[Merged] Saints activate Dan Arnold from practice squad (1 Viewer)

[insidejob]

I hope Arnold has better "feetwork" than these guys Rob Gronkowski is talking about right now on Fox pre game.

 

[FGE413]

I think the fumbles played a part even though, yeah, there's no documented way for me to prove that (I was also at that Jets game, so I'm sure there's some proximity bias). And I agree with you that he was deep down a #4 WR who was overstretched when asked to do a little more in terms of receiving, so I'm sure that figured into things as well (Austin Carr is another guy who leaps to mind as team player who's fine to have around until he suddenly is elevated to the #3 WR position due to injuries to Tre'quan and Kirkwood).

I wish Arnold the best today, I really do. He had some rough moments in limited action last year, but he's got the speed and size to be a great tool for Payton if he can get to the point where the QBs can trust him.

It's a deliberately outlandish analogy, to demonstrate the dangers of treating a statistical outlier as a constant state of production.

And not just to disagree with you, but I don't think there is any documented linkage between those fumbles and his no longer being on the team. More likely he was perfectly good as a #4, knew the scheme and was a willing blocker, but was overstretched when asked to play #3. To the extent that when his contract was up, the team went in a different direction.

My issue is and will continue to be that as a player, he gets short shrift because he did his job, which in the main was to play #4 WR, without living up to the same sort of over-eager fantastical fan projection/hype that people attach to almost every prospect we pick up, leading to an unachievable set of expectations. And Arnold is being subjected to the same thing in some of the posts here.

 

[TribuneUK]

I think the fumbles played a part even though, yeah, there's no documented way for me to prove that (I was also at that Jets game, so I'm sure there's some proximity bias). And I agree with you that he was deep down a #4 WR who was overstretched when asked to do a little more in terms of receiving, so I'm sure that figured into things as well (Austin Carr is another guy who leaps to mind as team player who's fine to have around until he suddenly is elevated to the #3 WR position due to injuries to Tre'quan and Kirkwood).

I wish Arnold the best today, I really do. He had some rough moments in limited action last year, but he's got the speed and size to be a great tool for Payton if he can get to the point where the QBs can trust him.

Proximity bias is a good term. I tend to rail against 'recency bias' which is probably very similar.

 

[blackadder]

He has been hanging around with the team long enough to at least understand what our offense is all about. The only real issue with him is that at times he inexplicably becomes Dan "I never met a perfect pass I could couldn't drop" Arnold.

But if we have to go to him often in this game, I sure hope he has his day in the sun!

The bigger concern for me is that, related to what you posted, he has tendencies that in a game like this where it is high probability that turnovers make the difference one way or another he might tip a ball or cough one up with heavy contact that end up spotting points to the Bears.

Going against this defense, he better have cleaned that stuff up.

If he is involved in a ball security issue then you might have to call an end to the experiment because at this level he's had enough chances.

All that said, I hope he balls out, has turned a corner and goes on to be a contributor.

 

[ilvdsnts]

I am not a fan of Dan Arnold and I am still mad that he dropped that touchdown. But giving the injures and seeing how people are wanting to trade for a tight end, I see reasons to activate Dan at the moment. Questionable move to sign a tight end this week when Arnold is already in the building.

They know what they have in dan arnold, they probably wanted to kick the tires on someone else to see if they could find a diamond in the rough, once they saw parker they decided DA was better.

 

[MJ in Calif]

Sounds like you're redefining what stats mean to suit your argument. Regardless, 47 games out of 48 without a fumble directly disproves your notion. Try to be factual when you're determined to needlessly slate a former Saint.

P.S. No statistical evidence I can find of Coleman fumbling a ball (that the Saints recovered) in any of those 48 regular season games as you suggest. It's almost as if basing your judgement of a player on limited anecdotal evidence is a seriously flawed approach ?

Slating a former Saint? How's that? He fumbled twice against the Jets in two consecutive plays when he touched the ball. He fumbled against Carolina in the playoff game but it was recovered by Ingram. For his size, he was not very physical against much smaller DBs on 50-50 balls. He was a good blocker downfield and that is probably why he stuck around. That and his potential that could never be reached.

 

[blackadder]

Slating a former Saint? How's that? He fumbled twice against the Jets in two consecutive playedwhen he touched the ball. He fumbled against Carolina in the playoff game but it was recovered by Ingram. For his size, he was not very physical against much smaller DBs on 50-50 balls. He was a good blocker downfield and that is probably why he stuck around. That and his potential that could never be reached.

There's a pattern and tendencies when Arnold gets targeted. There might indeed be some recency bias, but if he is part of the game plan today and there are ball security issues you have to conclude that there is a thing and the lights are too bright at this level.

 

[MJ in Calif]

There's a pattern and tendencies when Arnold gets targeted. There might indeed be some recency bias, but if he is part of the game plan today and there are ball security issues you have to conclude that there is a thing and the lights are too bright at this level.

My post was referring to Coleman fumbling not Arnold.

 

[TribuneUK]

Slating a former Saint? How's that? He fumbled twice against the Jets in two consecutive plays when he touched the ball. He fumbled against Carolina in the playoff game but it was recovered by Ingram. For his size, he was not very physical against much smaller DBs on 50-50 balls. He was a good blocker downfield and that is probably why he stuck around. That and his potential that could never be reached.

I think you've just repeated every Brandon Coleman trope, and I've heard them all. But none of them more telling than your last, it being the point I've made above, that fans attach unrealistic expectations on every player and then treat them like a bum when they don't become perennial all pros.

Coleman was what he was, which did not include fumbling every time he caught the ball. He helped us win games, and I'm grateful for his contribution.

 

[blackadder]

My post was referring to Coleman fumbling not Arnold.

Well thread was about Arnold so I missed that part.

 

[MJ in Calif]

I think you've just repeated every Brandon Coleman trope, and I've heard them all. But none of them more telling than your last, it being the point I've made above, that fans attach unrealistic expectations on every player and then treat them like a bum when they don't become perennial all pros.

Coleman was what he was, which did not include fumbling every time he caught the ball. He helped us win games, and I'm grateful for his contribution.

Never intimated he was a bum. Just that he had a propensity to fumble. Stop exaggerating. Whatever.

 

[TribuneUK]

Never intimated he was a bum. Just that he had a propensity to fumble. Stop exaggerating. Whatever.

Ok, I see how you've misunderstood that part based on what I've said. That's a general point aimed at others.

But still not a propensity to fumble. We won't agree on this though, fair enough.