Heath Evans thinks EVERY one of our draft picks will fail! What!?!

I was excited by the move but is Jordan really better than Hayden and Watson? Color me hopeful but not sold.

I just don't understand how Evans can be OK with all of the moves prior to trading up in the draft and then question all of them afterward.

Typical talking head.

 

I think it's a hilarious, ridiculous, disappointing thread..

 

Yep all day every day, Jordan over Hayden and Watson.

 

Evans wasn't a good player, and isn't a good commentator. Surprised he is employed, much be slim pickings out there.

 

He was being relatively tame compared to his usual behavior on NFL Network. He is just as capable of getting into little overdramatic tirades as some of the other guys on their. And as far as his intelligence, I think we all know he should understand defenses given his background. Generally, most of us are not going to argue his points about internal pressure and the issue with undersized defensive linemen. If Jordan is weighting in at 240 and playing DE in September, maybe we have something to worry about, I don't know. I am less convinced of his research with regarding to the spending spree and what was available this year in free agency. I thought Ireland matched his personnel targets with the money ok. As some of us have pointed out, he was going to spend a lot of that money and we all knew that. His "bias" and border-line rant/opinion became less researched in my opinion during those discussions. He didn't separate himself from the likes of Dukes and Sapp.
With all that said, the only way these guys will move on to another target of discussion is when Miami starts winning/showing progress on field. I think what makes some of us a little angry is he has a national platform for his comments. The Network was none too kind to the Dolphins last year (much of that understandable) and the rant continues. But I for one am not going to let a career journeyman at fullback rain on my parade. Good to expect better things.

 

Impressed Evans knew that much about the Phins. Most of the talking heads these days can name the top 2-3 players on each team and repeat the narrative ESPN has established for each.

Evans obviously has followed every more and knew exactly where the Dolphins stood.

I also don't really understand being so upset. This is very much a team that could go either way. He looked at the negative side of things, which is completely fair. We all hope Mike Wallace is a difference maker - but it's not hard to imagine his skills not translating outside of his previous system.

The only real issues I had were:

Calling Dion Jordan a reach. And even then it's just the definition of a reach. To me, a reach is picking a guy way before anyone else would pick him. Jordan wasn't going to drop much further - or at least the Phins weren't going to be able to move into position to get him for any cheaper than they did. So they didn't 'reach' to get him, though it's fair to argue he may not pan out in the NFL.

The 'middle pressure' argument - and that's probably more my own lack of knowledge on the. I thought Starks was one of the better pass-rushing DTs in the league. Odrick had 5 sacks last year - though I don't know if those came as a DT or DE. Is 'middle pressure' a weakness for the Phins? And can adding an additional speed rusher to Wake help expand an OL that would also provide more opportunities for middle pressure? I would think guys like Starks and Odrick would benefit when the tackles are forced to take wider breaks and create space in the middle.

 

Wow

 

I've posted a complete recap of the interview and shown where there was no research done and where points where made that are just out of the blue and make no sense.

Yet, I keep hearing people defend Evans. Its bizarre at this point.

 

Maybe my expectations for talking heads are just so low at this point that I don't expect much more than this.

 

Which is completely fair. Most of those guys suck goat balls.

That's why when one comes on, doing his best Skip Bayless impression and flat out fabricates facts out of thin air, I don't understand why some (and WADR, even yourself) come to his defense.

I'd totally understand if someone came on saying, "why is everyone upset, he's a talking head and those guys are stupid." But coming on and saying he's well researched and knows what he's talking about, is just really, really bizarre to me.

 

Of course. The typical "you're good until I disagree with you" stance. This is not the first or thousandth time I've seen it.

I'm not denying that Heath Evans drew a conclusion about the Dolphins' off season some time before he gave this interview. I don't see why people bring up that he seemed seething mad about what the Dolphins are doing on Day 2. I get mad when teams or players do stupid things that I don't agree with too. It doesn't mean I've lost objectivity. It's the analysis and the conclusions that sometimes draws the emotion, not the other way around.

If what you say was correct then I would listen to the interview and hear essentially what I heard from Jesse Agler's co-hosts. I'd hear a guy with an emotional opinion, who can't explain his opinion. Like when Jesse Agler said they may not agree with Heath but they appreciate him coming on and giving his opinion, and Twan Russell said that he doesn't even appreciate it. That's clearly emotional, clearly no amount of logic, research or presentation of evidence whatsoever. It's all surface level reasoning like, "oh he's fast, he can play".

From what you guys were telling me, that's what I expected to hear. It's not what I heard. At all. I heard a guy that clearly does RESEARCH and constructed his arguments well. I heard a guy that could have easily been stumped by Jesse Agler's very skilled rebuttals and follow up questions, but wasn't. At all. I heard a guy that I disagree with on a lot, but that clearly knows his football and does more research than 80 percent of the other guys I hear out there.

And if that makes you mad, that's on you.

 

LMAO at thoughtful, researched arguments being passed off as "football fancy talk".

Welcome to the Tea Party rally.

 

Or perhaps the first take was indicative of what his real thoughts were on the action that the team just took that drew this emotional response. He clearly had a player in the draft that he knew someone was going to reach on, that he didn't like AT ALL, and that was clearly Dion Jordan. He clearly already had some reservations with some of the things the Dolphins did in the off season but he was trying to withhold judgment (specifically, giving Mike Wallace $12 million a year and cutting Karlos Dansby in favor of Dannell Ellerbe)...and then when it's that same team that already did that, that stepped on the booby trap of trading up for the player he probably disliked the most amongst potential high picks, yeah he went from not saying anything at all because it wasn't going to be nice, to explaining what he did not like about the Dolphins' off season.

Either way it seems pretty clear to me that if he displayed any emotion on draft day as people say he did, it was the analysis that drew the emotion, not the other way around. And I understand that. I get emotional when I watch things that the Browns do every now and then, or the Chargers. Or the Panthers. Or the Giants. Or any number of teams that I have absolutely no connection with whatsoever. But it's not like I have this emotion about the team and then I shuffle around looking for some "football fancy talk" (sorry DJ, I'm using that one, you're not going to live it down for a while) to justify it. It's the analysis that produces the emotion.

 

If you listen to him, I don't think he was really OK with those moves prior to trading up for Jordan. I think he clearly had things he did not like, specifically he didn't like paying Wallace $12 million a year and he did not like cutting Karlos Dansby for Dannell Ellerbe. But it seems to me he was doing his best to try and see the other side of the argument on moves like that. And I'm sure there were also moves he did genuinely like.

When you join up with one of those networks sooner or later, unless you're Skip Bayless and this is literally your job to troll teams, you learn to couch any criticism you might otherwise have of teams positively. The old axiom if you don't have anything nice to say don't say it at all very much applies in the NFL network coverage space. When you decide to criticize, you have to be extremely muted and you have to dress it up well, like Mike Mayock does. And you'd better feel like you have great reasons to do so. I think Heath Evans is learning that and that's why he didn't go off on a crampage about the Mike Wallace or Karlos Dansby/Dannell Ellerbe moves. But I think Dion Jordan was kind of a last straw.

 

There is nothing stupid abotu his statement regarding Wallace. Its a fundamental of economics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner's_curse

How exactly do you reach this conclusion???? This is something that has yet to play out, but its very likely that Dion Jordan isn't affecting the game schematically to the point where the base formation is fundamentally changed.

 

I think his point on middle pressure was not necessarily that this is an area where Miami is sorely lacking, or anything like that. I think he was trying to point out that Baltimore is particularly good in that area and that's one reason they frustrate Brady. His point was that trading up and paying the #12 and #42 overall picks for an edge rusher is not a 'bang for your buck' kind of move if you're building yourself to beat the Patriots.

It was merely one of the reasons he doesn't understand that move. I think his first point is that he doesn't think Dion Jordan is a good defensive end. Secondary to that, he doesn't even understand how the move fits the need because if you're trying to build yourself to beat the Patriots then you're not prioritizing edge rushers.

 

I actually have that book. The Winner's Curse.

 

Thanks CK that is a different take on it that I had not considered..and the only one Ive heard that makes his behavior excusable..I still have the feeling he has some other reason for disliking Ireland but its just a feeling.

 

I think the Dolphins are a franchise that he doesn't "get", and hasn't for a while, especially Jeff Ireland. I think that's an opinion that is generally pretty pervasive up in New England's front office. I don't believe they have much respect for Jeff Ireland up there. Probably Steve Ross as well although I haven't specifically heard things on what they think of him (as opposed to Ireland). That probably rubbed off on Heath Evans a little bit. But that doesn't mean the analysis is not driving the response. It's not like Jeff Ireland is the one that cut him.

Either way people in this thread would have me believe the analysis wasn't even there. Like he just jumped on and was some poo-flinging monkey who heaved emotionalism constantly, did no research, didn't even make any sense, etc. That's what I expected to hear. I heard the opposite. I heard a guy that had drawn a conclusion and was doing his best to explain it. A guy that had clearly done a lot of research and put some thought into what he was saying. That's all.

 

Exactly. That was the part that undermined his entire argument. Also, to say Jordan is going to suck soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo badly in run defense, it wouldn't matter if he even got 18 sacks, What a bunch of hooey. And this was called a well researched line of reasoning?????

 

Specifically when he referred to GMs telling him the Dolphins are playing around with "monopoly money" I think he was referring to two signings: Mike Wallace and Dannell Ellerbe. Read between the lines and there are teams out there that feel the Dolphins were the highest bidders on both players by a good margin. There are teams that can't fathom how you give Ellerbe $7 million a year off 9 starts. There are teams that don't believe you pay a receiver the kind of money Miami gave Wallace unless he was a player without any holes in his game, whereas pervasively teams still regard Wallace as a deep guy but not a guy that is great running routes or a guy that can take over games in the crunch.

Those arguments could be worth spit, but I know they're out there, at the highest levels of various teams in the NFL.

 

Other way around.

Worth noting that this is Jeff Ireland's contract year, and the contracts spike significantly in year 2--which is one year after the expiration of his current contract.

 

That's true it doesn't mean he lost objectivity. It also doesn't mean he's being objective either.

You're hearing what you want to hear then or you're privy to a version of the show we haven't heard. There wasn't much logic involved in Heath's opinions and he didn't flesh out a lot of what he saying and contradicted himself a few times.

Further proof you heard what you wanted to hear or have access we don't. Jesse didn't debate him at all. Jesse asked him a couple of questions but they weren't rebuttals in anyway. Jesse saved his talking for after Heath had hung up.

There were many things Heath said that made no sense, including Pittsburgh not wanting Wallace, implying Jeff Ireland is known for being a big spender moneywise, implying Dansby was a playmaker, or saying he was "ok" with everything leading up to the draft but then turned around blasted everything leading up to the draft.

You are (once again) assuming the arguments against are simply because he said things we don't like, when its really about the fact that his justifications are out of left field. When someone's justifications are that bizarre, others tend to think there's an emotional reason for them, which is why he's being called bias.

 

Yet is was reported by Wallace's father that the Vikings offered more. Of course he could have been just flat out lying...

 

Yes, I'm sure he was talking about the winner's curse. Of course he was. SMH.

If three teams want a player, and 2 of them bids $2 and the 3rd bids $2.01 and they win...I can say no one else was willing to spend as much on that player as the winning team. Clearly, I'm talking about the winner's curse...right?

He said if the Steelers wanted him back (implying it was because Wallace was not that great of player for them) they would have gotten him back. That is not true and any book you have on economics has nothing to do with it. they wanted him back and tried to get him back.

Huh? What conclusion? That Jordan has the potential to cover TEs?

 

These are all good points to bring up in a rational discussion or debate with Heath Evans.

A rational discussion/debate that has not been occuring because various people have not gotten over the "Heath Evans hates the Dolphins!!!" aspect of all this and they don't do themselves the favor of actually considering the intelligent (but arguable) points that Heath brought up.

 

I sort of agree with CK here, I like Heath Evans more then most, but only when not talking about the Dolphins. For whatever reason I think he is just to negative against the Dolphins for whatever reason. Like it has been said though, he does more research then most analyst which is why I like him outside of the Dolphins.

 

Yes, their d cord,

 

Maybe I just haven't paid enough attention - but is this a common concern about Ellerbe? When he was signed it seemed most were on board with him being an up-and-coming player and someone that was unlikely to fail. I also thought I saw he's only like the 13th highest paid MLB - so the 'monopoly money' comment seems a bit extreme unless (like Jordan) he feels his talent level is much below the common perception.

Is Ellerbe someone that we should be concerned with this year?

 

You have very low standards for the media..

 

Yes I think Ellerbe was well regarded as an up-and-comer. However when the contract numbers came in showing him making $7 million a year, I think that's when more negativity came into it because he only has 9 starts or whatever the number is.

I would also surely love to see the data that suggests Dannell Ellerbe's $7 million per year makes him only the 13th highest paid middle linebacker. Not denying it, just not seen it.

 

Yes, those two teams did not believe that he was worth $2.01. Again, its a fundamental economic principle. Winner's curse is exactly what he was referring to.

The conclusion that he fundamentally changes the schematics of the base defense. Evans was specifically referring to the problems caused in regards to defensive personnel packages against 2 TE formations. Dion Jordan potentially being able to cover them changes this how? You're essentially suggesting that Dion Jordan becomes a defensive back in nickel formations. Possible? Yes. But forgive me for not believing anyone that disagrees is inherently biased.

 

I think this thread needs to die. Some of us recognize that Heath Evans came up with some pretty intelligent and researched arguments even if we ultimately disagree with them, and some people won't be happy unless everyone agrees Heath Evans is a moron that shouldn't be allowed on television or radio. Let's just leave it at that.

 

yeah it is, I like seeing the thank you's for the few posts that defend his POV...lol, lost puppies, or defending him is their way of coming out as to how they really feel about Ireland.

To think we can't see thru all the BS on both levels is quite funny.

 

I responded to your previous post before I read this, I think your correct.

 

LOL @ lets leave it as, "I am right, and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong."

 

Why would anyone be subtle with their feelings about Ireland?

 

This just comes off looking immature on your part. People have disagreements all the time. I would like to think we can be mature about them. Your conclusions that people defending Heath Evans are "lost puppies" or are just defending him as a way of "coming out" about how they have felt about the off season is ridiculous and childish. You should be above it. I'll give you an example. Stringer Bell has been defending Heath in here pretty consistently. I'm also positive that he's been on the other side of the aisle so to speak when I've had debates about Jeff Ireland with him in the past. In fact he's pretty vocal in his belief that Jeff Ireland should get a contract extension.

You're just making yourself look ridiculous because you can't be mature about this. This is a disagreement. It happens. Let it go.