Wittgenstein re: Speed at WR

by grantmp on Apr 14, 2009 5:01 PM PDT Comment 22 comments

As an undergraduate, I had the joy of dissecting a brutally difficult but immensely rewarding book by Ludwig Wittgenstein called Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, which attempted to develop a perfect language for the description of reality. He adopted a highly formal style that consisted of a series of propositions (sentences) ordered by a numbering system such that a first proposition (1) was commented on by 1.1, and 1.1 commented was upon by 1.1.1 and etc.
The recent discussion at NinersNation of the importance of speed at the WR position (with regard to Crabtree, particularly) inspired me to write a few propsitions of my own. I'd welcome your comments, examples, critiques, etc. Does this seem like a "perfect language" for studying WR's? Are there things I've missed? Does this go some way to explaining the inexhaustiblity of the debate about certain prospects (like Crabtree)?

Proposition 1: Speed is an asset for any football player and particularly for WRs.
Proposition 1.1: Speed relevant in football terms may or may not be measurable by stopwatches on practice fields.
Proposition 1.2.1: Speed measurements are thrown off by field conditions, whether a player is or is not wearing pads
Proposition 1.2.2: Speed's relevance for a particular WR is relative to offensive scheme and role within that scheme
Proposition 2: Speed is not the only factor in a receiver's likelihood of success at his position
Proposition 2.1: Balance, agility, etc. are also factors
Proposition 2.2: Unteachable physical tools like size, sense of leverage, etc. are factors
Proposition 2.3: Teachable, position-specific tools like route-running also factors in
Proposition 3: Speed is not at all a factor in a receiver's likelihood of success as a team member
Proposition 3.1: Being a bad teammate can sour a coach on you, leading to less playing time
Proposition 3.2: Being stuck behind a more-experienced teammate can hinder a receiver's development
Proposition 3.3.1: Being stuck with a bad QB can greatly hinder a receiver's development
Proposition 3.3.2: Being stuck on a good team that never throws the ball late in games can prevent a receiver from seeing the field and developing.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

1 recs | Comment 22 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So . . . how would grade Crabtree on that scale?

Understand the scale, but how do you use it?

by bignerd on Apr 14, 2009 6:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It's not a scale

It’s a description of the factors involved in our evaluation of WR’s.

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 14, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

But at least he understands the scale…

When the aliens land and say, "Take me to your leader," I'm taking them to you Fooch!

by jfainsf49 on Apr 14, 2009 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

kinda

I don’t know if Crabtree will make it down to 10. And apparently Braylon Edwards is going to be traded to the Giants so they would probably snag Crabtree

49ers WILL make the playoffs this year.

by iaalexeeff on Apr 14, 2009 6:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That would be perfect for me. The guy I think is a bust going to the team who always drafts busts.

by bignerd on Apr 14, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Edwards a bust......Not likely.

This scale takes many factors into effect,and it seems to be rather well thought out, yet here’s the REAL skinny on Edwards. First off, if you believe in them. Edwards faced the “Sophmore Jinx.” Apparently, during the long hitory of the league, several players at different positions have had 1 great year.(usually their rookie season) due to the fact many defenses haven’t seen that player in that particular scheme. The next season (thus the sophmore tag) defenses have had time to look at tendancies and the role the player has for that team. So they in turn adjust, making it harder for that player to exceed his prior contributions.

But, if Edwards goes to the Giants, look out. One, I think Edwards was not satisfied with the goings on in the team as a whole and his attitude showed up on the field with a myriad of drops. Also, not to break bad on a decent QB like Derek Anderson. However, he’s no Eli Manning. Manning has had his own set of groing pains and has adjusted positively. With Edwards going to the Giants ( a much better run organization) he will have plenty of opportunities to strut his stuff. Besides, the receiver corp for the Giants is almost as bad as ours. So, he would immediately come in as the #1 guy. No Plax looking over his shoulder.

Lastly, Edwards has shown already that he is capable of being a go to receier and on the Giants, it will be easy to make an immediate impact.

K.C.Edwards -AKA- "THE" DarkkStarr

by DarkkStarr1 on Apr 15, 2009 6:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think he meant

that with Edwards going to the Gaints, and the Browns picking ahead of us, then Crabtree won’t make it past them. He thinks Crabtree will be a bust and the Browns tend to pick busts.

Basically, it sounds like bignerd wants Crabtree gone before #10 so there is no question about the Niners taking him. And as much as I don’t want to start another war with the TT people, I’d have to agree. Besides the fact that I don’t see WR as a top 5 need (OT,NT,CB,RB2,OLB are all higher on the list) I also question how good he’ll be in the NFL. I will admit I haven’t watched all that much of Crabtree, and please, no one get offended that I don’t bow down to the TT god as I rightfully should, I just don’t like hype. And this time of the year, a bunch of players get over hyped and most end up failing miserably to live up to the high expectations. I just have a feeling Crabtree is one of those. No proof, no evidence, just a hunch. I may be right, I may be wrong, there’s no logic behind my thought I’ll admit. So yea, go Browns, get Crabtree.

by Sebaz49 on Apr 15, 2009 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And this time of the year, a bunch of players get over hyped…

Crabtree’s been hyped his whole college career. It’s not like it magically just started a few months ago or just last year.

by sfgfan on Apr 15, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

The reason why I’m insistent that it’s not a scale is because there’s no one formula for what makes a good wide receiver. The fact that Proposition 1 is one of the 3 propositions indicates that speed is important. But there are all kinds of different guys who can make an impact, from the Wes Welker/Braylon Edwards type to the Housh type to the Berrian Type to the Terrell Owens type. This isn’t a ‘survival of the fittest’ scenario where all of the different Receivers are trying to fit into one mold. (ASIDE: if I have an objection to Darwin’s theory, it’s not on creationist grounds, but on the basis of a lack of imagination about how linear the ‘development’ of the species needs to be). So this description tries to set out the parameters that are relevant for understanding the various niches a player can carve out/fit into.
With regard to Crabtree specifically, I think he has the skills to contribute right away (especially relatively, that is, compared to the rest of his class) as a #1 because of his all around game. The guy was flat-out dominant at the college level and showed up against the best teams even despite some injuries. Crabtree was as hyped at the beginning of last season as he was at the end of it, and despite the fact that Texas Tech’s opposition knew that they were only going to run 30 plays, and knew that Crabtree was going to have 10+ balls thrown his direction, not only could they not stop him, but he made them pay. Production at the college level is still an important factor, regardless of the Proposition 3-related external factors that contribute to assessing such a player.

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I just meant that this time of the year, they start feeding the hype machines with juicy babies so they can have them cranking at full steam before the draft.

He may have been hyped his whole career, but he seems to be hitting godlike status recently… or has it always been that way with him?

by Sebaz49 on Apr 15, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Crabtree...

… if I’m not mistaken, has always been “Godlike” in scouts eyes. He was projected as a surefire top 5 pick at some point a few months ago. His stock has only fallen because people are making mountains out of that injury issue, which is a minor setback but nothing major (unless he has Garrison Hearst’s luck).

by sfgfan on Apr 15, 2009 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And...

… I use the term “Godlike” rather loosely, just to use your words. I’m not saying he’s going to be some ridiculous specimen that turns out to be Randy Moss or Larry Fitzgerald. I think he will be something more along the lines of Harrison or Bruce, someone with solid route and ball skills and can seriously become a #1 option for a QB. He also knows what to do with the ball once he gets it and looks like he has quite a bit more running power or ability to shed tackles than those two.

by sfgfan on Apr 15, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

maybe not like Harrison

I have a buddy who’s a die-hard Colts fan and he would be outraged at the comparison with Harrison (rhyme not intentional)—though for reasons you might not think.
1) Harrison’s calling card has always been his speed, which is why he wasn’t nearly as productive last year. Crabtree doesn’t have Harrison-esque speed.
2) Harrison goes down if you breathe on him. Seriously. His YAContact totals are negligible. To the point that when he went back to return kicks, my buddy described Harrison as ‘madly seeking a football player (teammate or opponent) into whom he could run in order to fall down’. The Texas Catch alone is enough to know that’s not the case with Crabtree.
The Bruce comparison might have some legs, but Crabtree seems more elusive once he gets the ball.

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't watch a lot of...

… Colts games, but I’ve always thought he was more of a possession WR. I guess I’m wrong.

If Crabtree turns out to be anywhere close to Bruce in terms of polish over the years but providing more after the catch, I would be 100% happy with the pick. Heck, even if he was a mirror image of Bruce, I’d be completely happy three or so years from now.

by sfgfan on Apr 15, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not entirely fair . . .

The Browns make busts out of the their picks too.

by bignerd on Apr 15, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so "top-ten pick" = "god-like"?

Like I said, Crabtree was as hyped at the beginning of last season as he was at the end of it. He’s not being spoken of in the same way Calvin Johnson was, though that’s as much because people are 1) a bit unsure of their evaluation because of Crabtree’s having been ideally suited to the Texas Tech offense and 2) unable to distill Crabtree’s skills into an excel spreadsheet (which Calvin Johnson filled out beautifully).

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

(reply fail)

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 10:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

If you can grantmp, is there a

Simple explanation, for how to interprit Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus?

http://www.49ersboard.blogspot.com

by supraman on Apr 15, 2009 3:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I can't guarantee that it'll be simple, but...

I can send you my undergrad thesis.

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

An anecdote, though:

Apparently Wittgenstein was inspired by the French practice of drawing up the scenes of car accidents from a top-down view. Those top-down pictures describe a physical state of affairs symbolically. What Wittgenstein was trying to do was to develop a language that would describe not two sets of relations (from picture of a car to an actual car) but three sets of relations: from Understanding (i.e. Order in Thought) to Symbolic Order to Actual Physical Reality. All three are states of affairs. All three have objects. All three have relations between those objects that make up the states of affairs. Trying to give an account of the way that all three are related in a way that’s consistent is obviously very difficult. Wittgenstein later thought of TLP as a failure and abandoned the ideal-language approach to philosophy, saying, “Back to the rough ground!”

Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!

by grantmp on Apr 15, 2009 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's too much for me!

Can’t comprehend it

http://www.49ersboard.blogspot.com

by supraman on Apr 15, 2009 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's what she said!

"I'll be honest with you, I love his music, I do, I'm a Michael Bolton fan. For my money, I don't know if it gets any better than when he sings "When a Man Loves a Woman"

by 49erLou on Apr 15, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs