PDA

View Full Version : This guy think Craphonso Thorpe will be the second WR


Ninjaman
08-03-2005, 08:43 PM
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ramblings.php?p=2725&cat=4

Kansas City Chiefs

O/U: 9.5
2004 record: 7-9
2005 Home Opponents: NYJ, PHI, WAS, OAK, NE, DEN, SD, CIN
2005 Away Opponents: OAK, DEN, MIA, SD, BUF, HOU, DAL, NYG

Vivek: That half game in the line is a blessing for me and is the clincher for the pick. Gunther Cunningham burned me last year and despite the additions of Derrick Johnson, Patrick Surtain, and Kendrell Bell, this defense still will not put a lot of pressure on opposing quarterbacks and will not plug the gaps in the line. This team was shutout in the sack category four times last season, and recorded only one sack in another three games – the 40 overall sacks for the year is a misleading statistic.

The lack of burners to go downfield will allow defenses to shorten the field and hone in on Priest Holmes and Tony Gonzalez. Sammie Parker and Eddie Kennison do not make up a very imposing 1-2 combo at the wire receiver spots. They need to hope that FredEx does more than create over-the-top sound bytes for the sports talk programs. UNDER.

Al: I have to disagree with you on this one, Viv. This team should have won at least nine games last year. Kansas City finished with two fewer wins than their points scored and points allowed would indicate they should have. When a team underperforms its Pythagorean record by that much, it tends to bounce upwards the next season. When you look at 16-game seasons since the schedule was lengthened in 1978 (so, not counting 1982 and 1987), teams that have underperformed their Pythagorean record by at least two games in one year have seen their win totals increase by an average of 1.78 wins the next season.

There’s no reason this over/under line should be a half game higher than San Diego’s, but with Kansas City’s improved defense, ten wins is very realistic. If they could add a healthy Ty Law, the Chiefs would move from one of the worst secondaries in the league to possibly the best in their division. The offensive line is still one of the best in football. Priest Holmes will show signs of aging, but with Larry Johnson, Tony Richardson and Robert Holcombe, the Chiefs have one of the deepest backfields in the league. Gonzo and Eddie Kennison are good for about 1000 yards apiece. Fourth round pick Craphonso Thorpe should develop into Kansas City’s number two receiver by midseason, and secure his place in the pantheon of amazing first names. Craphonso? How can you do that to a child? OVER.

jiveturkey
08-03-2005, 08:44 PM
That would make him a football outsider for real.

philfree
08-03-2005, 09:03 PM
The verdict is still out on Parker but to say a guy that runs a 4.3 40 isn't a burner is stupid. What an idiot!

PhilFree:arrow:

duncan_idaho
08-03-2005, 09:08 PM
This moron has played too much Madden, I think... he also discounts the fact that KC has NEVER had a real downfield threat since Saunders/Green/Priest got here, and what's the result? Oh yeah, the best offense in football over the past three seasons. That's right.

It amazes me how many people place so much emphasis on the deep pass on receivers and pure speed.

The line still has to give the QB time to release the ball, and he has to make an accurate throw.

chefsos
08-03-2005, 09:15 PM
When you look at 16-game seasons since the schedule was lengthened in 1978 (so, not counting 1982 and 1987), teams that have underperformed their Pythagorean record by at least two games in one year have seen their win totals increase by an average of 1.78 wins the next season.

Yippeee!! We're going to win 8.78 games. :shake:

beer bacon
08-03-2005, 09:25 PM
This moron has played too much Madden, I think... he also discounts the fact that KC has NEVER had a real downfield threat since Saunders/Green/Priest got here, and what's the result? Oh yeah, the best offense in football over the past three seasons. That's right.

It amazes me how many people place so much emphasis on the deep pass on receivers and pure speed.

The line still has to give the QB time to release the ball, and he has to make an accurate throw.


I disagree about us not having a downfield threat. Sure, we don't have a Randy Moss, but who does? Kennison is definately a downfield threat. Here are some statistics. Kennison was 7th in the league last season in ypc at 17.5. Of the top 15 players in ypc last season he had the most yards at 1086.

Additionally, we have WON several games the last few seasons on long receptions for TDs by him. The two that come to mind are the Green Bay game in 2003 and the last season's first Raiders game.

People also forget that Kennison missed two games last season. He would have most likely had 1200+ yards last year if not for his injuries. He had a very good year, and he was a good deep threat.

Tribal Warfare
08-03-2005, 09:47 PM
opinions are like assholes everyone has one, and evidently some how this analysis was published

tiptap
08-03-2005, 10:33 PM
The FOOTBALLOUTSIDERS have been applying statistical analysis of pro football for 2 years now. This is the site that Tuesday Morning QB moved to for a short time after messing up at ESPN and before NFL.com line. Last year was their first year for predicting against the Vegas line. This year you've gotten the opinion of TWO guys in your quote. One got burned last year thinking KC would go over the Vegas line and so this year doesn't think KC will make the 9.5 win over/under line. The second contributor thinks from the Pythagorean rule, involving points scored vs points given up (quite good in correlating with win lost over several sports) that KC will bounce back to win at least 10 games (the same thing was said about Tampa Bay whose Pythagorean rule a year after SB inidcated better play than their record but they didn't bounce back). And since they consistently rant about theirr own misses in predictions, they will occasionally pick to focus on those intersting angles like Carphonso' name rather than really choosing who might be playing.

SoCalBronco
08-03-2005, 11:07 PM
Its true he might. Thorpe is the best WR prospect on the roster. When he is healthy, he is absolutely correct in stating that he is a first round player. Go watch any 2003 game outside of the Miami games. Just needs to get fully healthy and get over that broken leg completely.

Pants
08-03-2005, 11:10 PM
Its true he might. Thorpe is the best WR prospect on the roster. When he is healthy, he is absolutely correct in stating that he is a first round player. Go watch any 2003 game outside of the Miami games. Just needs to get fully healthy and get over that broken leg completely.

I'm going to go ahead and say that Parker is the best prospect right now. Not only is he f*cking fast, he has awesome hands and doesn't shit his pants when playing with the big boys.

Count Zarth
08-03-2005, 11:11 PM
We have two burners. This guy is an idiot.

Pants
08-03-2005, 11:13 PM
We have two burners. This guy is an idiot.

We have 3: Kennison, Thorpe, Smith and Hall. Yeah, make that 4.

Reaper16
08-04-2005, 12:17 AM
Its true he might. Thorpe is the best WR prospect on the roster. When he is healthy, he is absolutely correct in stating that he is a first round player. Go watch any 2003 game outside of the Miami games. Just needs to get fully healthy and get over that broken leg completely.

I'm going to agree with this.

Count Zarth
08-04-2005, 12:23 AM
We have 3: Kennison, Thorpe, Smith and Hall. Yeah, make that 4.

OK, yeah, but no one is really scared of Dante Hall down the field, and Thorpe is an unknown.

Pants
08-04-2005, 12:25 AM
OK, yeah, but no one is really scared of Dante Hall down the field, and Thorpe is an unknown.

We were discussing burners. But, yes, it's obvious that Thorpe is a much better prospect than Hall. Hall isn't even a prospect. I'm still saying Parker all the way, and I meant to say Parker instead of Smith there.

Count Zarth
08-04-2005, 12:47 AM
We were discussing burners. But, yes, it's obvious that Thorpe is a much better prospect than Hall. Hall isn't even a prospect. I'm still saying Parker all the way, and I meant to say Parker instead of Smith there.

Totally.

Tuckdaddy
08-04-2005, 12:49 AM
He will not be a second this season. It will be Mitchell, Bo or Parker. I'm guessing Mitchell as 2 and Parker as 3.

the Talking Can
08-04-2005, 12:59 AM
who the **** is Al?

go bowe
08-04-2005, 01:14 AM
We have 3: Kennison, Thorpe, Smith and Hall. Yeah, make that 4.no, it's 5...

bo is fast...

that's why he's so effective at the gunner spot on kick coverage teams...

Pants
08-04-2005, 01:15 AM
no, it's 5...

bo is fast...

that's why he's so effective at the gunner spot on kick coverage teams...

Yeah, you're right. Isn't Smith pretty fast as well?

keg in kc
08-04-2005, 01:16 AM
Bo was fast, once he got up to speed.

What Bo is now, however, remains to be seen.

StcChief
08-04-2005, 07:09 AM
Kennison
Parker
Thorpe ?
Mitchell
Bo

All fast enough to burn the D deep. or hit seam and burn em.

Just look at their number, 40 times.

ct
08-04-2005, 07:19 AM
The FOOTBALLOUTSIDERS have been applying statistical analysis of pro football for 2 years now. This is the site that Tuesday Morning QB moved to for a short time after messing up at ESPN and before NFL.com line. Last year was their first year for predicting against the Vegas line. This year you've gotten the opinion of TWO guys in your quote. One got burned last year thinking KC would go over the Vegas line and so this year doesn't think KC will make the 9.5 win over/under line. The second contributor thinks from the Pythagorean rule, involving points scored vs points given up (quite good in correlating with win lost over several sports) that KC will bounce back to win at least 10 games (the same thing was said about Tampa Bay whose Pythagorean rule a year after SB inidcated better play than their record but they didn't bounce back). And since they consistently rant about theirr own misses in predictions, they will occasionally pick to focus on those intersting angles like Carphonso' name rather than really choosing who might be playing.

Explain please...I'm a math geek(former anyway, but I haven't forgotten everything), so how about a formula?

Uatu
08-04-2005, 07:25 AM
What did we have last year, 50 plays of 20 or more yards? I think we were best in the league for 2 years running in that category. That might lead one to believe that the 'lack of a deep threat' either is false or isn't an issue.

ISUJeff
08-04-2005, 08:37 AM
Still impressed with this website overall, though, and I found
a great example why,

Follow the link for "Archives - Strategy Minicamp"
Then check out the write up on the I-Formation.
About 5 paragraphs down, after the heading "The Playbook",
the last sentence of that paragraph,

“Iso” is short for isolation, meaning the fullback is leading the running back through the hole and engaging the middle linebacker in an isolation, one-on-one block. (You know, the kind of block where the TV audience hears Ray Lewis complain that he was double-teamed.)

It was great to hear someone outside of KC acknowledge how
Ray Lewis was searching for excuses as Richardson was single handedly
owning him, an then even use it as an example of how an Iso should be
run.

htismaqe
08-04-2005, 08:40 AM
Still impressed with this website overall, though, and I found
a great example why,

Follow the link for "Archives - Strategy Minicamp"
Then check out the write up on the I-Formation.
About 5 paragraphs down, after the heading "The Playbook",
the last sentence of that paragraph,

“Iso” is short for isolation, meaning the fullback is leading the running back through the hole and engaging the middle linebacker in an isolation, one-on-one block. (You know, the kind of block where the TV audience hears Ray Lewis complain that he was double-teamed.)

It was great to hear someone outside of KC acknowledge how
Ray Lewis was searching for excuses as Richardson was single handedly
owning him, an then even use it as an example of how an Iso should be
run.

ROFL

morphius
08-04-2005, 08:41 AM
Kennison
Parker
Thorpe ?
Mitchell
Bo

All fast enough to burn the D deep. or hit seam and burn em.

Just look at their number, 40 times.
Yeah, that line to me really meant to me that the guy was probably talking completely out of his ass. Wasn't Kennison NFL's fastest man a few years back? Parker is even faster then he is. Yeah, this guy is pure genius.