Page 59 of 239 FirstFirst ... 5758596061 ... LastLast
Results 697 to 708 of 2868
  1. #697

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I think that's completely false.

    It is difficult to do any comprehensive look at plays where any specific player isn't targeted. No matter who you're talking about, that's hundreds of plays. That's why I didn't do it; a preposterous workload. I grabbed gifs of only the targets from last year, because Boykin got so few targets: I thought I could handle 22+ plays. Even then it was a lot of work.

    But of course it's not pointless. How else do you look at a WR's route-running – of course you have to look at plays where he isn't targeted, if you can. If his route-running is so shitty that he's never getting open, and that's why the QB never throw to him; you can't know that without looking at those plays.
    They need context though if you are going to use them. I have witnessed posters using videos and screen grabs of him getting open but the CB has his eyes on Lamar the entire time and you can see them pulling up or stop worrying about Boykin because they see the ball isn’t going to him.

    We can use plays when Lamar doesn’t target him, but they don’t tell the entire story.





  2. #698
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    11,805
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I think that's completely false.

    It is difficult to do any comprehensive look at plays where any specific player isn't targeted. No matter who you're talking about, that's hundreds of plays. That's why I didn't do it; a preposterous workload. I grabbed gifs of only the targets from last year, because Boykin got so few targets: I thought I could handle 22+ plays. Even then it was a lot of work.

    But of course it's not pointless. How else do you look at a WR's route-running – of course you have to look at plays where he isn't targeted, if you can. If his route-running is so shitty that he's never getting open, and that's why the QB never throw to him; you can't know that without looking at those plays.
    Its pointless depending on your goal. If you’re trying to make an objective assessment they’re a crucial part of the puzzle. But if you’re not interested in that then naturally it’s pointless. I feel confident and proud of the efforts made in this thread.





  3. #699

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    Which stats are those? Is it the one where Boykin led all Ravens pass-catchers in yards-per-attempt last season?
    Touting any stat beyond his 13 total receptions seems meaningless to me. (Since the issue I have is consistent production; his catches per target ranked 348th)

    If you point to his 15.1 yard average as leading the Ravens, you should also mention it put him at 68th in the league.

    This year is catch percentage is tracking a tick worse than last year. His average yards per catch this year has fallen by 25%, which means he's fallen from 68th to the 161st in that category.

    I think it's time we stop cherry picking "evidence" that he's been better than he really has been, and as fans, all agree we'd love to see him become what we want him to be in our dreams.





  4. #700
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by QtR Nevermore View Post
    ( I bet someone, if they were so inclined, could find examples of plays where he was open but not targeted like the Boykin examples in this thread.)
    Are there any examples of plays where Boykin was open but not targeted in this thread?

    I started it with all of Boykin's targets from last year, and only his targets. I know Ed & OC have followed up with several gifs of targets from this season: first downs on the sidleine, the incomplete at the goal line, the INT at Washington, etc. But I don't remember there being a lot of non-targets in this thread. Maybe the Andrews TD?


    Quote Originally Posted by QtR Nevermore View Post
    That play where Moore lost the sidelines seemed to mark his death knell as a receiver.
    Worse for me was the bomb that Moore failed to catch in the end zone in KC in 2018. Would have won the game. Lamar made a great play to elude a pass rusher and put it right on Moore's hands way downfield. Moore failed to win the ball (he had a defender with him).





  5. #701

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I think that's completely false.

    It is difficult to do any comprehensive look at plays where any specific player isn't targeted. No matter who you're talking about, that's hundreds of plays. That's why I didn't do it; a preposterous workload. I grabbed gifs of only the targets from last year, because Boykin got so few targets: I thought I could handle 22+ plays. Even then it was a lot of work.

    But of course it's not pointless. How else do you look at a WR's route-running – of course you have to look at plays where he isn't targeted, if you can. If his route-running is so shitty that he's never getting open, and that's why the QB never throw to him; you can't know that without looking at those plays.
    It is completely pointless to attempt to measure productivity when the player isn't even involved in the play. It's is an attempt to prove a point based on a hypothetical. It is a classic example of "if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle."

    It's easy to think you are seeing a good route when you don't take into account how the defender is reacting to what is actually happening on the field. Has the QB already signaled he's going elsewhere with the ball, and the defender has slacked off or shaded inside, etc?

    On the play against the Eagles, I might be able to see Miles running open downfield, and think, look at him beating the defender, and never realize that the actual route should have been an out.

    Not to mention we're not even seeing whether he would have hauled-in the hypothetical throw.

    So yeah, it is COMPLETELY pointless to evaluate his receiving skills when the ball is not being thrown to a receiver.





  6. #702
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    Touting any stat beyond ...
    I can't have a civil conversation with you AND a snarky shitfest with Capt Silver at the same time. The two modes don't work together. He mindlessly bloviated about "stats" and my post was calling him on it. Please don't take any of my comments in reply to his harassing & trolling posts, as part of the reasonable discussion you're trying to have.

    Actually, the most productive thing would probably be for me to add him to my ignore list, so the confusion doesn't arise. I'll go do that now.





  7. #703

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I can't have a civil conversation with you AND a snarky shitfest with Capt Silver at the same time. The two modes don't work together. He mindlessly bloviated about "stats" and my post was calling him on it. Please don't take any of my comments in reply to his harassing & trolling posts, as part of the reasonable discussion you're trying to have.

    Actually, the most productive thing would probably be for me to add him to my ignore list, so the confusion doesn't arise. I'll go do that now.
    Okay, gotcha. I tend to be poster agnostic and just react to every post as if it is being offered to everyone equally. So I took the bait. As you were. You snarky m-effer.





  8. #704

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by QtR Nevermore View Post
    The difference is that we'd seen Moore make a few spectacular catches and tough plays so fans were calling for him to get a shot. I don't think Boykin has even done that. Most of the excitment for Boykin seems to come from his combine rather than his play on the field.
    The Boykin dislike is understandable, but I don't get these extreme takes. Boykin has made great plays.
    Off the top of my head, there was beating the coverage deep early against Seattle only to be underthrown. He still slowed down to let the ball come to him, turned, had a defender running at him full sprint, and made the catch with the contact. There's also the pass down the lefr sideline from RG3 where he had to make a leaping backwards catch and still made the catch.

    Him running 2 bad routes and barely being target is not a reason to negate anything he's already done





  9. #705

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by purple_city39 View Post
    The Boykin dislike is understandable, but I don't get these extreme takes. Boykin has made great plays.
    Off the top of my head, there was beating the coverage deep early against Seattle only to be underthrown. He still slowed down to let the ball come to him, turned, had a defender running at him full sprint, and made the catch with the contact. There's also the pass down the lefr sideline from RG3 where he had to make a leaping backwards catch and still made the catch.

    Him running 2 bad routes and barely being target is not a reason to negate anything he's already done
    I'm not intending to be an extreme Boykin hater but those couple of nice efforts are more than outweighed by his poor plays on the ball in my mind.

    I suppose I just think that if the QB can't trust the receiver to know what he's doing and to be where he's supposed to be than he isn't going to target him. We can only play 11 and, if one WR is going to be an afterthought at best in the passing game, it's pointless having him out there.

    I don't think they should give up on Boykin but I wouldn't mind a mystery IR to let him work on his game and to let the Ravens bring in or promote someone who might make more of a contribution.





  10. #706
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    It is completely pointless to attempt to measure productivity when the player isn't even involved in the play. It's is an attempt to prove a point based on a hypothetical. It is a classic example of "if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle."

    It's easy to think you are seeing a good route when you don't take into account how the defender is reacting to what is actually happening on the field. Has the QB already signaled he's going elsewhere with the ball, and the defender has slacked off or shaded inside, etc?

    On the play against the Eagles, I might be able to see Miles running open downfield, and think, look at him beating the defender, and never realize that the actual route should have been an out.
    Only part of what you said is right. This part:

    It's easy to think you are seeing a good route when you don't take into account how the defender is reacting to what is actually happening on the field. Has the QB already signaled he's going elsewhere with the ball, and the defender has slacked off or shaded inside, etc?

    Yes: if you isolate on a receiver you could think you see him "beating" a DB. But looking at the whole play would show that the DB peeled off when the throw went somewhere else. Or you think you see a receiver "open", but you look at the whole play and see that the defense rushed 9 and the QB is buried under a pile of bodies. So I agree that you can't be sure what you're looking at if you isolate on a receiver in a play.

    But coaches & scouts evaluate route-running all the time on college prospects coming into the draft. They don't use only the plays where the receiver is targeted: they use all the snaps they can get.

    How does the receiver handle press? Does he have a variety of releases off the line? Waldman posts stuff about receivers using a rocker step or jab step or 2- & 3-step combinations to release off of press. How well does the receiver run his stem? Does he eat up the cushion quickly? Does he take the corner's back, or force him to misstep? Does he stack the corner? Does he use subtle moves at the top of his stem to create space? Does the receiver sink his hips on his breaks? Does he read the zone well and find the soft spot?

    It's absurd to say that there's nothing to be gained from looking at plays where a receiver is not targeted. Receivers have more to evaluate without the ball than any other offensive (skill) position does. They have to do (much) more work to put themselves in position to have a chance at the ball, than RBs or QBs do. Their without-the-ball skills are a huge component of their game.

    Take the INT in Washington: forget Boykin, we would grade Andrews very well on the play. Here's an excerpt from Mark Bullock's write-up of the play in The Athletic from Oct 7:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Bullock in The Athletic
    On second-and-10, the Ravens call for a mirror route concept, with the inside receivers running deep stick routes while the outside receivers run comebacks. Washington dials up a blitz, sending Pierre-Louis and slot corner Jimmy Moreland off the right side.

    Jackson looks to his right and appears to spot the blitz coming. He knows with two coming to the right, the running back can only pick up one, so he has to account for the other by getting the ball out or making him miss. ...

    Andrews recognized the blitz and did an excellent job adjusting his route to break off early and make himself available to Jackson. Washington didn’t have another defender in the area and Andrews [positioned himself to] easily pick up significant yards after the catch had Jackson worked that way.
    Do you think the offensive coaches aren't grading Andrews on that rep, because they think it's pointless to grade a receiver on plays where the pass doesn't go to him? I don't. I think they're grading him – and I think he gets a good grade on the play. Well: a check, at least.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    Not to mention we're not even seeing whether he would have hauled-in the hypothetical throw.

    So yeah, it is COMPLETELY pointless to evaluate his receiving skills when the ball is not being thrown to a receiver.
    Does "receiving skills" refer to catching skills, or to the skills required of a receiver?

    I agree that we can't evaluate a player's catching skills if the ball doesn't do to him. Duh, obviously. No one here is trying to do that.
    (And for that matter I don't see any gifs of non-targets in this thread. Or not more than one or two, anyway: something someone saw in passing.)

    But the way you phrased it makes it sounds like there are no such things as route-running skills etc. That's obviously wrong.





  11. #707
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    You snarky m-effer.


    That's me!





  12. #708

    Re: A closer look at Miles Boykin

    Let me explain it this way.

    We have all seen where someone posts a highlight reel of a player in college to make a point about how great he is. People will quickly object by saying anyone can be made to look great on a highlight tape.

    Now here we are with Boykin, and we've taken this mindset even further. It's not just that we are cherry picking a handful of nice plays. We're also cherry picking pieces of plays where he is not even involved in order to add to his resume and project what kind of production we should soon expect to see. I think it's silly.

    If the debate was whether he had skills, maybe I'd listen to this defense of his talent. But that's not what we are debating.

    The question is whether Boykin is going to develop into a consistent threat as a receiver and secure the #2 WR role.

    Showing me that he can run a go route and get separation on a play when the ball is thrown to the other side of the field does nothing to sway my opinion on whether he is a consistent receiver. He isn't. That's just a fact.

    Can he be? Maybe. I've said maybe all along, while maintaining healthy skepticism.

    But I am not going to consider isolated off-the-ball clips in evaluating his production, which has been limited, and 50/50 on a team where the QB was 70/30 throwing to everyone else.

    That analysis is akin to pulling out his combine tape. Which is fine, as I said, if the debate is can, rather than will.

    I will happily stipulate that he is capable of doing the sort of things that the combine tests for. But none of it is a predictor of what he will do in the future when the ball is in the air and he needs to be in the right spot at the right time in the right position to make a catch.

    I stipulate that he is a legitimate NFL receiver prospect with exciting athletic potential. A prospect who has yet to blossom into a legitimate NFL receiver.

    Lots of receivers have passed through Baltimore with tons of potential. As Brian Billick used to say, "son, your potential is going to get me fired."





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->