Move Over Sashi .....
-
It would be nice at least to have him as a consultant to our FO.
As here is the thing about our FO: that they are analytics driven....which may be find to a point. But the are ALL about the stats: They DID pick guys that had the best "numbers" in college. Most sacks, mot TD catches, most this, most that. While production levels is an important factor, it should not necessarily be the be all and end all of selecting our draft chcices. You should have a qualified talent evaluator as well, a football guy...not JUST numbers guys. Polian has been one of the best at that historically.....so he....or someone like him (a Gil Brandt type) SHOULD be hired to help our FO out, without stepping on any toes.
-
It would be nice at least to have him as a consultant to our FO.
As here is the thing about our FO: that they are analytics driven....which may be find to a point. But the are ALL about the stats: They DID pick guys that had the best "numbers" in college. Most sacks, mot TD catches, most this, most that. While production levels is an important factor, it should not necessarily be the be all and end all of selecting our draft chcices. You should have a qualified talent evaluator as well, a football guy...not JUST numbers guys. Polian has been one of the best at that historically.....so he....or someone like him (a Gil Brandt type) SHOULD be hired to help our FO out, without stepping on any toes.
It would be nice at least to have him as a consultant to our FO.
As here is the thing about our FO: that they are analytics driven....which may be find to a point. But the are ALL about the stats: They DID pick guys that had the best "numbers" in college. Most sacks, mot TD catches, most this, most that. While production levels is an important factor, it should not necessarily be the be all and end all of selecting our draft chcices. You should have a qualified talent evaluator as well, a football guy...not JUST numbers guys. Polian has been one of the best at that historically.....so he....or someone like him (a Gil Brandt type) SHOULD be hired to help our FO out, without stepping on any toes.
The idea that our FO is analytics-driven is a bit overblown and misunderstood by our media that seems obsessed with it. If you listen to them, the Browns will have a bunch of bean-counters plugging player stats into IBM's Watson and taking the print-out straight to the podium on draft day. But if you listen to what they've said in this ESPN article, you'll know that:
DePodesta was not hired because of analytics. The immediate assumption when DePodesta was hired was the Browns would be a full-bore analytics team, a "Bill James comes to football" kind of thing. DePodesta and Brown both admitted that is not the case. "Paul is not about analytics," Brown said. They will welcome information from analytics, which will be one tool in judgments, but it's part of what they do and not all of it.
and...
[Analyics] is more about a mindset than an algorithm. Analytics, DePodesta said, is not about numbers and formulas; it's about a "mindset" that means the Browns are open to learning and using information in the best way possible -- and in unique ways.
-
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
-
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Why the fuck does it matter what the fans think
-
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Why the fuck does it matter what the fans think
Why the fuck does it matter what the fans think
You are right. It doesn't. Still....don't you think someone with football talent evaluation skills is needed? Do you deny perhaps that any one of us armed with a Kiper or Scouts Inc. manual could have likely drafted as well as the Browns the last several years?
-
If you combine the pro football knowledge of Stosh, Pud and JimmyDee, then set it on the edge of a razor blade. It would look like a BB going down a four lane highway.
-
-
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
what talent evaluator...we have no fucking talent evaluator, decision maker, leader etc...we got another fucking block head coach who come hell or high water thinks fucking rg3 can win a superbowl...what the fuck...rg3 right now could be listed behind clipboard jesus if he was still on the roster...thats how bad it is...we still have no fucking direction, all anyone ever talks about is the draft..we still talk about who are we going to draft that can help us..this is from 1999 to now and based on past performance i would not count on anything good happening next draftday
-
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Probably, but I don't know for sure. What's our current guru's name? Tell me that and I'll get back to you.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Lovely.....they still can use a guru at talent evaluation......does anyone disagree with this?
Or do the Browns have some hidden gem of a talent evaluator on their staff? Enough to garner fan respect? Clearly not.
Probably, but I don't know for sure. What's our current guru's name? Tell me that and I'll get back to you.
Probably, but I don't know for sure. What's our current guru's name? Tell me that and I'll get back to you.
Exactly. I don't see one....but here are the candidates, I guess:
Andrew Berry Vice President, Player Personnel Ken Kovash Vice President, Player Personnel Kevin Meers Director of Research and Strategy Chisom Opara Director of Player Personnel Bobby Vega Director of College Scouting Dan Saganey Director of Pro Scouting Mike Cetta Director of Scouting Glenn Cook Assistant Director of Scouting Dave Giuliani Football Research Analyst Andrew Healey Senior Strategist for Player Personnel Debbie Kruszynski Executive Assistant, Player Personnel/Manager Football Administrative Services Zach Ayers Scout Charles Bailey Scout Zac Bocian Scout Colton Chapple Scout Lake Dawson Scout Sam DeLuca Scout Ron Hill Scout Gerald McCully Scout Patrick Moore Scout Marshall Oium Scout Max Paulus Scout Josh Cox Scouting Assistant Scott DiBenedetto Scouting Assistant Sam Fioroni Scouting Assistant Branden Francis Scouting Assistant Scott Kaniecki Scouting Assistant Scott Levin Scouting Assistant Keegan Leyrer Scouting Assistant Dax Nollenberger Scouting Assistant Thomas Pack Scouting Assistant Zach Wigmore Scouting Assistant
The only "guru" on the Browns FO staff?:
Jim Brown
-
Probably, but I don't know for sure. What's our current guru's name? Tell me that and I'll get back to you.
Exactly. I don't see one....but here are the candidates, I guess:
Andrew Berry Vice President, Player Personnel Ken Kovash Vice President, Player Personnel Kevin Meers Director of Research and Strategy Chisom Opara Director of Player Personnel Bobby Vega Director of College Scouting Dan Saganey Director of Pro Scouting Mike Cetta Director of Scouting Glenn Cook Assistant Director of Scouting Dave Giuliani Football Research Analyst Andrew Healey Senior Strategist for Player Personnel Debbie Kruszynski Executive Assistant, Player Personnel/Manager Football Administrative Services Zach Ayers Scout Charles Bailey Scout Zac Bocian Scout Colton Chapple Scout Lake Dawson Scout Sam DeLuca Scout Ron Hill Scout Gerald McCully Scout Patrick Moore Scout Marshall Oium Scout Max Paulus Scout Josh Cox Scouting Assistant Scott DiBenedetto Scouting Assistant Sam Fioroni Scouting Assistant Branden Francis Scouting Assistant Scott Kaniecki Scouting Assistant Scott Levin Scouting Assistant Keegan Leyrer Scouting Assistant Dax Nollenberger Scouting Assistant Thomas Pack Scouting Assistant Zach Wigmore Scouting Assistant
The only "guru" on the Browns FO staff?:
Jim Brown
Exactly.
Stole my anticipated reply to your reply...
So basically you are in favor of replacing a person whose name you do not know, let alone his abilities with a Polian.
I admit Bill is very knowledgeable. Can you admit you don't know why he was fired from Indy? Or that he once accosted an employee of another organization?
Do a google...
Spoiler alert... Bill does not play well with others. Therefore he does not fit in our consensus driven FO. Thus my original post... exactly my original post.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Andrew Berry would be our head of pro scouting, essentially. Responsible for identifying players on other rosters or who have recently been waived and bringing them in. So that would include Collins, Davis, Reynolds, Paea and Boddy-Calhoun. Plus Jamar Taylor who we picked up for essentially nothing (swapping 7th round picks) and has played well enough to be handed a new contract. Oh, and, Austin 'one game of competence at center' Reiter.
Not to say that's an all star cast or there haven't been players we've signed that haven't worked out, but most of those guys have done OK, plus Collins being now fourth on the team in tackles despite only playing 5 games instead of 13. Gotta keep him btw. But you know what? I'll take signing 20 guys and having a third or so working out into starters and dumping the rest. That's fine by me.
-
Been doing some more reading on the pros and cons of this whole analytics, money ball stuff. It does seem that all the stats and info paints a great picture of the past. As far as predicting future performance...not so good. I was looking at different articles about the book and stayed away from the film. It's interesting but when you come down to it, picking talent is more about instinct and heart. Sure, speed matters but brains, instincts and heart can be difficult to assign a number to.
-
Been doing some more reading on the pros and cons of this whole analytics, money ball stuff. It does seem that all the stats and info paints a great picture of the past. As far as predicting future performance...not so good. I was looking at different articles about the book and stayed away from the film. It's interesting but when you come down to it, picking talent is more about instinct and heart. Sure, speed matters but brains, instincts and heart can be difficult to assign a number to.
The common misconception is that analytics means a bunch of nerds crunching numbers. That's not the case. There is a such thing as qualitative analytics and it's just as important as quantitative.Been doing some more reading on the pros and cons of this whole analytics, money ball stuff. It does seem that all the stats and info paints a great picture of the past. As far as predicting future performance...not so good. I was looking at different articles about the book and stayed away from the film. It's interesting but when you come down to it, picking talent is more about instinct and heart. Sure, speed matters but brains, instincts and heart can be difficult to assign a number to.
It's more than saying "this guy has 4.5 speed and 16 sacks, which puts him in the 99th percentile". It's about creating a standard for what's important to building a successful team rather than your flavor of the week GM going "meeeeeeh, I like this guy". That's how you end up in our position, with a smorgasbord of differing players from different systems picked by different GM's.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
Also, I'm willing to bet there is little to no meaningful correlation between speed and success for a given position. Obviously if a guy runs a 5 second 40, he's not going to cut it as a receiver, but when you're in the 'acceptable' range of under say 4.6, it's just a box that's been ticked. Same with height, weight, strength etc.
Does anyone honestly think that a bunch of harvard educated lawyers are basing any analytical decision on unfounded assumptions like 'faster = better'?
-
Also, I'm willing to bet there is little to no meaningful correlation between speed and success for a given position. Obviously if a guy runs a 5 second 40, he's not going to cut it as a receiver, but when you're in the 'acceptable' range of under say 4.6, it's just a box that's been ticked. Same with height, weight, strength etc.
Does anyone honestly think that a bunch of harvard educated lawyers are basing any analytical decision on unfounded assumptions like 'faster = better'?
Also, I'm willing to bet there is little to no meaningful correlation between speed and success for a given position. Obviously if a guy runs a 5 second 40, he's not going to cut it as a receiver, but when you're in the 'acceptable' range of under say 4.6, it's just a box that's been ticked. Same with height, weight, strength etc.
Does anyone honestly think that a bunch of harvard educated lawyers are basing any analytical decision on unfounded assumptions like 'faster = better'?
Hmmmm, wonder where "hands" fits into the WR equation or in the Browns's case, doesn't fit.
-
The common misconception is that analytics means a bunch of nerds crunching numbers. That's not the case. There is a such thing as qualitative analytics and it's just as important as quantitative.Been doing some more reading on the pros and cons of this whole analytics, money ball stuff. It does seem that all the stats and info paints a great picture of the past. As far as predicting future performance...not so good. I was looking at different articles about the book and stayed away from the film. It's interesting but when you come down to it, picking talent is more about instinct and heart. Sure, speed matters but brains, instincts and heart can be difficult to assign a number to.
It's more than saying "this guy has 4.5 speed and 16 sacks, which puts him in the 99th percentile". It's about creating a standard for what's important to building a successful team rather than your flavor of the week GM going "meeeeeeh, I like this guy". That's how you end up in our position, with a smorgasbord of differing players from different systems picked by different GM's.
A whole lot is written about how a good ballplayer doesn't have to "look" like a player, but that's baseball and I can agree with that...to a point. I think we need some addition through addition or subtraction. Hue may be a good coach but his talent evaluation seems suspect. Let him focus on his job and add the end all talent guy. Spielman, Kosar, Dixon or somebody that knows firsthand what a real football player is. Analytics whether qualitative or quantitative has holes in it bigger than Rosie.The common misconception is that analytics means a bunch of nerds crunching numbers. That's not the case. There is a such thing as qualitative analytics and it's just as important as quantitative.
It's more than saying "this guy has 4.5 speed and 16 sacks, which puts him in the 99th percentile". It's about creating a standard for what's important to building a successful team rather than your flavor of the week GM going "meeeeeeh, I like this guy". That's how you end up in our position, with a smorgasbord of differing players from different systems picked by different GM's.
-
A whole lot is written about how a good ballplayer doesn't have to "look" like a player, but that's baseball and I can agree with that...to a point. I think we need some addition through addition or subtraction. Hue may be a good coach but his talent evaluation seems suspect. Let him focus on his job and add the end all talent guy. Spielman, Kosar, Dixon or somebody that knows firsthand what a real football player is. Analytics whether qualitative or quantitative has holes in it bigger than Rosie.The common misconception is that analytics means a bunch of nerds crunching numbers. That's not the case. There is a such thing as qualitative analytics and it's just as important as quantitative.
It's more than saying "this guy has 4.5 speed and 16 sacks, which puts him in the 99th percentile". It's about creating a standard for what's important to building a successful team rather than your flavor of the week GM going "meeeeeeh, I like this guy". That's how you end up in our position, with a smorgasbord of differing players from different systems picked by different GM's.
A whole lot is written about how a good ballplayer doesn't have to "look" like a player, but that's baseball and I can agree with that...to a point. I think we need some addition through addition or subtraction. Hue may be a good coach but his talent evaluation seems suspect. Let him focus on his job and add the end all talent guy. Spielman, Kosar, Dixon or somebody that knows firsthand what a real football player is. Analytics whether qualitative or quantitative has holes in it bigger than Rosie.
I'd say that analytics has smaller of a hole in it than any one random person's biased talent evaluation, however.
Berry was a talent evaluator for the Colts since 2012, a team that has been notoriously against "analytics". (What a dumb fucking sentence)
The scouting team scouts the players and provide reports, Berry digests the information and figures out what pieces may be needed where and who would be the best fit, Sashi and Depo compare that information with their blueprint and determine how to maximize our return, and then we draft.
I think the system works just fine. I believe Coleman, Pryor, Collins, Ogbah, Nassib and Kessler are great acquisitions. Do you think they're worse than what our previous regimes put together?
-
I'm not for scrapping the whole thing at all. Add a real football guy to the mix. It takes a sniper to get a sniper to put it in simple terms.
-
We have "real football guys"... the whole "have to have played the game" thing is a myth. Yes, some successful GMs are former players of note, but most are not.
The Browns approach is not "Analytics >> Scouting"... or over scouting... or however you want to state it.
Our approach is "Analytics + Scouting Consensus" which does not say anything about relative weighting. It only requires agreement.
I can easily see as many memos flowing from Scouting to Analytics them to quantify "this player" as I can see flowing from Analytics to Scouting to put their eyes on "that player".
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login