Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut
Which was my point all along, there is a context to the stats and if you look only at the stats you miss the evaluation.
Again were back to a looking at the stats.
If the stats were the sum of his ability then according to your view it would be long odds for Locker to improve his comp%.
When you repeatedly avoid the question about how many Washington games you've watched leads me to believe that you haven't seen Locker play very often.
If stats were excluded from the discussion and we just look at Locker as a prospect i bet you would have a different opinion of him; especially his accuracy.
HTTR!
|
I don't think we can just ignore what Locker's statistics say just because they don't always match up with the film. It's hard to make any completely conclusive statements based on only statistics, but I would argue that "Jake Locker is not worthy of the 10th overall selection" is one of those statements.
That's to say nothing of where his value might actually lie, I was just trying to point out that even though you might sometimes have to talk about stats, I can isolate a single statistic from the rest of the picture and show how rare it is for someone who can't complete passes to be successful. Rare does not equal impossible: Doug Williams had multiple valuable years where he was at the bottom of the league in comp %. That's not to avoid context, but I don't believe you can view that point as valueless and still remain intellectually honest.
If a GREAT team were to take a flyer on Jake Locker and then tear him down and try to rebuild his mechanics, maybe you get a different player entirely. But even in such a hypothetical, you're already given the benefit of a strong organizations, and with the exception of maybe the 2009 Packers, strong organizations don't pick in the top ten unless they pick up a pick from a lesser organization.