive is baseless.

DaBruinz said:

Wow. You just can't admit to being wrong about anything, can you? First off, you are lying because you did NOT claim that the Patriots opted to draft players to replace veterans in lieu of re-signing them. You made the following claim "the Patriots have let many key vets go and drafted their replacement 1 year prior to the vet's contract expiring".

Click to expand...

I am not going to admit I am wrong because I am not wrong, the Patriots replace players through the draft, that is what they do, that is what smart teams do, teams like the Oakland Raiders overpay for second and third contracts. I am sorry you think that is what the Patriots do but you are wrong.

DaBruinz said:

ALL 3 have to be met for your statement to be valid. Unfortunately for you, that's just not the case for most of what you posted. The only ones it could be considered valid for is Green-Ellis/Woodhead. Both of which I already acknowledged. The rest, you are flat out wrong.

Click to expand...

Does Belichick call you and tell you the reasons why players are drafted? For the record I only need to show Green-Ellis and Woodhead to prove you are wrong, so disputing everything else does not matter, did we plan in advance for the departure of those two? Yes we did, so we could do the same thing for Slater.

DaBruinz said:

We've already talked about how Collins doesn't fit because they play different positions. Furthermore, Collins was brought in to cover TEs. Something that Spikes couldn't do. Calling it a replacement is laughable. Not to mention untrue since Spikes was let go for maturity reasons, not because the Patriots didn't want to pay him.

Click to expand...

How do you know why Spikes was let go, or why was Fletcher let go, why did they not pay him either I thought we paid all our players like we did Slater?

DaBruinz said:

No it doesn't make him Spike's replacement. Spikes replacement is whomever plays MLB, which would be MAYO, not Collins. You clearly don't understand what the word replacement means.

Click to expand...

No you clearly do not understand what the word replacement means, it is when a player fills the void left by the previous player, which is exactly what Collins is doing, maybe his playing style and how he aligns is different but he is replacing Spikes in the starting lineup, are you saying he is not?

DaBruinz said:

Why do you draft a LB in the 2nd round? Because your team doesn't have depth at the position and you have no one on your roster that has the ability to cover TEs/RBs out of the backfield. So you add a talented player like Collins in hopes that he can bring depth and coverage skills.

Click to expand...

Did Belichick tell you this is why he drafted Collins? I do not know why everyone is so excited for Collins this season, they obviously do not know what you know that Collins is nothing more than a depth player here to cover tight ends and running backs. I thought he was here to start, I am glad you told me Belichick’s plan I will not by his jersey after all.

DaBruinz said:

You're head is hurting because you keep making up more and more BS instead of looking at the facts of the situation. You're so desperate to look like you know what you're talking about, you insist on changing your story again and again. Like you have..

Click to expand...

No my head is hurting because you are like CD that skips, the same thing repeatedly.

DaBruinz said:

MG - How is it weak? Because I used an EXAMPLE to show how most teams are currently at or above the worthless 70% claim that Brady6 made?

Click to expand...

Did you actually click the link you provided? You realize it does not show the snap count for players like Slater on special teams right.

Brady6 said:

Personally, I think that those who dismiss PFF are doing so because they are either unable or unwilling to read between the lines. I do not see a ton of value in PFF rankings or even their articles but they do offer some in-depth stats that you cannot find other places. Stats like all things are open to interpretation you can determine how weight to put into them, but to outright dismiss a site that offers what PFF offers readers is very shortsighted. If it is good enough for Mike Reiss and Greg Bedard, it is good enough for me to read.

Click to expand...

If you feel as though you get something from PFF, by all means, continue to check it out. If I am reading an article by Reiss or Bedard or someone, I will often click on the link to read it as well.

I tend to try and take any good that it may have (as well as PFT), and leave the bad behind. The problem that most people have is that they have a crazy system attempting to determine certain things that makes them look downright silly from time to time. From that reasoning, one can understand why there are many who automatically dismiss it due to its bad reputation.

supafly said:

If you feel as though you get something from PFF, by all means, continue to check it out. If I am reading an article by Reiss or Bedard or someone, I will often click on the link to read it as well.

I tend to try and take any good that it may have (as well as PFT), and leave the bad behind. The problem that most people have is that they have a crazy system attempting to determine certain things that makes them look downright silly from time to time. From that reasoning, one can understand why there are many who automatically dismiss it due to its bad reputation.

Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying, I just feel like people see PFF and they just take issue with it, an example would be my post, I only used the PFF data for the sake of the names on the list, nothing else. The response was using PFF is a mistake as if I was highlighting the PFF rankings, so it is just a general response to all things PFF being negative.

Then you have the other posters who say it is fantasy football, I personally played fantasy football one time in 2005 and never again, but I look at PFF and plenty of other sites. That I label anything I do not understand or agree with “fantasy football” attitude is warped, PFF is one of the furthest sites from fantasy football of all NFL sites, ESPN is more fantasy based.

Brady6 said:

I hear what you are saying, I just feel like people see PFF and they just take issue with it, an example would be my post, I only used the PFF data for the sake of the names on the list, nothing else. The response was using PFF is a mistake as if I was highlighting the PFF rankings, so it is just a general response to all things PFF being negative.

Then you have the other posters who say it is fantasy football, I personally played fantasy football one time in 2005 and never again, but I look at PFF and plenty of other sites. That I label anything I do not understand or agree with “fantasy football” attitude is warped, PFF is one of the furthest sites from fantasy football of all NFL sites, ESPN is more fantasy based.

Click to expand...

If you enjoy some aspects of it then I'd keep checking it out from time to time.

You also have to understand those who don't take it seriously due to some very poor decisions they've made in the past with their "analyzing," so just try to keep that in mind. As I said in another post, I think they could have prevented some of their poor reputation by utilizing common sense.

When you publish an article and rankings that show Tyrone McKenzie as the NFL's most valuable player, while the QB who leads his team to a 14-2 record barely makes it in the top 30, something is probably wrong with your system.

Brady6 said:

Personally, I think that those who dismiss PFF are doing so because they are either unable or unwilling to read between the lines. I do not see a ton of value in PFF rankings or even their articles but they do offer some in-depth stats that you cannot find other places. Stats like all things are open to interpretation you can determine how weight to put into them, but to outright dismiss a site that offers what PFF offers readers is very shortsighted. If it is good enough for Mike Reiss and Greg Bedard, it is good enough for me to read.

Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint, but I dismiss PFF because it's mostly dog ****. When it first came out and stuck to basic stuff, I championed it (If you search back far enough, you can probably find those posts). It's a perfectly reasonable alternative to not having snap counts, for example. As PFF tried expanding its focus, though, it lost its way. Use it for raw data on obvious things (snap count), where the couch potato is less likely to make mistakes. Avoid it like the plague for anything more advanced.

And, if they try giving you a graded list, walk away laughing.

supafly said:

If you enjoy some aspects of it then I'd keep checking it out from time to time.

You also have to understand those who don't take it seriously due to some very poor decisions they've made in the past with their "analyzing," so just try to keep that in mind. As I said in another post, I think they could have prevented some of their poor reputation by utilizing common sense.

When you publish an article and rankings that show Tyrone McKenzie as the NFL's most valuable player, while the QB who leads his team to a 14-2 record barely makes it in the top 30, something is probably wrong with your system.

Click to expand...

I agree, I do not even read their articles; I just use some stats that are hard to find. Their rankings are based on metrics that are not usually true indicators of the players performance, and if you understand that then it will not be as shocking when you see the players on top of their ranks. In 2010 Brady had in my opinion his best season as a QB, but for things that matter in a PFF ranking he did not have big numbers. He threw for under 4000 yards, and threw the majority of his passes in the under 10-yard range. Those 2 things work against a PFF ranking for whatever reason.

You look at a player like Ryan Wendell in 2012, in my opinion I thought they did a good job highlighting his value; people are stuck with the image of Wendell being destroyed last season especially against Denver so they have a mental block on how well he played in 2012. They think that PFF article is an example of how their ranks suck, but I see it as the opposite I thought it was one time the ranks did work. I think for OL, interior DL, and specialist the PFF stats are very helpful, I think the other positions where production is more evident the PFF system fails in most cases.

Honestly if there was dog turd that offered some insight into a player that I could not find anywhere else I would read it, that is just me, I like information. I read a lot of different things, if others do not take that approach it is not a big deal, I do not think there is any right or wrong way to be a Patriots fan.

Deus Irae said:

Sorry to disappoint, but I dismiss PFF because it's mostly dog ****. When it first came out and stuck to basic stuff, I championed it (If you search back far enough, you can probably find those posts). It's a perfectly reasonable alternative to not having snap counts, for example. As PFF tried expanding its focus, though, it lost its way. Use it for raw data on obvious things (snap count), where the couch potato is less likely to make mistakes. Avoid it like the plague for anything more advanced.

And, if they try giving you a graded list, walk away laughing.

Click to expand...

As I just said to SF, each their own, I will read a dog turd if it has something that another site does not offer, will I weigh the dog turd heavily in my assessment? Probably not, but I will add to my considerations.

I do not belong to their site so most of what I see from them is in articles written by non-PFF writers.

Brady6 said:

As I just said to SF, each their own, I will read a dog turd if it has something that another site does not offer, will I weigh the dog turd heavily in my assessment? Probably not, but I will add to my considerations.

I do not belong to their site so most of what I see from them is in articles written by non-PFF writers.

Click to expand...

Reading crap is often worse than useless. It often just makes your arguments worse, because you frequently pull some of the crap into your work. The famous Tom Brady rating, and PFF's defense of it, is just one prime example of the abysmal failure that is PFF.

For the record, TQBR is garbage, too.

And, please, don't respond with another "To each his own" type of post. I'm not looking to get into a back and forth about this. I was just responding to your incorrect post regarding those who don't like PFF.

Deus Irae said:

Reading crap is often worse than useless. It often just makes your arguments worse, because you frequently pull some of the crap into your work. The famous Tom Brady rating, and PFF's defense of it, is just one prime example of the abysmal failure that is PFF.

For the record, TQBR is garbage, too.

And, please, don't respond with another "To each his own" type of post. I'm not looking to get into a back and forth about this. I was just responding to your incorrect post regarding those who don't like PFF.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you know more than I do so I will take your word for it. I am far from an expert on any of these sites.

Brady6 said:

I'm sure you know more than I do so I will take your word for it. I am far from an expert on any of these sites.

Click to expand...

We all have our opinions here, and I'm not trying to stifle yours. Just know that the judgment you made about its detractors, at least those on this site, was basically 180 degrees off. It's not that PFF's hated here because people don't want to read between the lines. It's that PFF's despised precisely because we have posters here who look past the raw data that's fed to them. Last year's arguments about dropped passes are a pretty good example of that, too, now that I think of it, and that's not about PFF. Also I don't give a damn what Reiss or Bedard think about PFF. Neither of them is the end all/be all of NFL analysis. Hell, Reiss kind of sucks at it.

If you like PFF, feel free to like PFF. Just understand that there are many of us who've been dealing with PFF from the beginning, or at least near to the beginning, and we've seen its decline. The disdain for that site here crosses all homer/downer divides, and anytime it gets mentioned there will be an almost obligatory "PFF sucks" in response. Also, any time it's mentioned, your arguments will get tuned out by many just because of that.

So, use it or not. That's up to you.

Deus Irae said:

We all have our opinions here, and I'm not trying to stifle yours. Just know that the judgment you made about its detractors, at least those on this site, was basically 180 degrees off. It's not that PFF's hated here because people don't want to read between the lines. It's that PFF's despised precisely because we have posters here who look past the raw data that's fed to them. Last year's arguments about dropped passes are a pretty good example of that, too, now that I think of it, and that's not about PFF. Also I don't give a damn what Reiss or Bedard think about PFF. Neither of them is the end all/be all of NFL analysis. Hell, Reiss kind of sucks at it.

If you like PFF, feel free to like PFF. Just understand that there are many of us who've been dealing with PFF from the beginning, or at least near to the beginning, and we've seen its decline. The disdain for that site here crosses all homer/downer divides, and anytime it gets mentioned there will be an almost obligatory "PFF sucks" in response. Also, any time it's mentioned, your arguments will get tuned out by many just because of that.

So, use it or not. That's up to you.

Click to expand...

My issue was more with posters not considering the context of what I posted from PFF. I used a list that gave the top 10 gunners in terms of snaps and double teams; I used it as a reference because I was trying to show other players that perform the duties that Slater does and what their cap number was. I was not even speaking to the PFF rank so when posters are like using PFF is a mistake it just seems pre-concluded. If I was like look at this list and showed how others perform better than Slater does at PFF metrics, I would understand a response like that but to respond at the site of the PFF logo is silly in my opinion.

Jackson 2 said:

Not intending to denigrate you or Ebner, but at least for now, Ebner isn't close to Slater as a ST player.

Click to expand...

i'm not saying he is, i'm really just saying that the only reason BB would cut Slater is if he felt that other players had surpassed him on the depth chart and as you said nobody appears close to where he is in terms of Special teams.

I think a key factor in if the Patriots will resign Slater after this season is Jamea Thomas. He was a terrific gunner in college, and has the speed and skill do so in the NFL. If he is impressive this season, Belichick could feel comfortable moving on from Slater if the price is too high.

Special Teams
This could be the spot where Thomas makes the most immediate impact. Thomas’s speed and aggressiveness makes him great as a gunner as well as on kick coverage. He has also shown with his explosiveness, he is a threat to block kicks off of the edge and is able to bend and leap to try to get in the way. Thomas has not been able to block a kick in his career for the Yellow Jackets but he has come close on a number of occasions.

Click to expand...

2014 NFL Draft Scouting Report - Jemea Thomas, DB Georgia Tech - With The First Pick