Jump to content

Revisiting some 2006 draft scouting profiles of Jamaal Anderson...why does it "suprise" so many he went sackless?


gazoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

ukfalc (3/26/2008)
Good thread. Jamaal is exactly as advertised - a raw prospect with huge potential upside.

Every rookie deserves to get at least 3 years to develop and establish himself at this level. The way that Roddy was being treated last year and that Jamaal is being treated by some people this year, is disgraceful.

The problem a lot of us have with Anderson is that he's not shown any sign of that upside. He's not shown speed or power or anything that would make you think he has potential. We've seen the rawness. We've seen the sloppy technique, the lack of closing speed, going wide trying to get around the line, the lack of power. We're still waiting to see a speck of potential. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Shanny (3/26/2008)
This guy is another Kalimba Edwards which means a wasted draft pick.

Because you're obviously qualified to predict which picks will pan out and which ones will not.

So no one else can have an opinion only you??? Pick a player your not happy with and see what happens? Hit the road if your dissappointed with other peoples thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanny (3/26/2008)
This guy is another Kalimba Edwards which means a wasted draft pick.

Because you're obviously qualified to predict which picks will pan out and which ones will not.

How qualified are you????? about the same as all of us not at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ukfalc (3/26/2008)
The way that Roddy was being treated last year and that Jamaal is being treated by some people this year, is disgraceful.

I agree 100%...its as if its done with malicious intent to players on a team you call yourself a fan of.

There is no better example than Roddy White, a WR that comes into the NFL raw and from a small school, and the fans were absolutely ruthless on threads I was making about other late 1st round WRs  that didn't blossom until year 3 such as Eric Moulds  at pick #24.

The fans that were bashing Roddy and calling him a bustr could of cared a less about the facts. I've no doubt it's some of the same "fans" calling Anderson a bust and claimig he was a wasted pick.

None of us know Andersons fate at this point. Yes, it would have been nice to see a few sacks, yes it is a concern, but I also can't compare him to others that playted DE mich longer than him before getting to the NFL...that would be ignorant.

Time will tell with Anderson. He clearly it the rookie wall late last year after wearig down from starting all year and not using proper form. You can resrve energy by using proper techinique, and the opposite takes place when you don't. It makes perfect sense that he dodn;t "improve" the last 6 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

capologist (3/26/2008)
Not ready to call him a bust yet but being raw and not registering a single sack is a bit disturbing. Hopefully he'll break out this year and make tremendous strides but if he doesn't then I'd be worried...

I agree that if we don't see some serious improvement in his play from last year  it is going to be very concerning to me as well.  I have questions at this point, don;t get me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

birdweiserrr (3/23/2008)
Well he deserves another year to show improvement before I start complaining about him. I think he's gonna be just fine though.

I also wasn't expecting a whole lot. The fact that he started all 16 games and played good against the run precludes him from being a bust. If he does little or nothing this year, then the "bust" term will definitely start to creep in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Falcon Ace (3/27/2008)
David Ethan (3/26/2008)
you don't spend a top 10 pick on a peoject

He kinda underachieved last year, but his potential is that of a top DE in this league.

You have to look at the risk compared to the potential reward and the liklihood of that reward.

In Anderson's case the risk is very, very, very, very, very high and always has been. He was by far the biggest risk in the top 10. His skills are so primative and his resume so brief that there has always been a big chance he'd bust.

The potential reward on Anderson is great. He's got some things you can't teach. He could become a top notch DE. However the odds of this have always been remote. Even the most elite prospects frequently fail to become top DEs. Anderson has always had a lot more hurdles to clear than most of your elite DE prospects. It's always been more likely that he would fail to master all the things he'd need to reach his potential.

You can afford  to take that risk with a late pick and if you don't have a lot of needs. With a top 10 pick you have to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to look at the risk compared to the potential reward and the liklihood of that reward.

In Anderson's case the risk is very, very, very, very, very high and always has been. He was by far the biggest risk in the top 10. His skills are so primative and his resume so brief that there has always been a big chance he'd bust.

The potential reward on Anderson is great. He's got some things you can't teach. He could become a top notch DE. However the odds of this have always been remote. Even the most elite prospects frequently fail to become top DEs. Anderson has always had a lot more hurdles to clear than most of your elite DE prospects. It's always been more likely that he would fail to master all the things he'd need to reach his potential.

You can afford  to take that risk with a late pick and if you don't have a lot of needs. With a top 10 pick you have to pass.

 

I think I agree with you when it comes to top 10 picks.  The old addage about giving a player 3 years to produce no longer applies to guys drafted in the top 10 because of the money they make.

When someone is drafted in the top 10 there is a very good chance he will be one of if not THE highest paid player or the team AND within the top 5-10 highest paid for their position.  You CANNOT pay a guy that much and not have him produce.

Let's look at Jamaal and Chauncey Davis...  This is not about Jamaal being a bust but his production vs his cost...  What was the difference between the production of Davis and Anderson last year?  Not much.  What was the difference in price?

Jamaal - $3,805,000

Chauncey - $439,200

And that's JUST for 2007..

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/footbal...amp;player=3715

The point is that players selected in the top 10 now cost soooo much that they need to produce almost immediatley...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sun Tzu 7 (3/27/2008)

You have to look at the risk compared to the potential reward and the liklihood of that reward.

In Anderson's case the risk is very, very, very, very, very high and always has been. He was by far the biggest risk in the top 10. His skills are so primative and his resume so brief that there has always been a big chance he'd bust.

The potential reward on Anderson is great. He's got some things you can't teach. He could become a top notch DE. However the odds of this have always been remote. Even the most elite prospects frequently fail to become top DEs. Anderson has always had a lot more hurdles to clear than most of your elite DE prospects. It's always been more likely that he would fail to master all the things he'd need to reach his potential.

You can afford  to take that risk with a late pick and if you don't have a lot of needs. With a top 10 pick you have to pass.

 

I think I agree with you when it comes to top 10 picks.  The old addage about giving a player 3 years to produce no longer applies to guys drafted in the top 10 because of the money they make.

When someone is drafted in the top 10 there is a very good chance he will be one of if not THE highest paid player or the team AND within the top 5-10 highest paid for their position.  You CANNOT pay a guy that much and not have him produce.

Let's look at Jamaal and Chauncey Davis...  This is not about Jamaal being a bust but his production vs his cost...  What was the difference between the production of Davis and Anderson last year?  Not much.  What was the difference in price?

Jamaal - $3,805,000

Chauncey - $439,200

And that's JUST for 2007..

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/footbal...amp;player=3715

The point is that players selected in the top 10 now cost soooo much that they need to produce almost immediatley...

Immediate impact? Yes, Jamaal failed. Long term potential? That is where it matters most.

I would rather have a guy not produce well for the first two or so years and then explode come year 3 or 4 over a guy that will do pretty well right off the bat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...