To Fellow TBS'ers: Re-Ranking Recruiting Classes Survey Request
Comments
-
This turned into a massive threadjack. I love it. The key to the Callier argument from my side is that I'm not saying he's Polk or Sankey. He's 2* less than them at a minimum. I'm just saying he's not DiAndre Campbell. Callier was good in his role and produced. Campbell was not and has not.
I was not overly excited about Callier being the guy to take over for Polk. I felt like he was a pretty quick, hard runner that fell down at times for no good reason. I thought/think he would have been OK, but wouldn't have held the job for long if the injury hadn't happened. Sankey would have needed 1-2 full games to take over. I really had no idea Sankey was going to be as good as he was though. -
Yes, claiming he was a better player than Talia Crichton, Cody Bruns and DiAndre Campbell is major dooging man. MAJOR.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Hahaha, you're fucking dooging out over Callier!dnc said:
Of course if he was a 5 star he'd be considered a bust. We're arguing whether he's a 2 or a 3, anyone in that 2.5 range is a massive bust if he came in with 5 star hype.Dennis_DeYoung said:With Coleman, I don't know what's going to happen. He showed flashes (like Callier) of being a really good tailback when he ran with purpose. When he didn't, he looked awful. He had such a good couple games early, he started over everyone... then he looked awful and got benched.
In the words of Jay-Z in the Jaz classic, Hawaiian Sophie, "I can't call it."
I think it's always important to deal with what people 'actually are' rather than what they 'could've been.' With Callier, the evidence is that he was in a position to take the job twice and neither time could he grab the job.
He's essentially a poor man's Jay Barry.
My point about all of this is that he gets more interest because he came in with middling fanfare and had a couple decent runs, so people thought he might be good in the future. When he never really did much, people never really came to terms with what he actually was, which was a back of average size, speed, vision and moves.
You can't mention him in the same breath with Sankey and Polk, who were both absolute geniuses as soon as they hit the field.
If Callier had been a 5-star kid, I think people would be calling him a major bust and it would be easier to label him a 2 because of the contrast away from the expectations.
I try to ask myself, 'what if this kid came in as a 5-star?' so you are honest about what each kid did.
Are there kids on our team that lived up to that right now? Yeah: Shaq, Shelton, Peters (well, used to be on our team anyway) and Kikaha.
It's an interesting exercise to de-bias evaluation. What would you think if they were unrecruited 2-stars, or 5-stars?
Wouldn't Kasen's career be seen totally differently?
I'm not saying it's super important to think that way, but if we want to be accurate (I'm guessing the reason to get 20 people to do it is to get a 'wisdom of the crowd' effect), it helps to think from a few angles possibly.
I just think Callier gets a little bit of 'Cody Bruns' love. A guy who seemed like he would do something and never really got a chance to unequivocally prove he sucked because he never really played... so people's template of him in their minds dominates the evaluation rather than the fact that he was never a starter on middling Pac-12 teams.
Just some thoughts for the mind as they say.
This is basically a Tevis "Unibomber" Bartlett manifesto at this length.
TL;DR - i'm not saying anything interesting. Move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for.
But fuck off with the Bruns and DiAndre Campbell shit. Callier is one of the best kick returners UW ever had and averaged over 5 yards a carry for his career. He was never bad when he got onto the field, which is something you absolutely cannot say about Bruns or Campbell.
No one is putting him in the same breath with Polk and Sankey, let's leave that strawman aside. We're debating whether he deserves a third star or not. Everyone would rate both Polk and Sankey as five stars. At least I assume so, if not this rating system is bullshit.
Jessie Callier performed well in every season he saw the field and in every role he ever played on the field. We can speculate as to the reasons he didn't see the field more - just wasn't as good as the players ahead of him, injuries sapped his explosiveness when he would have been the most talented guy, wasn't a great practice player, whatever. But the dude played well when he actually played. I'm not arguing he *could* have done something, I'm arguing he played when when he played, both on ST and in the backfield, and the numbers back my eyes up. IMO, he was a lot better player though he never started than many players we have had who did start at other positions (hello Campbell, Crichton, etc). -
I didn't realize HIV affected eyesight.chuck said:This turned into a massive threadjack. I love it. The key to the Callier argument from my side is that I'm not saying he's Polk or Sankey. He's 2* less than them at a minimum. I'm just saying he's not DiAndre Campbell. Callier was good in his role and produced. Campbell was not and has not.
I was not overly excited about Callier being the guy to take over for Polk. I felt like he was a pretty quick, hard runner that fell down at times for no good reason. I thought/think he would have been OK, but wouldn't have held the job for long if the injury hadn't happened. Sankey would have needed 1-2 full games to take over. I really had no idea Sankey was going to be as good as he was though.
T's and P's. -
Praise be to Allah, this thread has been saved.GrandpaSankey said:
I didn't realize HIV affected eyesight.chuck said:This turned into a massive threadjack. I love it. The key to the Callier argument from my side is that I'm not saying he's Polk or Sankey. He's 2* less than them at a minimum. I'm just saying he's not DiAndre Campbell. Callier was good in his role and produced. Campbell was not and has not.
I was not overly excited about Callier being the guy to take over for Polk. I felt like he was a pretty quick, hard runner that fell down at times for no good reason. I thought/think he would have been OK, but wouldn't have held the job for long if the injury hadn't happened. Sankey would have needed 1-2 full games to take over. I really had no idea Sankey was going to be as good as he was though.
T's and P's.
-
When we reveal the voting of this survey hardcorehusky might actually explode judging by the reaction over a debate about whether Jesse Callier is a 2 or 3 star player. This could be awesome!
-
If nothing else it gives us something to distract us from another run at the offseason natty.CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:When we reveal the voting of this survey hardcorehusky might actually explode judging by the reaction over a debate about whether Jesse Callier is a 2 or 3 star player. This could be awesome!
-
We all know better you blind, HIV dripping motherfucker.GrandpaSankey said:
I didn't realize HIV affected eyesight.chuck said:This turned into a massive threadjack. I love it. The key to the Callier argument from my side is that I'm not saying he's Polk or Sankey. He's 2* less than them at a minimum. I'm just saying he's not DiAndre Campbell. Callier was good in his role and produced. Campbell was not and has not.
I was not overly excited about Callier being the guy to take over for Polk. I felt like he was a pretty quick, hard runner that fell down at times for no good reason. I thought/think he would have been OK, but wouldn't have held the job for long if the injury hadn't happened. Sankey would have needed 1-2 full games to take over. I really had no idea Sankey was going to be as good as he was though.
T's and P's.
-
What monster did I create by squinting at my phone on a bar top to defend Callier? I just always thought his numbers spoke for themselves even though the general sentiment on the boreds was "he sucks, he falls down, has no wiggle, etc". Over 5.0 ypc. He was never bad. He was good and produced whenever he played. He deserves the 3rd star.
Anyways back to drinking you doogliest doogers to ever doog!! -
Campbell is another interesting case study.
As a WR, he was pedestrian to say the least. However, his blocking ability at the WR position was fairly strong.
I'd say that he's a 2 on the scale, but would give him a 2.5 if I could. He's another guy that I would argue, much like Callier, that had a role on the team and performed his role accordingly. It might have always been a sexy role, but it was a role none the less and he performed that role actually fairly well. -
I agree with most of that but I've seen Campbell drop too many balls.Tequilla said:Campbell is another interesting case study.
As a WR, he was pedestrian to say the least. However, his blocking ability at the WR position was fairly strong.
I'd say that he's a 2 on the scale, but would give him a 2.5 if I could. He's another guy that I would argue, much like Callier, that had a role on the team and performed his role accordingly. It might have always been a sexy role, but it was a role none the less and he performed that role actually fairly well.
