Watson to Cleveland

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
17,496
No it wasn't about competitive integrity on the field why they came down so hard on the Patriots. It's a bullshit patina they put on going after the Partriots. And the reason we know this is there are plenty of other times where teams have been caught doing thing to impact the "integrity" of the game, and sometimes didn't even get the fines that are proscribed in the rule book or the barest min fines for it.

The Chargers stickum towel, the vikings (or their opponent or both) heating footballs up on the sideline, and a bunch of others I am sure if I wasn't just going off memory.
I know. I wrote a 24,000 word article about it years ago.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
The statement is nonsense, but backloading the deal so the Y1 cap hit is minimal is standard operating procedure for a lot of long term deals. Maybe a potential suspension was a consideration here, but maybe not. In another thread we're talking about how the Pats have no cap space this year because they structured their deals last year in a similar fashion.
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
6,265
CA
The statement is nonsense, but backloading the deal so the Y1 cap hit is minimal is standard operating procedure for a lot of long term deals. Maybe a potential suspension was a consideration here, but maybe not. In another thread we're talking about how the Pats have no cap space this year because they structured their deals last year in a similar fashion.
The backloading of the deal was also almost assuredly what the players’ agent pursued. I think it is a total bullshit move and an obvious circumvention of an inevitable suspension, but I am not sure why the Browns organization is getting the majority of the flack here. Blame the greedy agent and the scumbag player — it was their demand based on the situation, and the team agreed as it doesn’t impact them in any way. It sucks but it feels weird that there have been so many takes of “and the Browns made it worse by helping him avoid paying a fine”. The agent and player is ultimately and almost soley responsible here imo.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
8,960
Beyond the obvious scumbaggery involved here, it's interesting how in baseball, teams seem to value draft choices more highly that ever to the extent that a free agent with a QOnis almost persona non grata, while NFL teams increasingly toss them around like confetti. This is despite that fact that many top baseball draft choices never make the majors while virtually all high NFL draft picks have multi-year careers. Seems sort of upside down.

Add in that the Browns and Raiders are dealing first rounders for the right to pay these guys zillions of dollars and it's even crazier. Imagine the Red Sox trading three first round picks for the right to pay Correa $230 million.
 
Beyond the obvious scumbaggery involved here, it's interesting how in baseball, teams seem to value draft choices more highly that ever to the extent that a free agent with a QOnis almost persona non grata, while NFL teams increasingly toss them around like confetti. This is despite that fact that many top baseball draft choices never make the majors while virtually all high NFL draft picks have multi-year careers. Seems sort of upside down.

Add in that the Browns and Raiders are dealing first rounders for the right to pay these guys zillions of dollars and it's even crazier. Imagine the Red Sox trading three first round picks for the right to pay Correa $230 million.
It's even worse than that, since Watson was already under contract for several years (at free agent rates). He was not entitled to, and clearly not deserving of, any kind of new contract at all. One article I read described it as essentially franchising him now for 2026 at $90m+.

I'm actually genuinely fascinated by how teams are valuing draft picks. There's reasonable research out there suggesting that once you factor in what you have to pay them, first and second round picks are worth less than thirds and fourths. But no teams behave in a way that even remotely resembles what the academic literature would suggest is the optimal way of valuing draft picks, so either it's all riddled with mistakes or teams are doing really really dumb shit.

On the Watson affair - This whole thing disgusts me. I'm pretty sure that if this were the Patriots it would be the end of my relationship with them. I kinda considered the Browns my second/third team these last few years but now I wish nothing but a lifetime of Hue Jacksonesque seasons upon them. I suspect they will go undrafted in our family's fantasy game, something thus far only achieved by the Jets.

There were reportedly ten teams out there desperate enough to win football matches that they wanted this guy. The world is an incredibly dispiriting place sometimes.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
26,719
Putting out a statement about how you did due diligence just so you can get buried by Buzbee for never reaching out to him or any of the accusers is so dumb. You obviously don't care if he did it, why not call Buzbee?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,509
I'm actually genuinely fascinated by how teams are valuing draft picks. There's reasonable research out there suggesting that once you factor in what you have to pay them, first and second round picks are worth less than thirds and fourths. But no teams behave in a way that even remotely resembles what the academic literature would suggest is the optimal way of valuing draft picks, so either it's all riddled with mistakes or teams are doing really really dumb shit.
Interesting. Do you have any links handy for the research you mention? I'll look it up later but if you know of any articles, I'd be interested in reading it(them).

As for your question, the Ravens horde their mid-round draft picks so I wonder if they have assimiliated this research as an organization.
 

glennhoffmania

I stand corrected... again.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,406,951
NY
All we know is that the grand jury declined to recommend charges. That's typically fatal to the prosecution's case. https://www.nfl.com/news/grand-jury-declines-to-indict-texans-qb-deshaun-watson-following-allegations-of-

My guess is that it has something to do with not being able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the cases involved non-consentual criminal behavior.
I'm pretty sure the standard for getting an indictment is not beyond a reasonable doubt, although obviously states have different rules. I thought it was probable cause that a crime was committed and that the accused committed it. That's not a very high burden.

Also, it's impressive how even topics that have nothing to do with NE somehow come back to deflategate.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
11,688
The backloading of the deal was also almost assuredly what the players’ agent pursued. I think it is a total bullshit move and an obvious circumvention of an inevitable suspension, but I am not sure why the Browns organization is getting the majority of the flack here. Blame the greedy agent and the scumbag player — it was their demand based on the situation, and the team agreed as it doesn’t impact them in any way. It sucks but it feels weird that there have been so many takes of “and the Browns made it worse by helping him avoid paying a fine”. The agent and player is ultimately and almost soley responsible here imo.
1st year base salary for Matthew Judon, Hunter Henry, and Jonnu Smith last year.... 1M.

You can think Watson is gross, the Browns are the worst, AND understand this is a pretty typical contract. I don't understand the handwringing at all. Obviously it has the likely benefit of minimizing lost $ in a year suspension 1, but that's just how these deals are almost always done. Lucky for Watson.

Watson and his agent would have had to go out of their way to demand Watson take an ATYPICAL contract in an effort to make him pay extra suspension money compared to a standard NFL deal. Not sure that is a likely or reasonable expectation. Everyone upset about the structure needs to relax.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
14,892
Tuukka's refugee camp
The backloading of the deal was also almost assuredly what the players’ agent pursued. I think it is a total bullshit move and an obvious circumvention of an inevitable suspension, but I am not sure why the Browns organization is getting the majority of the flack here. Blame the greedy agent and the scumbag player — it was their demand based on the situation, and the team agreed as it doesn’t impact them in any way. It sucks but it feels weird that there have been so many takes of “and the Browns made it worse by helping him avoid paying a fine”. The agent and player is ultimately and almost soley responsible here imo.
The Pats did the same thing with Brady for the Deflategate suspension. And no I am not saying Deflategate is the same as Watson’s situation. Also, why wouldn’t Watson structure it this way? They aren’t getting a game shaved off by structuring the contract differently.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,509
I'm pretty sure the standard for getting an indictment is not beyond a reasonable doubt, although obviously states have different rules. I thought it was probable cause that a crime was committed and that the accused committed it. That's not a very high burden.

Also, it's impressive how even topics that have nothing to do with NE somehow come back to deflategate.
You are correct as to the standard; I was trying to put it in more non-lawyer terms. As I know you know, oftentimes the grand jury verdict follows how the prosecutor feels about the case. I am just learning that the grand jury only heard from one victim so as I said before, I'm guessing that the prosecutor didn't really want the case to go forward because the prosevtor didn't think she or he could prove it. https://www.yahoo.com/video/deshaun-watson-grand-jury-wanted-001439937.html
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
26,719
You are correct as to the standard; I was trying to put it in more non-lawyer terms. As I know you know, oftentimes the grand jury verdict follows how the prosecutor feels about the case. I am just learning that the grand jury only heard from one victim so as I said before, I'm guessing that the prosecutor didn't really want the case to go forward because the prosevtor didn't think she or he could prove it. https://www.yahoo.com/video/deshaun-watson-grand-jury-wanted-001439937.html
yeah whatever the reasoning behind it, the details that have come out make it pretty clear this was a case of the prosecution laying the blame on a grand jury so they didn't take heat for not prosecuting, and that they tanked the GJ on purpose to make sure it didn't indict
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
52,558
Why is it relevant was done for free agents or non rapist veterans? I had someone in my kitchen last night. No big deal. If I invited a rapist to my kitchen, that’s a different story. Especially if it helps them avoid penalty or punishment.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
11,688
Why is it relevant was done for free agents or non rapist veterans? I had someone in my kitchen last night. No big deal. If I invited a rapist to my kitchen, that’s a different story. Especially if it helps them avoid penalty or punishment.
If this is re: contract structure.... the blame on the Browns is for signing him at all, not that they signed him a standard type of NFL contract.

As I mentioned above, the idea they would go out of their way to do an atypical contract in an effort to have him pay a higher fine is bizarre.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
52,558
If this is re: contract structure.... the blame on the Browns is for signing him at all, not that they signed him a standard type of NFL contract.

As I mentioned above, the idea they would go out of their way to do an atypical contract in an effort to have him pay a higher fine is bizarre.
Honest question - is it atypical? I’m seeing examples of it occurring with other players, but not that it’s a standard or majority move.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
Honest question - is it atypical? I’m seeing examples of it occurring with other players, but not that it’s a standard or majority move.
It depends. It's pretty common for big, long-term deals. Myles Garrett has the same 2022 base salary as Watson, for instance. Hunter Henry and Jonnu Smith both had their contracts structured the same way. Generally you don't see shorter contracts backloaded like that.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,399
Beyond the obvious scumbaggery involved here, it's interesting how in baseball, teams seem to value draft choices more highly that ever to the extent that a free agent with a QOnis almost persona non grata, while NFL teams increasingly toss them around like confetti. This is despite that fact that many top baseball draft choices never make the majors while virtually all high NFL draft picks have multi-year careers. Seems sort of upside down.

Add in that the Browns and Raiders are dealing first rounders for the right to pay these guys zillions of dollars and it's even crazier. Imagine the Red Sox trading three first round picks for the right to pay Correa $230 million.
The best player in baseball is worth maybe 8-10 war compared to a replacement level player over a 162 game season. That would equate to being worth about 1 extra win in an NFL length season.

The best QBs compared to a replacement level qb are worth way way way more than 1 extra win.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
8,960
The best player in baseball is worth maybe 8-10 war compared to a replacement level player over a 162 game season. That would equate to being worth about 1 extra win in an NFL length season.

The best QBs compared to a replacement level qb are worth way way way more than 1 extra win.
Yeah, I know QBs are the most valuable players in sports, but how does that explain Devante Adams, Jalen Ramsey, Jamal Adams, Khalil Mack, Laremy Tunsil, etc...?
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
11,688
Honest question - is it atypical? I’m seeing examples of it occurring with other players, but not that it’s a standard or majority move.
Every time I look up a recent long term deal, the first year base is in the 1M range. The first 3 Patriots deals that came to mind were Judon, Jonnu, Henry and when I looked them up, all 1M base in year 1. Obviously those were not in an effort to minimize suspension costs. It's just how they are usually done. Huge signing bonuses and small base salaries early on.

Mahomes base salary was 990k last year and is 1.5M this year.

Rodgers base salary 2022 is 1.15M and in 2023 is 1.165M
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,399
Yeah, I know QBs are the most valuable players in sports, but how does that explain Devante Adams, Jalen Ramsey, Jamal Adams, Khalil Mack, Laremy Tunsil, etc...?
They're also more valuable than any baseball player, just not as more valuable as a QB, which is why they don't go for as much.

Baseball is only a pseudo team sport, the best players get to impact at most 10-15% of their teams plays, the best NFL players get to impact almost half.
 
Interesting. Do you have any links handy for the research you mention? I'll look it up later but if you know of any articles, I'd be interested in reading it(them).

As for your question, the Ravens horde their mid-round draft picks so I wonder if they have assimiliated this research as an organization.
This isn't the only study, but the first one I found with a quick googling. It thinks the sweet spot is 2nd/3rd round but the gist is the same as the one I mentioned which thought it was slightly later.

http://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/how-teams-value-draft-picks/
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,509
This isn't the only study, but the first one I found with a quick googling. It thinks the sweet spot is 2nd/3rd round but the gist is the same as the one I mentioned which thought it was slightly later.

http://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/how-teams-value-draft-picks/
Thanks. The article you linked referenced this article - http://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/nfl-draft-pick-value/ - which formed the basis of their conclusion. They certainly put a lot of work in.

Their main conclusion is that when taking into account salary (and excepting QBs), 3rd and 4th round picks are more likely to generate surplus value than 1st round picks. I think that's pretty easy to agree with.

However, the one unstated assumption that they make that I don't necessarily agree with is that surplus value translates into wins. Yes, good players on lesser contracts have more surplus value but teams still need very good to great players - even on first round contracts - and even their research shows (see chart below) that teams have a better chance of getting a highly productive player at the top of the draft - which is why QBs are excluded.

So while it's probably correct that teams should load up on 3rd and 4th round picks - which the Ravens do, particularly hoarding comp picks, I'm not sure that trading out of the first round consistently is going to help, particularly the top of the draft.

50300
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
They're also more valuable than any baseball player, just not as more valuable as a QB, which is why they don't go for as much.

Baseball is only a pseudo team sport, the best players get to impact at most 10-15% of their teams plays, the best NFL players get to impact almost half.
Baseball players have a lot more influence over that 10-15% though. A batter is the focal point of the offense when he's at the plate; any non-QB isn't and is just 1/11 on the field.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
54,288
New York City
Baseball players have a lot more influence over that 10-15% though. A batter is the focal point of the offense when he's at the plate; any non-QB isn't and is just 1/11 on the field.
But great players in the NFL can and do impact things on every single play. A shutdown corner takes away half the field. A great pass rusher takes multiple guys on the line to block.

And the QB, obviously has the most importance of all. A great QB can impact a team significantly more than a great pitcher or Mike Trout can. It's not even close.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
But great players in the NFL can and do impact things on every single play. A shutdown corner takes away half the field. A great pass rusher takes multiple guys on the line to block.
I think a lot of this stuff is overblown. And just mathematically, it doesn't make a lot of sense, right? You've got 11 players on offense / 11 players on defense / 48 man game day rosters vs 9 on offense / 9 on defense / 25 man game day rosters; individually the average baseball player has to have more impact.

And the QB, obviously has the most importance of all. A great QB can impact a team significantly more than a great pitcher or Mike Trout can. It's not even close.
Agreed ... but that means, mathematically, that the impact of all the non-QB football players are reduced. We see this in the Vegas lines; games will swing 3-4 points on QB injuries but only a small handful of non-QBs will move a line by even 1 point.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,925
02130
Yeah, I know QBs are the most valuable players in sports, but how does that explain Devante Adams, Jalen Ramsey, Jamal Adams, Khalil Mack, Laremy Tunsil, etc...?
I think this whole conversation is a little misguided since MLB draft picks can't be traded. We don't know what kind of draft haul teams MLB might trade for a player at a position of need that they think puts them over the top. Maybe it would be comparable if Mike Trout or someone were made available.

The original statement was a little hyperbolic. Teams avoid signing FA's with QO attached for fear of losing the draft pick, but they do sign the best ones and agree to lose the pick. For the more marginal players with QOs, you can probably sign a guy who's almost as good for just money in most cases, so of course you're going to do that.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
16,416
Somewhere
Thanks. The article you linked referenced this article - http://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/nfl-draft-pick-value/ - which formed the basis of their conclusion. They certainly put a lot of work in.

Their main conclusion is that when taking into account salary (and excepting QBs), 3rd and 4th round picks are more likely to generate surplus value than 1st round picks. I think that's pretty easy to agree with.

However, the one unstated assumption that they make that I don't necessarily agree with is that surplus value translates into wins. Yes, good players on lesser contracts have more surplus value but teams still need very good to great players - even on first round contracts - and even their research shows (see chart below) that teams have a better chance of getting a highly productive player at the top of the draft - which is why QBs are excluded.
The big challenge to that assumption is that roster sizes are limited; at some point you have to spend on *someone* so the comparison becomes the value you can extract out of high draft picks versus free agents (e.g)
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
11,227
All we know is that the grand jury declined to recommend charges. That's typically fatal to the prosecution's case. https://www.nfl.com/news/grand-jury-declines-to-indict-texans-qb-deshaun-watson-following-allegations-of-

My guess is that it has something to do with not being able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the cases involved non-consentual criminal behavior.
Having been on a grand jury, and knowing how low the bar is for indictment, the cases must be very weak. In that setting, you're just asked to think about whether it was "more likely than not."

We only declined to put forward like 2 of 100 cases.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,011
Los Angeles, CA
If this is re: contract structure.... the blame on the Browns is for signing him at all, not that they signed him a standard type of NFL contract.

As I mentioned above, the idea they would go out of their way to do an atypical contract in an effort to have him pay a higher fine is bizarre.
See, to me whether that contract structure is typical or not is irrelevant. As you said, the blame is on the Browns - or any team - attempting to sign him at all. And there's plenty of blame to be directed there. After that, who cares what the contract structure is? Of course it's going to be back loaded. Any team which wanted to front load the first year simply wouldn't have gotten him (because the value of the offer is diminished by some percentage of that amount).
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,399
I think a lot of this stuff is overblown. And just mathematically, it doesn't make a lot of sense, right? You've got 11 players on offense / 11 players on defense / 48 man game day rosters vs 9 on offense / 9 on defense / 25 man game day rosters; individually the average baseball player has to have more impact.
But almost all of those 11 guys on offense or defense have the chance to help make a big play something like 50-75 times a game. And a single big play in football does way more to increase your chances to win than a single big play in baseball. A typical batter bats 3-4 times a game, most of those at bats don't have much of a chance to materially change the teams odds to win, and they maybe gets a handful of atypical fielding opportunities that matter a year.

I mean, the Angels have literally had a guy put up the best start to a career EVER, and in those 10 years they made the playoffs once and didn't win a game. That would never happen in football.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
17,496
A shutdown corner doesn’t take away half the field. He mostly takes away one receiver. And even the best corners still tend to give up a 50% completion rate, so saying they “take away” one receiver isn’t even true. Jalen Ramsey’s best completion percentage against was 50.7%, in 2020. Meaning when QBs threw at him they (barely) completed more passes than they didn’t.

And that year in 15 games he was targeted 4.7 times a game so yes elite corners tend to not be thrown on quite as much as other corners, but still... they do get thrown at.

So yeah the “elite CBs take away half the field” stuff just isn’t true.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
26,719
Yeah, I think the thing in football is every player has some impact on almost every play he's on the field, and can have moderate to massive impact on a lot of them. So in baseball most players are probably going to have 3-6 chances per game to make an impact. An NFL player will have 20-80 chances to make an impact.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
But almost all of those 11 guys on offense or defense have the chance to help make a big play something like 50-75 times a game. And a single big play in football does way more to increase your chances to win than a single big play in baseball. A typical batter bats 3-4 times a game, most of those at bats don't have much of a chance to materially change the teams odds to win, and they maybe gets a handful of atypical fielding opportunities that matter a year.
Those 11 players on offense or defense don't make a big play 50-75 times a game though, or even close. Maybe once a game for a really good player. Most football plays are pretty ordinary. Also, for them to make a big play, almost invariably it's going to require teammates to also make big plays - the receiver gets the big catch, but the QB has to make the throw, the OL has to hold up, the play design has to hold the safety, etc.

I mean, the Angels have literally had a guy put up the best start to a career EVER, and in those 10 years they made the playoffs once and didn't win a game. That would never happen in football.
That happens all the time in football. Aaron Donald and JJ Watt are the two best defensive players of the last 20 years and have been on any number of terrible defenses. Joe Thomas was the best left tackle for a decade on horrible Cleveland teams with crummy offenses. It is easier to make the playoffs in football, so it's probably rarer to have that little playoff success, but plenty of great players toil on crappy teams.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,399
Those 11 players on offense or defense don't make a big play 50-75 times a game though, or even close. Maybe once a game for a really good player. Most football plays are pretty ordinary. Also, for them to make a big play, almost invariably it's going to require teammates to also make big plays - the receiver gets the big catch, but the QB has to make the throw, the OL has to hold up, the play design has to hold the safety, etc.


That happens all the time in football. Aaron Donald and JJ Watt are the two best defensive players of the last 20 years and have been on any number of terrible defenses. Joe Thomas was the best left tackle for a decade on horrible Cleveland teams with crummy offenses. It is easier to make the playoffs in football, so it's probably rarer to have that little playoff success, but plenty of great players toil on crappy teams.
Aaron Donald literally just won a super bowl, and he played in another one and been to the playoffs 4 times in 8 years. JJ Watt has been to the playoffs 6 times in the 8 years he's been healthy. They've been on a lot of good teams.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,925
02130
Those 11 players on offense or defense don't make a big play 50-75 times a game though, or even close. Maybe once a game for a really good player. Most football plays are pretty ordinary. Also, for them to make a big play, almost invariably it's going to require teammates to also make big plays - the receiver gets the big catch, but the QB has to make the throw, the OL has to hold up, the play design has to hold the safety, etc.
Isn't the big difference that you can try to use your best player on any play you want, while in baseball you have to wait until his turn at bat or his turn in the rotation?

If the Patriots need a third down conversion in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl they're going to scheme something for Edelman to be one-on-one and take their chances that he'll get open. If the play breaks down the Raiders are going to heave it to Davante Adams and hope he can make an amazing catch. They may not convert the play but you gave them a shot and if you don't have a player like that you're giving someone crummier a shot.

But, the only thing the Angels can do is put Mike Trout high in the order and hope that the guys in front of him get on base, and the highest leverage spots could very easily go to their worst hitters.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,675
Mansfield MA
Isn't the big difference that you can try to use your best player on any play you want, while in baseball you have to wait until his turn at bat or his turn in the rotation?

If the Patriots need a third down conversion in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl they're going to scheme something for Edelman to be one-on-one and take their chances that he'll get open. If the play breaks down the Raiders are going to heave it to Davante Adams and hope he can make an amazing catch. They may not convert the play but you gave them a shot and if you don't have a player like that you're giving someone crummier a shot.

But, the only thing the Angels can do is put Mike Trout high in the order and hope that the guys in front of him get on base, and the highest leverage spots could very easily go to their worst hitters.
In theory, but in practice even the top players get maybe 30% of targets, many less than that. And that's 30% of pass plays, not including runs and defensive plays. And of course, even if they do get the target, they're just 1 of 11 on the team and the others are playing roles blocking or passing or drawing coverage.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,399
In theory, but in practice even the top players get maybe 30% of targets, many less than that. And that's 30% of pass plays, not including runs and defensive plays. And of course, even if they do get the target, they're just 1 of 11 on the team and the others are playing roles blocking or passing or drawing coverage.
Because the defense is devoting extra resources to slowing them down. If they didn't put a lockdown corner or a double team on Edelman the ball was going to him over and over. Then when they did do that it created much easier matchups for everyone else on the field. Just by being on the field top players are creating a mismatch somewhere.

To a small extent someone like Trout makes it easier for the guys in front of him to hit, but for the majority of the lineup he does nothing.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
13,924
New York City
Jenny Vrentas tweeting that another grand jury is considering charges against Watson
I think this to amounts to nothing.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong on this but I think there are a whole lot of folks who have been way over the skis on how likely the Watson matter is to result in criminal charges. On the one hand pretty clear the guy has systematically abused women using a particular MO, on the other, really tough for a prosecutor to bring a case and the alleged activity is in most of the cases not a serious crime under texas law. IMO the media has given folks the wrong impression about both the type of allegations he's facing and the likelihood of him getting indicted.
 

Average Game James

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
3,339
I think this to amounts to nothing.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong on this but I think there are a whole lot of folks who have been way over the skis on how likely the Watson matter is to result in criminal charges. On the one hand pretty clear the guy has systematically abused women using a particular MO, on the other, really tough for a prosecutor to bring a case and the alleged activity is in most of the cases not a serious crime under texas law. IMO the media has given folks the wrong impression about both the type of allegations he's facing and the likelihood of him getting indicted.
And you’re dead on…

View: https://twitter.com/mikerothstein/status/1507103926553911296?s=20&t=IcbFsxSo8G02eMNEpe7FwA
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
8,727
Needham, MA
First he's pitching reverse mortgages and now this. Fuck Magnum PI.

Edit: To add some content, I am assuming the Browns have done their due diligence and are fairly convinced there won't be criminal charges here. But then again they are the Browns so who knows?
 

Gash Prex

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2002
5,797
Another lawsuit filed against Watson

Another woman has filed a lawsuit against Deshaun Watson, joining 22 others who accused the Cleveland Browns quarterback in civil cases filed in 2021 of inappropriate sexual conduct during massage sessions.


In the 23rd civil case filed Tuesday in Texas against Watson, the lawsuit states that the plaintiff had her first massage session with Watson during the summer of 2020 and that his "behavior grew worse." During the third and final massage, she alleges in the lawsuit that Watson exposed himself to her, touched the woman between the legs and "repeatedly requested" her to have sex with him.

According to the lawsuit, the woman changed her mind about suing Watson after watching HBO's "Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel" last week. On that show, two other women, Ashley Solis and Kyla Hayes, who have also accused Watson of inappropriate sexual conduct, criticized the Browns for giving the quarterback an NFL-record $230 million guaranteed contract after trading for him in March.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34015843/cleveland-browns-qb-deshaun-watson-facing-23rd-active-lawsuit-inappropriate-sexual-conduct?platform=amp

As a lawyer this conduct makes me extremely uncomfortable - under zero circumstances should 2 lawyers for Watson take a potential claimant/witness to dinner

The 23rd plaintiff apparently contends that two of Hardin’s colleagues tried to talk her out of making claims against Watson. (We have not yet seen the new complaint.)

“The two highly respected lawyers from our firm, Letitia Quinones and Rachel Lewis, also vehemently deny there was any coercion or intimidation involved in the very cordial meeting at Vic and Anthony’s,” Hardin said. “They met her to see if she was one of Mr. Buzbee’s then still anonymous plaintiffs. At that time Mr. Buzbee refused to identify his clients. The suggestion that either of these two accomplished lawyers would have said ‘us black women must stick together’ is absurd. The interview was so congenial, she joined the lawyers for dinner afterwards.”
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/05/31/rusty-hardin-issues-scathing-response-to-latest-lawsuit-filed-against-deshaun-watson/
 
Last edited:

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,095
Maine
Nothing can repay women for sexual misconduct.
But assuming at least some of this is true.
There is some poetic justice if Watson Earns 200-300-500 million over his career and ends up "pennyless" and broken down at 40 after paying out millions in damages and lawyer fees.
Any doubt that there is a non Zero chance that once the NFL money Printing press breaks down he ends up in jail cause he can no longer pay off women?