rakish

revisit number 1

We will revisit this quote

Nonsense

Applications for hopping on the Derek Grant bus will be accepted and considered on a rolling basis on planet raku.

The Quarterback Problem Gladwell is really talking about hiring, not football, but I think it has some merit in this thread none-the-less.

I'm in

http://forums.sabrespace.com/topic/22096-sabres-fantasy-gambling-contest/

A couple months ago I put together a chart comparing the career trajectory of a handful of defensemen. I added Risto to give you an idea where he sits in relation to the others.

Responding to K-9 No, I think the Bills use a divided field for their progressions, so they were going right the whole time, the TE was triple teamed, the second progression was to the WR, who was flat footed and not open, the third was the check down. If that is not true, then I'm wrong. If Taylor is taught to look at Woods for the second progression, then he is at fault. My argument is that the Baltimore Ravens gambled a TD that he wouldn't make the second progression you think he should have made, and the Ravens were right. It's my belief that they wouldn't have gambled based upon footwork or formation, that they knew the play beforehand. Had Taylor seen the SS (if this really is a problem for Baltimore, I have no idea) on Woods and audibled, I think the FS changes the play and rolls to his right instead of his left believing that the play was changed to Woods or Watkins.

I think there's a difference between behavior when someone thinks what likely will happen as opposed to what will definitely happen, and the SS play indicates to me that he knew the progressions presnap. And thanks for playing along.

Nonsense K-9, the Ravens knew what was coming, if you look at the gif it's obvious that the Ravens know the progression presnap, you're blaming the quarterback because did what he was coached to do.

Let's workshop your idea, smell. I'll play the SS, you're covering Watkins, we just broke the huddle walking toward our positions. rakish: smell, the Bills often start the game going to the TE, so if they come out with 2 WR weak side, I'm going to ignore Woods and help out on the check down. Good luck covering both. smell: TIME OUT coach: Why did you call time out before the first play? smell: rakish has a concussion... rakish: you can just call it a rakoosh, coach knows what that means. smell: He thinks, based on two weak side WR, they might be going to the TE, if they do, the strong side WR will be the second read, the RB will be the checkdown, so he's not going to cover his guy, and leave it to me. coach: I hate when he rakooshes rakish: The plural is rakoos... coach: I hate when he rakoos on Sunday, Eleven, get in there, play SS, and cover people. I can't get the conversation to make more sense than that.

I think that's a reasonable view smell if the SS knew he had FS coverage behind him, which he knew he didn't. As I said upstream, the SS makes a huge gamble here, on the basis of the formation? For me it's too big of a gamble, much less likely than the Raven's knowing what the play was going to be. As I say, I have a bias. If this wasn't in Baltimore, or wasn't a unique situation (first play), I might give some credence to this possibility.

I am by nature conspiratorial and I recognize I could be totally wrong because of my bias, but I think the Ravens staked too much on being right by guessing on a cost/benefit view.

Edit, saw new comment, just getting to that. Sorry, misread your question. Your first sentence gets to the crux of my theory here. For me, it's obvious they know what's coming, the Ravens are far too confident in the defensive play, if the second read is to Woods, TD, if the second read is to Watkins, likely TD. So if they know what's coming, let's look at the possibilities. The Bills talked about the play in the locker room, which is mic'ed. Less likely, the Bills got to the line too soon, and the Ravens were able to hear the Bills huddle, and pass that along to the defense before the wireless was turned off. I think it's important that this is the first play. I recognize both possibilities are highly conspiratorial, and many people will ignore my thoughts for that reason, but I think Ravens were dead certain they knew the play, I think there's too many 'reads' being made for it to be a read. I'm arguing the Ravens are cheating.

Watch the corner covering Watkins. His assignment is to zone cover Watkins and Woods, because the SS (covering Woods) has no intention of ever covering Woods, his assignment is to tackle the checkdown. My point is that this isn't a defensive breakdown, this is a defensive play. Woods didn't beat anybody, the defense used one CB for two WR. Watkins recognizes this and stops to put max space between him and Woods. So if it's a defensive play, why are they running it? Why cover the TE with 3 players? Why not cover Woods?

Eleven, they are triple teaming the tight end, double teaming the checkdown, and not covering Woods at all. Doesn't that tell you something?

I found someone doing an All 22 analysis of this game, and couldn't find the other example. This play is very interesting. The Bills split the field in half for their QB, the first read is the TE, covered with 3 guys. The second read is the WR on the right, covered. Taylor hits third read, the checkdown. Very nice job by the QB. What is interesting is that the Ravens know the play and the reads coming. How this play should have been defended was the FS rolls to his right to double Watkins, but since the Ravens knew the play, and knew it strong enough that they didn't even bother covering the left side of the field, the FS rolls to his left to triple team the TE. This defense wouldn't work against a QB who... how can I put this nicely... has a free reign on altering the play. Flutie, for instance, would have counted three Ravens covering the TE, one on the WR right, two on the check down, four rushing, would add that to ten and step back and look for the open receiver, but that's not who Taylor is. The interesting thing for me is how confident the Ravens are. Since it's the first play, and there was some other talk of the first play looking the same, but I couldn't find it. It's the first play, making it unique in two ways. The Bills could have talked about it in the locker room, or they could have gotten to the line early, when the defense would still have their helmet speakers on. Just a theory.

I'm sitting on a bus, coincidental in Baltimore, watching Flagg's clip over and over again. Is the all 22 available for the whole game?

You forgot Reinhart, so he's 7th

My guess is one 30, Eichel, and two 20's, Eichel's linemates. As any fan of Corsi will tell you, O'Reilly scores more than 20 when his shooting percentage is over 13%, and less than 20 when he is closer to his career average of 10.7%, therefore O'Reilly's 2015-2016 scoring more than 20 was lucky. In all seriousness, I think Bylsma will give O'Reilly a reasonable number of minutes so he doesn't burn out this season like he did last year. 5-5 goals scored per 60, O'Reilly's number was .53, which did beat Deslau's .52, while it's an unfair comparison since O'Reilly plays stronger opponents, it should raise an eyebrow. O'Reilly's linemates will get too few offensive zone starts to expect to reach 20 goals. I expect Okposo plays with O'Reilly, and scores 16. He will miss the sweet, sweet time with Tavares, although he did play a lot with Nielson too. Like O'Reilly, his goals per 60 are OK, but not 6M for 7 years OK, or whatever the contract was. Where to play Kane? In his 20 goals last year, 4 were empty net. I would play him on the third line, but if he plays with Eichel, I think he'll score 20, if he plays with the Sedin's, I think he'll score 20. I think some players, to give an extreme example, Tyler Myers, play better when they are just told to play hockey, and trying to get them to think and play at the same time leads to tears. Having switched between Ruff, what's his name, Nolan, and Bylma has given me a good look at which players can think on ice, and which players don't, as such, I think Ennis (who I love to watch play hockey) and Girgensons (who I love to watch play hockey) will not survive this system. I expect Reinhart to play with Eichel, and score 26. I'll go off the board for the other Eichel linemate, and predict current Rochester American Derek Grant will end up on the Eichel line sometime in November and get 20.

What I get for eichel/mackinnon

My guess is that it would have cost Teddy a lot of Pegula dollars

It's actually a bit more situational than the plus in plus/minus, since you get it vs. minutes played. Foligno didn't lead the team, he came in about 5th, depending on who you count, like Rodriguez or Cal O'Reilly.

The plus in plus minus