Inconsistent playmaker versus game manager

[JohnnyLV]

Reading the training camp reports, and the G&W scrimmage it has become apparent that Hack is inconsistent, but talented and explosive. His "highs" are the highest of the three, and his lows are probably the lowest, but he is flashing every day and outside of yesterday limiting turnovers well. 

McClown has been McClown. Steady, unspectacular dink and dunk guy.

So it got me thinking that in general, which QB is better for a team?

A lot of people, especially those that prefer a defensive mindset would reflexively say the "game manager"

But I am far from convinced that is the right call.

In the last 20 Super Bowl winners, Flacco would clearly be an inconsistent playmaker, Dilfer the game manager. However you could make a good argument that Eli is closer to the playmaker category (2 Super Bowl Wins), Favre is a hall of famer, but still a dynamic playmaker that made TONS of aggressive mistakes, and we could put Russel Wilson closer to the game manager category, but he made so many plays with his feet that he is sort of in his own category along with Doug Williams and Tarkenton (who made a bunch but never won)

So teams CAN win SBs with the more inconsistent QBs, and really you can only point to one definitive QB in the game manager category that won in the modern NFL.

If Hackenburg can limit interceptions, which it seems like he may be able to do, but still make dynamic plays and plays downfield, I think he gives us a better chance to win than a game manager.

Say Hackenburg had a year like 3000 yards, 25 TDs 15 Ints and a completion percentage of 55%, and McCown had same yards but say 18 TDs and 6 picks,I think almost 100% of the time we will win more with Hackenburg.

The poster child for game manager is Alex Smith and I do not think anyone thinks he accounts for a lot of KCs victories.

Give me the inconsistent young guy that can make plays every day of the week

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Adoni Beast]

I said something along these lines in an old thread a couple months back. Basically, with the lack of offense we have its going to be difficult to stat watch Hackenberg. 

If he's moving the ball, throwing touchdowns, limiting killer ints...I wont care if his completion % is in the low 50's in his first year playing. I wont care if he throws 20 ints  as long as they're not constant pick 6's and game breakers. As long as he's getting the ball in the end zone, commanding the huddle (somethinf which he seems to have some trouble with in camp) and team then we have something to build off of. 

 

[jpoppy717]

Disagree with the premise.  While one would expect Hack as inexperienced QB to be the inconsistent risk taker  and McCown as veteran journeyman to be the game manager, that doesn't seem to be the case.  McCown throwing more INTs in practice, Hack didn't have any for about the first  week, but taking more sacks.  Sounds like McCown taking more chances.  

And through his career, McCown has had pretty high INT rates, except for the 2013 season that makes no sense.  McCown has also had reasonably high yards per completion averages.  Just because he's a mediocre backup journeyman doesn't mean he's a dink and dunk game manager.  Similar to Fitzpatrick, who many assume is a game manager because he went to Harvard and is a mediocre journeyman, but instead is a high-risk-taker who throws a lot of INT.  

[Beerfish]

"Say Hackenburg had a year like 3000 yards, 25 TDs 15 Ints and a completion percentage of 55%, "

If Hackenbrug ever does this i will contribute $500 to my local spca

[JiFtheOracle]

It's almost like we've had this conversation before the good old wily (sh*tty) vet vs young inconsistent yet explosive (big arm) kid.  

We have chose the Vet in recent history and boy that panned out well.