Getting to know Brandin Cooks

patfanken · Mar 26, 2017

Patsfanin Philly said:
Another aspect of Cooks that bodes well, having mentors to teach huim..

The Big Promise of Brandin Cooks

>>>When Cooks was a high school sophomore, he met Phil Ruhl, then a junior on the football team. The two quickly bonded over weightlifting and an appreciation for each other’s dedication. Not long into their friendship, Ruhl invited Cooks to his family’s home. “I was like, ‘Goddamn,’” Cooks says. “I was sitting there, just soaking it all in.” Ruhl’s mother is Alexis Ruhl, formerly Alexis Spanos — that Spanos. Her father, Alex, is the real estate mogul who owns the San Diego Chargers, and her husband, Barry, has had his own professional real estate success.

The Ruhls became a second family for Cooks; even when Mrs. Ruhl opposed other overnight guests, Brandin was always welcome. He spent weekends at the family’s home near Lake Tahoe. On the Ruhls’ kitchen counter, there are six senior photos — of her five children and Brandin.

Emotional support was one thing, but the education Cooks received from his time with the Ruhls was another. There was talk of politics, finance, investments. It was a world he hadn’t been exposed to before. Cooks went with Mr. Ruhl when he leased a car, just so he could learn. He asked about real estate decisions, how to surround yourself with a team whose knowledge could buttress your own.

Cook can recite the signing bonus for DeAndre Hopkins, one of last year’s first-round receivers, and also how much of that check goes to the government, how much he’ll have left over, how much should go this way and that. “It’s one of those things,” Cooks says, “short-term greed, long-term wealth.” He attributes it all to his time around the Ruhls. “They were just teaching me those things I never was exposed to growing up.”<<<<<

Thanks for finding this, it was an illuminating and in depth article that should be must reading for Pats fans.

As you all know I'm not as big a WR guy as most fans, as I see them either replaceable or developable inside this offense. I was also not a big fan of giving up even the #32nd pick for a WR, let alone Malcolm Butler. BUT after reading this piece, I DO feel a little bit better about the deal. Clearly this is a quality kid who is motivated to be great.

I feel a lot better now that he will be able to play in this offense since his work ethic and intelligence should enable him to thrive in this offense. About the only question that remains is whether that fierce competitive nature will allow him to put winning ahead of his own personal expectations. If he can, then he might just be the WR that BB will be willing to pay a market price for.

At any rate he's going to be here for the next 2 years, . Hopefully, for at least those 2 years, he will be able to meet no only HIS expectations, but ours as well

Tony2046 · Mar 26, 2017

K. Dog said:
I'm doubtful a long threat is going to be as useful at Brady's age as it was in '07; seems more like an invitation for turnovers. His long balls seemed to have more arc and less speed than they did in '07. That's my sense maybe I'm off. Obviously his timing and mid-range to short-range passes are perhaps better in some ways than '07.

What worries me about Cooks resume is that it sounds like a resume that any other team would want. We usually do better seeing things other teams don't see or understand in our receivers.

You need to view the youtube vid Manx posted right above your post. Brady is as deadly as ever with his long ball if not more.

rochrist · Mar 26, 2017

K. Dog said:
I'm doubtful a long threat is going to be as useful at Brady's age as it was in '07; seems more like an invitation for turnovers. His long balls seemed to have more arc and less speed than they did in '07. That's my sense maybe I'm off. Obviously his timing and mid-range to short-range passes are perhaps better in some ways than '07.

What worries me about Cooks resume is that it sounds like a resume that any other team would want. We usually do better seeing things other teams don't see or understand in our receivers.

My impression is that last season he threw the deep ball better than he has since 2007.

QuantumMechanic · Mar 26, 2017

Biffins said:
Brady mentioned in an interview that he only realized later in his career how receivers liked receiving the ball coming down from above on the long balls, and he used to zip it to them before on flat throws but has realized he needed to arc it to drop it in comfortably. He said this has increased the ability of the receivers to complete these long balls and increased his downfield percentage.

That's an odd thing for Brady to say. Hadn't he, you know, asked receivers what they liked on long balls? Or noticed what kind of balls receivers were catching on deep routes when he was studying defenses?

FoxboroFlyer · Mar 26, 2017

I got a feeling we'll all get to know the cookie monster, and what a dynamic play maker he is, come September.
#trademark

RIpats88 · Mar 26, 2017

Ochmed Jones said:
I really wonder how bb will use him. In New Orleans he ran a limited route tree. But I think that was the saints coaching staff trying to keep him from taking extra hits.

Clearly his speed should mean defenses have to double cover him by having a safety over the top, yet when watching tape of games against the nfc south foes, rarely do you see them double him.

But I can imagine Brady will be licking his chops if he sees single coverage on the outside against cooks.

Ideally our offense should have a lot more quick strike to it with cooks, hogan and gronkowski all working downfield.

Now we need a beastly running back because we will see a ton of defenses with only six in the box.

If teams double cooks that leaves Gronk and edelman with single coverage which brady should eat alive.

convertedpatsfan · Mar 26, 2017

K. Dog said:
A bit more formally, suppose we divide receiver attributes into classes X and Y with associated random variables X and Y. X is a measure of the standard attributes of a receiver, the ones that, say the Jets and the Steelers would seek: 40-time, TD's scored, etc. - those attributes that Antonio Brown and Odell Beckham exemplify. Y is the measure of attributes that the Patriots value but that other teams don't: 3-cone time, adaptability, blocking ability, self-sacrifice, reaction quickness, route running, team chemistry, ability to read the defense, and so on.

For this analysis, it doesn't matter specifically what's in Y actually.

Clearly, Cooks has a super-high X value. We don't actually know anything about his Y value, at least, I don't. All I know is that the Patriots selected him.

This framework falls into a rubric called Berkson's Paradox, and it's why I'm pessimistic. Berkson's Paradox states that positively correlated random variables in a population can become negatively correlated conditional on their sum exceeding some threshold.

If we assume that the Patriots select a receiver where X+Y is higher than some threshold T, then given that we observe a Patriots player with high X we are are actually more confident that he has low Y than if we had observed low X. This is true even if X and Y are positively correlated in the general population.

Of course, once we see Cooks play here we'll have more information. But Berkson's paradox explains why all these high X value players being signed this off-season are profoundly worrying me.

I think you're spending more time trying to find excuses why this won't work rather than looking at the player itself.

In particular, you mention the Y value of the 3-cone. Meanwhile, Cooks and Beckham (a guy you list as possessing the X values) both excelled in it. It's possible for a player to have both on the list.

I'm nowhere smart enough to comment on Berkson's paradox, but at the same time, I think you're missing the fundamental point of the Y values. It's not that BB prefers them OVER the X values. It's that there is value in them that is cheaper to acquire than others.

Think about Moneyball and the OBP revelations and how it changed how that stat was priced in the market. And then it became overpriced when everyone shifted to it, so some teams started targeting other under-valued assets like defense.

Now look at BB. He zigs when others zag. He was running a 3-4 before it was cool, and when it caught on and the price tag rose, he went the other way. He's taken your classic "X" trait receivers like Moss, but only when there was value in doing so. In Cooks, he feels there is a tremendous amount of value to the team regardless of what traits you want to correlate to whatever else.

AtomicDawg · Mar 27, 2017

Pretty cool quotes from him here:

Kontradiction · Mar 27, 2017

K. Dog said:
I'm doubtful a long threat is going to be as useful at Brady's age as it was in '07; seems more like an invitation for turnovers. His long balls seemed to have more arc and less speed than they did in '07. That's my sense maybe I'm off. Obviously his timing and mid-range to short-range passes are perhaps better in some ways than '07.

What worries me about Cooks resume is that it sounds like a resume that any other team would want. We usually do better seeing things other teams don't see or understand in our receivers.

Tom Brady’s Deep Ball Numbers Will Make Your Jaw Drop To The Floor

Tom Brady has been one of the best deep ball quarterbacks in the NFL

Good call!

FreeTedWilliams · Mar 27, 2017

I think where Cooks will make the biggest impact is not in the deep ball, but in the catch and run. To stop the Pat's offense, you must get pressure on Brady up the middle with your front 4 only. Blitz him, and he will find the open guy, play zone and he will pick you part (ask the Steelers). But get pressure and play tough man on the short crossing routes, that's when the Pats have troubles.

Now imagine you are playing man and Cooks catches a slant, if the rest of your DBs are in man, by the time they turn to chase him, he is gone!

I think this is this the brilliance of the Cooks move, he is too fast to cover one on one
, and if you do, he will turn a ten yard slant into a 60 yard TD. You almost have to put a safety over the top on him. Which will open up the seam route for Mr. Gronkowski!

This offense is going to be scary good. It's the same offense that just put up 25 points in the last eight minutes of the Superbowl with the additions of Gronkowski and Cooks!

RIpats88 · Mar 27, 2017

Hogan was the first deep ball receiver we have had since moss. And what do you know his numbers got better

It shouldnt surprise anyone that bradys deep ball got better when his deep options werent stone hands slater or 5 9" guys like welker or edelman

Adam Seward · Mar 27, 2017

K. Dog said:
This framework falls into a rubric called Berkson's Paradox, and it's why I'm pessimistic. Berkson's Paradox states that positively correlated random variables in a population can become negatively correlated conditional on their sum exceeding some threshold.

So when you see an ugly looking dude with a hottie? His looks (Y) + money or huge dong (X) = girl out of his league (T)?

K. Dog · Mar 27, 2017

KontradictioN said:
Tom Brady’s Deep Ball Numbers Will Make Your Jaw Drop To The Floor

The article you cite, and the video someone else cited above, both commit the most common statistical error in NFL analysis: they conflate probability and conditional probability. In Belichick's terms: they ignore situations.

Both these sources look at the percentage of completions (or QB rating) of Brady's long passes to conclude Brady is superb at long passes. Both of these sources do note, however, that Brady attempts fewer long passes than other quarterbacks or than he used to.

The statistical error of comparing completion percentage for this smaller sample against completion percentage of other QBs (or Brady in other seasons) who throw longer passes more often is illustrated in the sentence from the article you post:

these statistics also are susceptible of being skewed to some extent because of small sample size

This sentence is suggesting that the reason these statistics may be misleading is only that the sample is small. But that's not why the statistics are misleading. They are misleading because the reason the sample is small may be that Brady is throwing in different situations: he may simply be choosing to make long throws that are easier, e.g. where the receiver is more open or the defense is not as tight. That is, it's not that the sample is small - it's that the sample may be drawn from a different distribution than the passes in 2007.

Of course, the statistics here do show that Brady has impeccable strategy and is, as usual, making all the right choices. But they don't show his arm is as strong as in 2007.

Kontradiction · Mar 27, 2017

K. Dog said:
The article you cite, and the video someone else cited above, both commit the most common statistical error in NFL analysis: they conflate probability and conditional probability. In Belichick's terms: they ignore situations.

Both these sources look at the percentage of completions (or QB rating) of Brady's long passes to conclude Brady is superb at long passes. Both of these sources do note, however, that Brady attempts fewer long passes than other quarterbacks or than he used to.

The statistical error of comparing completion percentage for this smaller sample against completion percentage of other QBs (or Brady in other seasons) who throw longer passes more often is illustrated in the sentence from the article you post:

This sentence is suggesting that the reason these statistics may be misleading is only that the sample is small. But that's not why the statistics are misleading. They are misleading because the reason the sample is small may be that Brady is throwing in different situations: he may simply be choosing to make long throws that are easier, e.g. where the receiver is more open or the defense is not as tight. That is, it's not that the sample is small - it's that the sample may be drawn from a different distribution than the passes in 2007.

Of course, the statistics here do show that Brady has impeccable strategy and is, as usual, making all the right choices. But they don't show his arm is as strong as in 2007.

Until 2016, Brady had not had a reliable deep threat since Moss departed. So, yeah, when you combine that with the fact that the offense's bread and butter is typically quick routes between the numbers and YAC, you'll get the result of fewer attempts. You're moving the goal pots, though. You said his deep ball isn't what it once was and his completion percentage on balls thrown 15+ yards downfield in 2016 disagrees with that. Add Cooks in with Hogan and you have two guys that can get deep. Brady's deep ball is fine. If it wasn't, he would have had 1) more incompletions on those balls, and 2) more interceptions. Your OP doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Brady_to_Moss · Mar 28, 2017

Ya last year it was Hogan...now with Cooks running by people like a ferrari...love it

JMC00 · Mar 30, 2017

K. Dog said:
I'm doubtful a long threat is going to be as useful at Brady's age as it was in '07; seems more like an invitation for turnovers. His long balls seemed to have more arc and less speed than they did in '07. That's my sense maybe I'm off. Obviously his timing and mid-range to short-range passes are perhaps better in some ways than '07.

Brady, percentage on passes over 20 yards (regular season)

2016- 38%
2007- 40%

In 2007 he had Randy Moss as his deep threat. In 2016 his deep threat was Chris Hogan.

You know what "Mr. Best Passer Ever" Aaron Rodgers was this year on balls over 20 yards??? 29%.... In 4 more games than Brady, Rodgers only completed 5 more throws over 20 yards last year and he had 30 more attempts of over 20 yards than Brady did.

You can try to continue to argue that Brady's deep ball is worse than it was in '07. It just won't go well for you....

Bobs My Uncle · Mar 30, 2017

Nothing complicated here; just get this kid the ball and let his freakish skills take over. Short, intermediate or deep (passes) ... who cares?

Brady_to_Moss · Mar 30, 2017

Cooks wasn't happy some games not being the top target..hopefully he puts that all aside to go deep in the playoffs and I think he will

K. Dog · Mar 30, 2017

JMC00 said:
Brady, percentage of passes over 20 yards (regular season)

2016- 38%
2007- 40%

In 2007 he had Randy Moss as his deep threat. In 2016 his deep threat was Chris Hogan.

You know what "Mr. Best Passer Ever" Aaron Rodgers was this year on balls over 20 yards??? 29%.... In 4 more games than Brady, Rodgers only completed 5 more throws over 20 yards last year and he had 30 more attempts of over 20 yards than Brady did.

You can try to continue to argue that Brady's deep ball is worse than it was in '07. It just won't go well for you....

I said "obviously Brady's mid-range to short-range passes are in some ways better than in '07". Statistics about 20+ yard passes (with unknown YAC) would be a mixture of mid- and long-range passes and one could not conclude from them anything about deep-range passes.

Really what you want, if you are going to analyze this statistically, is for each pass a rough measure of the window: how accurate did the pass have to be to get caught? That is, what is the radius of the maximum size sphere such that any pass landing in that sphere at the time of the catch would also have been caught. From this, subtracting the YAC you get a rough measure of the distance of the throw itself. From the distance and the window, you get a sense of the accuracy required - the delta-theta so to speak, or the angle error in the pass allowed. (One should throw in timing data as well, as there are timing windows in addition to the spatial windows. In theory one should account for the differential utility associated with interceptions and incompletions: a pass where a small error leads to an int is more difficult than one for which a small error only leads to an inc.). Surely someone has done this already - it'd be much more useful than this QBR and TDs garbage stats they use to measure QBs.

They_Hate_We · Mar 30, 2017

Brady_to_Moss said:
Cooks wasn't happy some games not being the top target..hopefully he puts that all aside to go deep in the playoffs and I think he will

That really seemed to be blown out of proportion by the talking heads. Among the Saints fans that I hang with on a regular basis, nobody saw him as a locker room issue. When your team goes 7-9 for 3 straight years, but you consistently crank out top 5 offensive numbers, people have to find anything to complain about.

Talk to any Saints fan, and just mention the word defense. Then get ready to hear some real *****ing! LOL

Getting to know Brandin Cooks

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Burn it all down!

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

Patriot of the Week

On my retirement tour.

RIP NEM

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

IAN 2020

On the Game Day Roster

On my retirement tour.

28-3....

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

28-3....

On the Game Day Roster

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Similar threads