Jerome Baker Stock Up

[SCLSU Mud Dogs]

If it is only taking the last four weeks into account, I can believe it I guess.

He was much more effective as the season went on. That's understandable, as it was a redshirt rookie situation. In addition to that, 3 of the last 4 games were against teams that weren't very good.

The one metric is the last 4 games. The other, the 6th best run defense grade, was the whole season. I'm not saying that Kwon is anything special, I was just dispelling the myth that all of our linebackers were bad against the run last year.

All linebackers benefit from being kept clean by the defensive line, so maybe with a new defensive scheme we'll see more from our unit.

 

[Soca casual]

Right now -- we have a legit chance to be significantly better in a number of areas
than the skeptics are predicting. Baker is one of the wild cards IMO. If he really
excels in the new system -- that's a positive uptick for sure...

Granted, I am optimistic and hopeful at this point -- but I really believe we will
enjoy a number of positive "surprises" this season. Not talking winning tons of
game -- but some sustainable links in the chain to build upon...

That's my hope at least.

BNF

This . And I’m sure that’s all our realistic hopes BNF

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

The front 7 plays as a unit. And based on run stop percentages, Raekwon McMillan near the top of the league. I believe the 6th best grade against the run of any linebacker in the NFL.

Showing that stats can be subjective, as opposed to seeing him moonwalk with the help of offensive lineman, away from the POA.

 

[Phinatic8u]

Baker was easily the best LB on the team last year, I expect a huge jump in his ability.

 

[djphinfan]

If you all haven’t heard this dude talk in interviews you should, sounds like a very confident grown man..

 

[SCLSU Mud Dogs]

Showing that stats can be subjective, as opposed to seeing him moonwalk with the help of offensive lineman, away from the POA.

And saying random "here's how I think he played" without actual figures to back it up is subjective. You can see the actual, non subjective figures in the previous post I made.

 

[Mach2]

Showing that stats can be subjective, as opposed to seeing him moonwalk with the help of offensive lineman, away from the POA.

Statistics are never subjective. How one views them can be. How much "weight" someone gives one stat vs another stat can be, but if its just raw #s, they arent subjective.

Now, when ppl, like PFF and other sites, publish "rankings", all that usually goes out the window because that gets into breaking down plays, etc, where assignments, and play design are being assumed. It's an evaluation, as opposed to a statistic, and that, indeed, can be subjective.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Statistics are never subjective. How one views them can be. How much "weight" someone gives one stat vs another stat can be, but if its just raw #s, they arent subjective.

Now, when ppl, like PFF and other sites, publish "rankings", all that usually goes out the window because that gets into breaking down plays, etc, where assignments, and play design are being assumed. It's an evaluation, as opposed to a statistic, and that, indeed, can be subjective.

While I agree with that, the sites/individuals with legitimate stats consistently rank players about where people would expect. That is, I don't see JJ Watt or Dallas Thomas ranked as 'average.' Don't see Parker as top 10. Good stats measure reality most of the time.

In the case of Baker, he looked better as the season progressed - eye-ball test. I expect a significant improvement with a year's experience and real coaches. What he does with that is open to debate.

 

[Mach2]

While I agree with that, the sites/individuals with legitimate stats consistently rank players about where people would expect. That is, I don't see JJ Watt or Dallas Thomas ranked as 'average.' Don't see Parker as top 10. Good stats measure reality most of the time.

In the case of Baker, he looked better as the season progressed - eye-ball test. I expect a significant improvement with a year's experience and real coaches. What he does with that is open to debate.

What you say about "rankings" being accurate is, well, accurate. The "eyeball" test definitely has a place in player evaluations.

My comment was more about the term "subjective" itself, rather than how well website rankings align with reality. I'm not usually "that guy" who wants to pull out a dictionary to prove some technical aspect of an argument, but it does help discussion if everyone is speaking the same "language".

 

[fansinceGWilson]

What you say about "rankings" being accurate is, well, accurate. The "eyeball" test definitely has a place in player evaluations.

My comment was more about the term "subjective" itself, rather than how well website rankings align with reality. I'm not usually "that guy" who wants to pull out a dictionary to prove some technical aspect of an argument, but it does help discussion if everyone is speaking the same "language".

Point taken. I agree