http://www.outsports.com/2015/4/30/8265615/shane-ray-michael-sam-draft

I've been saying this in general about the Missouri linemen in the NFL NOT named Michael Sam. Seem everybody's fucks with his teammates, but don't fuck with him, mo homo.

Michael Sam was good enough to be on someone's team. Period. He was as good at Mizzou as Shane. That being said, I root for all Tigers, so I'm happy that Shane got drafted. Just knew he'd get down to Dallas at the end of the first, but Denver had other plans.

smelled an NFL roster. He didn't even get a legit shot in real game action. Everybody pointed to his measureables as to why he *wouldn't* succeed in the NFL, but they present it as if he *didn't* succeed in the NFL.

To see his a Ray's measureables side by side like that, smh it's pretty blatant. I wish someone would take a chance on him. If he's a bust then let me be a bust the old fashion way, by flaming out ON the field.

So you can't say that dude wasn't performing

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Granted, a lot of starters don't play a lot of minutes.

And sure, there was legit D Line talent on that Rams squad.

But NOBODY can give dude a shot? At all? Article definitely lays it all out there. The narrative has certainly been "go try to improve your game in Canada, they be on that shit up there". And it's like improve on what? He never got a shot here.

is telling about the league's "stance" on this, which is sad because the fans of the nfl did not care at all, it was not nearly the issue the media tried to make it out to be


@rob_starrk

but this is a terrible comparison. Ray left school early (younger) and significantly outperformed Sam. his athletic measurables are better in every category not mentioned in that piece-including the ones that matter much more for DE/OLB (cone drill and 20 yard) and all of the counting stats forget to mention that Ray equaled or bested Sam's numbers in 3 seasons compared to 4 and his final season before leaving leaves Sam's in the dust--nearly 20 more tackles, 3 more sacks, and 3 more TFL.

terrible comparison.

-----------
Its 2014...there are computers in glasses and people stunt after hitting the ball far. Get over it. -Cenario
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious

to me this article says Ray is slightly more physically impressive than Sam, and they both have had production on the field.

The difference is EVEN if one guy has those 20 extra tackles, tackles for loss, and sacks, one person is a 1st round talent that slid because of an off the field issue. The other guy had no off the field issue, yet in coming out slid all the way to the 7th Round.

If I give merit to the production disparity on the field, at MOST Sam should slide to the 2nd or 3rd round. But he almost went undrafted, as an SEC Defensive Player of the Year. There's no way he shouldn't at least be smelling an NFL roster.

they had the same total number of tackles! except it took one guy 25% less time to get there.

they have the same 40 yard dash! except they don't have similar agility scores...

they were both SEC DPOY! except one guy was 23 and the other was 20...

i could keep going. it's shitty statistical comparison. roughly as bad as exponent running regressions with an N of 22. it would fail a 101 class.

-----------
Its 2014...there are computers in glasses and people stunt after hitting the ball far. Get over it. -Cenario
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious

I think most would agree that Ray is CLEARLY the better prospect.

However, though the better prospect, he isn't dominating the difference to the extent to where he is a first round pick and therefore Sam doesn't even belong in the league.

the article is about how it is MORE telling that Sam's "off the field issue" is harder to deal with than Ray's. They can handle weed, but can't handle homosexuality.

the comparison is less about who is better as much as it is about how is Sam not even on a roster right now? What stat is there to support that?

.

a post with the subtitle: "The similarities between Michael Sam and Shane Ray - former teammates and defensive ends at Missouri - are striking. Distractions? Ray has a drug charge and Sam is gay. Ray was a first-round pick while Sam went in the last round. 1 + 1 = 2."

the post that says that they "performed nearly identically." or "Yet the wide discrepancy between the draft positions of these two men does not reflect their minuscule differences in size, strength, speed and college production."

you're right. it's not saying they're really similar quality draft prospects at all. nowhere does it say that.

the post thinks its clever because it saw some numbers were similar, but either the author of it is mathematically illiterate, knows nothing about football/drafts, or both. i think it's both. it's a shame, because this only hurts the argument--it's far too easy for someone who is homophobic and knows football (or stats) to dismiss the claims in that post because he makes apples to oranges comparisons and uses percentages to make differences that are meaningful (it's only a 10% difference! that doesn't matter--if 10% is the difference between a tackle and a missed tackle, 10% is enough).

the similarities aren't striking. They were CLEARLY at different levels as pro prospects based purely on how they performed in college and how they performed at the combine and pro days.

-----------
Its 2014...there are computers in glasses and people stunt after hitting the ball far. Get over it. -Cenario
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious

>a post with the subtitle: "The similarities between Michael
>Sam and Shane Ray - former teammates and defensive ends at
>Missouri - are striking. Distractions? Ray has a drug charge
>and Sam is gay. Ray was a first-round pick while Sam went in
>the last round. 1 + 1 = 2."

yes, because it is looking at how the NFL is willing to deal with their respective "off the field issues" and how that weighs in on draft stock/opportunity in the NFL. This IS indeed the point of the article.

>the post that says that they "performed nearly identically."
>or "Yet the wide discrepancy between the draft positions of
>these two men does not reflect their minuscule differences in
>size, strength, speed and college production."
>
>you're right. it's not saying they're really similar quality
>draft prospects at all. nowhere does it say that.


The player comparison is not the POINT of the article. The player comparison REINFORCES the point that whatever difference in them as prospects (which isn't as large as one might think) does not translate to the disparity of their draft selection. Ray is a legit 1st rounder. But Sam was a legit 3rd rounder at WORST.

>the post thinks its clever because it saw some numbers were
>similar, but either the author of it is mathematically
>illiterate, knows nothing about football/drafts, or both. i
>think it's both. it's a shame, because this only hurts the
>argument--it's far too easy for someone who is homophobic and
>knows football (or stats) to dismiss the claims in that post
>because he makes apples to oranges comparisons and uses
>percentages to make differences that are meaningful (it's only
>a 10% difference! that doesn't matter--if 10% is the
>difference between a tackle and a missed tackle, 10% is
>enough).

Again, you are dismissing someone's professional potential off of combine stats alone. He never got a shot to prove it on the field. PLENTY of prospects with less than stellar measureables got drafted in early rounds this year. And yes, some players with great measureables went drafted in low rounds this year. But same had enough measureables to be selected earlier, and certainly enough on field production to warrant a legit shot at making a roster.

>the similarities aren't striking. They were CLEARLY at
>different levels as pro prospects based purely on how they
>performed in college and how they performed at the combine and
>pro days.

Listen to how you sound: "They were CLEARLY at different levels as pro prospects based purely on how they performed in college and how they performed at the combine and pro days." Naw, with the eye test, had they play on the same team and entered the same draft, Ray would be a legit first rounder. You would not then say that Sam was a 7th rounder. I see a clear difference is talent, but maybe a 1st round talent vs a 3rd round talent. The worst part? Sam WAS projected as a 2-4th round pick before he came out. Again, it's not about if they are the same prospect. It's about how similar prospects had two completely different outcomes based on their "off the field" issues.

>yes, because it is looking at how the NFL is willing to deal
>with their respective "off the field issues" and how that
>weighs in on draft stock/opportunity in the NFL. This IS
>indeed the point of the article.

problem is, that only really works IF they're similar draft prospects. because the idea that stars and potential stars get better treatment than fringe players is...ZOMG SO NEW.

>The player comparison is not the POINT of the article. The
>player comparison REINFORCES the point that whatever

really? because the entire article is comparing their stats. THE ENTIRE THING. it all falls apart if they're different quality prospects.

>difference in them as prospects (which isn't as large as one
>might think) does not translate to the disparity of their
>draft selection. Ray is a legit 1st rounder. But Sam was a
>legit 3rd rounder at WORST.

bullshit. Sam was a low-end draft pick. go look at the pre-draft predictions. and this is irrelevant, becase the article doesn't start from the premise that Ray >>> Sam but Ray isn't >>>>>>> Sam. it's Ray is roughly = to Sam.

>Again, you are dismissing someone's professional potential off
>of combine stats alone.

nope. and numbers from when he was at Mizzou. And professional draft scout reports. And knowing that the numbers presented in the article are all manipulated and bullshit.

He never got a shot to prove it on the
>field. PLENTY of prospects with less than stellar measureables
>got drafted in early rounds this year. And yes, some players
>with great measureables went drafted in low rounds this year.
>But same had enough measureables to be selected earlier, and
>certainly enough on field production to warrant a legit shot
>at making a roster.

but that's not the point of the article, because if it were, it wouldn't make stupid ass comparisons to Shane Ray. christ.

>Listen to how you sound: "They were CLEARLY at different
>levels as pro prospects based purely on how they performed in
>college and how they performed at the combine and pro days."
>Naw, with the eye test, had they play on the same team and
>entered the same draft, Ray would be a legit first rounder.

ok, so Ray is a 1st rounder. got it.

>You would not then say that Sam was a 7th rounder. I see a
>clear difference is talent, but maybe a 1st round talent vs a
>3rd round talent.

SO THEY'RE NOT SIMILAR. christ, that's all i ever was pointing out.

The worst part? Sam WAS projected as a 2-4th
>round pick before he came out.

by ONE site (we've been through this roughly 5 times on this board. and if you look, I'm 100% on the Sam side of the debate. except i don't like bad comparisons and bad use of numbers. which was all i ever fucking pointed out.

>are the same prospect. It's about how similar prospects had
>two completely different outcomes based on their "off the
>field" issues.

even if I accept that Sam was a 3rd round prospect, THAT'S NOT SIMILAR TO A CONSENSUS 1st ROUNDER.


-----------
Its 2014...there are computers in glasses and people stunt after hitting the ball far. Get over it. -Cenario
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious

Ray and Sam are similar talents. Similar does not even "same", however they were more alike than they were different.

the narrative created around why Sam isn't in the NFL has never been about his on field production, because he didn't have any in the NFL outside of the preseason(where he actually did well, considering he was going against 2nd and 3rd string offensive line personnel.)

Ray is a dynamite prospect, and a clear top pass rusher in the draft. No one disputes that. Faster measureables than Sam, clearly. However, the narrative constructed around Sam has been as if to say that he so way slower, shorter, and less dynamic than Ray, or than any worthy prospect for that matter.

There are a slew of receivers that come out every year, and they all are trying to hit 4.4 or better at the combine to land that first round grade. Plenty of them only hit in the 4.5s. And some of those, tho productive, just can get that first round grade. But them registering a 4.5 instead of a 4.4 doesn't equal going from the first round and dropping to the 7th. Sam was a better prospect than a 7th rounder. His measureables aren't that far off from Ray. Ray is used to show that compared to his first round grade, Sam should not have slipped to the 7th round, AND virtually be out the league. Fowler just tore his ACL, and the Jags need pass rushing. Let's see if they give Sam a call.

(and I'm not for a second assuming you don't) I can say that Shane has more dimensions to his game than Mike. So did Kony Ealy and so does Marcus Golden. Which is why Shane was projected top 10 before his weed infraction. Mike was NEVER rated that high by anyone...because he was seen more as a straight up pass rusher. He was damn good at it too. But seventh round??? Not even on a roster??? Naw...it's some bullshit. Who can't use a pass rush specialist, who happens to be a good dude and in no way a trouble maker?

of ALL the teams he can't get any smell? Insanity.

this dismissive "try Canada" theme is like when Blacks couldn't get served in restaurants. On some "on sorry, we're all booked up *looks at empty chairs* but you can try Bessie over on the East side of town. They may can serve you there."

He hasn't even failed. He hasn't even ATTEMPTED!

athletically and is far more versatile. Ray can be a stand up linebacker or he has the frame to bulk up and be a rush end AND he can play special teams. Sam is pretty much a one dimensional pass rusher.

Also pre-season stats don't mean dick.(no pun intended)

talent and grades out 9% better than another prospect qualify for a distance between the 2 prospects as 1 guy is a top 20s overall pick and the other guy doesn't even belong in the league?

Sam never even got a shot at real game action to fail. To dismiss him being worthy of a shot based purely on his measureables is insane.

Tom Brady didn't have the measureables coming out of Michigan. Should he have been relegated to the preseason and not even given a roster shot based on his 3 cone drill time?

There's no way he shouldn't legit smell an NFL roster.