Josh Gordon Thread: Reinstatement (Deja Vu)

[WZA]

RC for President. WZA voted for him!

Haha...yessir! You know it pal!

[balaberda]

I will admit I used to be intrigued by RC and his unique player analysis. While I don't think his stuff is totally junk I think he is pretty biased to his little computer program and he sees things that aren't there to support his metric analysis.

He takes away a players brain, work ethic, heart, etc. which is what I think is more important that your size/speed ratio etc.

[WZA]

I will admit I used to be intrigued by RC and his unique player analysis. While I don't think his stuff is totally junk I think he is pretty biased to his little computer program and he sees things that aren't there to support his metric analysis.

He takes away a players brain, work ethic, heart, etc. which is what I think is more important that your size/speed ratio etc.

I agree. Good point.

[jnormy]

There are positive and negative reports all over the web on this guy. Check rotoworld and you can basically see it all. The statement about underperforming against "real competition" is a matter of opinion, not fact. So is his "weak pro day." some scouts talk him up to generate hype, others talk him down to trick teams not to go after him. It's all a game and there is spin on both sides. Anyway, WR1, WR2, or WR3 potential...whatever...if I have the roster space I'm gonna take a chance on him, isn't that what dynasty is all about?

On thing interesting is the fact that Brian Quick's 40 time was worse than Gordon, yet you don't hear people slamming Quick because of it. Does it help to have 4.4 40 speed? Hell yeah it does, but 4.5 is pretty damn good too and I'm sure there have been plenty of stud WRs who had 4.5 speed. Oh and one more thing...wasn't there an article on this site claiming Brian Quick will be the next Larry Fitzgerald...solely on his MEASUREABLES?

http://dynastyleaguefootball.com/2012/i ... fitzgerald

So you discredit the one author and then cite Rotoworld of all sources as if they don't have their own personal favorites? I love Rotoworld's info as much as the next guy, but their personal biases are pretty transparent about some players that are their favorites.

And it wasn't just "a matter of opinion" about how Gordon performed against better competition, the author gave statistical examples of bad games against good teams. Were those numbers wrong? Were there some great games Gordon had against top competition that he conveniently left out?

Look, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, nor am I "slamming" Gordon. I just haven't really seen anything on the 'Net that provides solid reasons why this guy is special. That's the only reason I asked you for links and actual quotes from reputable scouts, I'm actually wanting to read that kind of info. And then the only link you give me is about Brian Quick not Gordon, lol.

But you're right, it's worth a shot if you have the roster space. It's the people who might have to make a more difficult drop who need to see more than just some generalities to make that move.

[WZA]

There are positive and negative reports all over the web on this guy. Check rotoworld and you can basically see it all. The statement about underperforming against "real competition" is a matter of opinion, not fact. So is his "weak pro day." some scouts talk him up to generate hype, others talk him down to trick teams not to go after him. It's all a game and there is spin on both sides. Anyway, WR1, WR2, or WR3 potential...whatever...if I have the roster space I'm gonna take a chance on him, isn't that what dynasty is all about?

On thing interesting is the fact that Brian Quick's 40 time was worse than Gordon, yet you don't hear people slamming Quick because of it. Does it help to have 4.4 40 speed? Hell yeah it does, but 4.5 is pretty damn good too and I'm sure there have been plenty of stud WRs who had 4.5 speed. Oh and one more thing...wasn't there an article on this site claiming Brian Quick will be the next Larry Fitzgerald...solely on his MEASUREABLES?

http://dynastyleaguefootball.com/2012/i ... fitzgerald

So you discredit the one author and then cite Rotoworld of all sources as if they don't have their own personal favorites? I love Rotoworld's info as much as the next guy, but their personal biases are pretty transparent about some players that are their favorites.

And it wasn't just "a matter of opinion" about how Gordon performed against better competition, the author gave statistical examples of bad games against good teams. Were those numbers wrong? Were there some great games Gordon had against top competition that he conveniently left out?

Look, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, nor am I "slamming" Gordon. I just haven't really seen anything on the 'Net that provides solid reasons why this guy is special. That's the only reason I asked you for links and actual quotes from reputable scouts, I'm actually wanting to read that kind of info. And then the only link you give me is about Brian Quick not Gordon, lol.

But you're right, it's worth a shot if you have the roster space. It's the people who might have to make a more difficult drop who need to see more than just some generalities to make that move.

I only suggested rotoworld because they have news clippings from scouts (Cowboys, Eagles, Redskins, etc) and other authors from SI, Sporting News, ESPN, etc. Not just the rotoworld opinions. Even RGIII lobbied hard for the Skins to get him.

If you're looking for more in depth articles then google it. There are plenty of opinions both positive and negative on Gordon. Not sure why it's necessary for me to do the research for you and provide a laundry list of links.

[jnormy]

I will admit I used to be intrigued by RC and his unique player analysis. While I don't think his stuff is totally junk I think he is pretty biased to his little computer program and he sees things that aren't there to support his metric analysis.

He takes away a players brain, work ethic, heart, etc. which is what I think is more important that your size/speed ratio etc.

Interesting that those of some of the traits that are the biggest red flags with Gordon, especially with three failed drug tests in his past. Here's another interesting article I just found from NFL.com that seems to give a pretty balanced assessment of Gordon the player and Gordon the person:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... for-browns

Looks like the physical ability is there, but the off-field concerns, lack of a track record (only two 100-yard games in college), and lack of fundamentals and route-running skills suggests that he's more of a project than a sure thing at the moment. But the upside may make the gamble worth it as a dynasty stash if he keeps away from the weed and gets his poop together.

[jnormy]

Not sure why it's necessary for me to do the research for you and provide a laundry list of links.

Or even one link, for that matter...

[WZA]

I will admit I used to be intrigued by RC and his unique player analysis. While I don't think his stuff is totally junk I think he is pretty biased to his little computer program and he sees things that aren't there to support his metric analysis.

He takes away a players brain, work ethic, heart, etc. which is what I think is more important that your size/speed ratio etc.

Interesting that those of some of the traits that are the biggest red flags with Gordon, especially with three failed drug tests in his past. Here's another interesting article I just found from NFL.com that seems to give a pretty balanced assessment of Gordon the player and Gordon the person:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... for-browns

Looks like the physical ability is there, but the off-field concerns, lack of a track record (only two 100-yard games in college), and lack of fundamentals and route-running skills suggests that he's more of a project than a sure thing at the moment. But the upside may make the gamble worth it as a dynasty stash if he keeps away from the weed and gets his poop together.

Oh for sure, he is raw as hell. No doubt about that. Whatever anyone's opinion may be on Gordon, I think the bottom line is he's worth a stash at this point at the back end of your roster or taxi squad.

One thing about that RC article...he even admits in that article that he's slamming Gordon partly because of his frustration over the media hype. That's why I don't like RC. I appreciate his professional skepticism, but I feel like some times he puts out negative stuff just to be on the other side of the argument. His numerical analysis is pretty good though, but I'm always careful with his opinions.

[WZA]

Not sure why it's necessary for me to do the research for you and provide a laundry list of links.

Or even one link, for that matter...

Lol..is your google broken?

[WZA]

Not sure why it's necessary for me to do the research for you and provide a laundry list of links.

Or even one link, for that matter...

Lol..is your google broken?

Here...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... -to-browns

I tend to trust what Adam Schedter reports. He gets a lot of good inside info.

[Water Buffalo]

I will admit I used to be intrigued by RC and his unique player analysis. While I don't think his stuff is totally junk I think he is pretty biased to his little computer program and he sees things that aren't there to support his metric analysis.

He takes away a players brain, work ethic, heart, etc. which is what I think is more important that your size/speed ratio etc.

Interesting that those of some of the traits that are the biggest red flags with Gordon, especially with three failed drug tests in his past. Here's another interesting article I just found from NFL.com that seems to give a pretty balanced assessment of Gordon the player and Gordon the person:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... for-browns

Looks like the physical ability is there, but the off-field concerns, lack of a track record (only two 100-yard games in college), and lack of fundamentals and route-running skills suggests that he's more of a project than a sure thing at the moment. But the upside may make the gamble worth it as a dynasty stash if he keeps away from the weed and gets his poop together.

Oh for sure, he is raw as hell. No doubt about that. Whatever anyone's opinion may be on Gordon, I think the bottom line is he's worth a stash at this point at the back end of your roster or taxi squad.

So wait, we've now gone from him being a potential fantasy WR1 to a back end of your roster stash? Which is it? That is, unless all back end of roster stashes have "WR1 potential because it could happen" which goes back to the point of calling a guy like him a potential WR1 pointless in the first place.

[WZA]

Interesting that those of some of the traits that are the biggest red flags with Gordon, especially with three failed drug tests in his past. Here's another interesting article I just found from NFL.com that seems to give a pretty balanced assessment of Gordon the player and Gordon the person:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... for-browns

Looks like the physical ability is there, but the off-field concerns, lack of a track record (only two 100-yard games in college), and lack of fundamentals and route-running skills suggests that he's more of a project than a sure thing at the moment. But the upside may make the gamble worth it as a dynasty stash if he keeps away from the weed and gets his poop together.

Oh for sure, he is raw as hell. No doubt about that. Whatever anyone's opinion may be on Gordon, I think the bottom line is he's worth a stash at this point at the back end of your roster or taxi squad.

So wait, we've now gone from him being a potential fantasy WR1 to a back end of your roster stash? Which is it? That is, unless all back end of roster stashes have "WR1 potential because it could happen" which goes back to the point of calling a guy like him a potential WR1 pointless in the first place.

Nobody said he was going to be a WR1 this year or even next year. So yes...back of the roster stash.

[jnormy]

Not sure why it's necessary for me to do the research for you and provide a laundry list of links.

Or even one link, for that matter...

Lol..is your google broken?

Haha, nah, I just didn't find anything that was backing the notion some people had in here that Gordon had more upside than the many other WRs who physically look great and wow 'em in training camp. I'm skeptical, but really wanted to be converted... sadly it never happened. A project with off-field baggage is worth a dynasty stash, but not worth getting too excited about... yet.

[jnormy]

Oh for sure, he is raw as hell. No doubt about that. Whatever anyone's opinion may be on Gordon, I think the bottom line is he's worth a stash at this point at the back end of your roster or taxi squad.

So wait, we've now gone from him being a potential fantasy WR1 to a back end of your roster stash? Which is it? That is, unless all back end of roster stashes have "WR1 potential because it could happen" which goes back to the point of calling a guy like him a potential WR1 pointless in the first place.

Nobody said he was going to be a WR1 this year or even next year. So yes...back of the roster stash.

LOL, it took awhile, but in a strange, roundabout way, I think we've all come around to the same conclusion here! :rockon:

[WZA]

So wait, we've now gone from him being a potential fantasy WR1 to a back end of your roster stash? Which is it? That is, unless all back end of roster stashes have "WR1 potential because it could happen" which goes back to the point of calling a guy like him a potential WR1 pointless in the first place.

Nobody said he was going to be a WR1 this year or even next year. So yes...back of the roster stash.

LOL, it took awhile, but in a strange, roundabout way, I think we've all come around to the same conclusion here! :rockon:

Lol..Yeah...except this point was made on like page 2 or 3.