Sam & the great QB’s of the past

[Sperm Edwards]

28 minutes ago, nico002 said:

Yet you keep ignoring the Herndon TD, or the inability to run for a 3rd and 4th and 1. And 3-4 other drive killing drops in the first two games. Or the Herndon fumble. All things out of the QBs control that would have kept drives going and off set “garbage time” stats. The idea that other QBs don’t ever fall behind is laughable, they all do and they all benefit from “prevent” defenses. Not to mention that every other QB out there has 1-3 guys that can take the ball make a play and make the QB look good. Those Hogan passes behind the line? Julio Jones is taking those to the house for Matt Ryan.  You can cherry pick as much as you want, it doesn’t change the fact that you are making blanket assumptions off two games. 

Wrong again, though that has become a predictable pattern.

No other QB has used 2 garbage-time possessions as the only thing keeping a QB labeled as promising rather than Ginger Geno. If you disagree, and it's so obvious to you, then be good enough name all of them (or even some of them) and cite these games that saved their season stats, instead of talking in BS semantics.  

Every QB suffers through dropped passes, fumbles, etc. Every one of them. 

And you suggesting someone else is cherry-picking is rich. You threw out a whole football game from last year, as though being a statistical outlier meant it didn't happen - i.e. the worse game he had, the more justified you feel in ignoring it - then you threw out half a season of whole football games to grade his stats on a curve in a way you wouldn't do with any other QB.

You threw out entire games that very much counted. I threw out exactly 2 garbage-time drives, that everyone knew could have no possible impact on their games' results before they started. And it's relevant to show this is what his numbers are without these drives where the D outright let him complete passes so long as they were shorter and kept the clock moving. It's way more relevant than cherry-picking only the entire games you want to count and throwing out the ones you want to pretend never happened. 

[nico002]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Wrong again, though it has become a predictable pattern.

No other QB has used 2 garbage-time possessions as the only thing keeping a QB labeled as promising rather than Ginger Geno. If you disagree, and it's so obvious to you, then be good enough name all of them (or even some of them) and cite these games that saved their season stats, instead of talking in BS semantics.  

Every QB suffers through dropped passes, fumbles, etc. Every one of them. 

And you suggesting someone else is cherry-picking is rich. You threw out a whole football game from last year, as though being a statistical outlier meant it didn't happen - i.e. the worse game he had, the more justified you feel in ignoring it - then you threw out half a season of whole football games to grade his stats on a curve in a way you wouldn't do with any other QB.

You threw out entire games that very much counted. I threw out exactly 2 garbage-time drives, that everyone knew could have no possible impact on their games' results before they started. And it's relevant to show this is what his numbers are without these drives where the D outright let him complete passes so long as they were shorter and kept the clock moving. It's way more relevant than cherry-picking only the entire games you want to count and throwing out the ones you want to pretend never happened. 

Yes because the first 2 weeks of the 2020 season are all that we should use to make determinations. It’s certainly more reliable than say the 20 game sample that I provided earlier. And where you are 100% certifiably wrong is that while yes all  QBs suffer from drops they also benefit from playmakers making plays and getting open. You keep ignoring that fact though. I get it, it feels good to take a negative stance and deal only in absolutes, it’s easier and requires less brain power. 

[OilfieldJet]

It may be academically enjoyable to debate Sam now, but absent an injury (and Sam may not make it through all 16 games), we have him as the starter the rest of this year. We will know lots more by game 16, mechanics, accuracy, leadership, everything will become clear. That said, this year is an up or down outcome, no more handwringing, excuses or denials.

[Wonderboy]

20 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

The odds are stacked against him. Maybe pocket passers are being phased out for those 'running' QBs like Lamar jackson and josh allen

Yea seems like it but those guys will sooner or later get clocked and be a shell of their former selves. And these defenders are bigger and faster now as well. Even Vick, who was the best joystick qb ever, regressed after his initial splurge.  There’s more to the position than grease lightning.

[TheMo]

Realistically if Sam Darnold plays poorly enough to get us a shot at Lawrence you take the QB. 

BUT you also fire Gase and hopefully JD picks a good HC (I personally think that might be Toub or Greg Roman). 

At that point Darnold is in the Alex Smith role. Either way he's taking the punches in the system while it builds up and then Lawrence takes over. If Darnold becomes decent he can get us back significant draft capital. If he doesn't he bought you time to build a team around Lawrence. 

[predator_05]

6 minutes ago, Wonderboy said:

Yea seems like it but those guys will sooner or later get clocked and be a shell of their former selves. And these defenders are bigger and faster now as well. Even Vick, who was the best joystick qb ever, regressed after his initial splurge.  There’s more to the position than grease lightning.

 

But what if further rule changes disallow defenders from tackling cleanly? They're already making it harder to use the helmet. If you protect the running QB, then they'll change the game and set a new standard. 

I'm guessing this is the direction our game is headed. Running QBs are exciting to watch, and don't need a lot of coaching. Accurate short-range passer with running ability is a day 1 starter in any vanilla offensive scheme.  

[Sperm Edwards]

24 minutes ago, nico002 said:

Yes because the first 2 weeks of the 2020 season are all that we should use to make determinations. It’s certainly more reliable than say the 20 game sample that I provided earlier. And where you are 100% certifiably wrong is that while yes all  QBs suffer from drops they also benefit from playmakers making plays and getting open. You keep ignoring that fact though. I get it, it feels good to take a negative stance and deal only in absolutes, it’s easier and requires less brain power. 

So you're not going to name anybody even though you take a position as though it's such commonplace occurrence. Nice cop out, but it's about what I expected.

But you go on thinking that it makes rational sense to judge Darnold exclusively by removing his bad games, to instead count his good games against tomato can opponents, and then amortize those good games over a full 16-game season to come up with phony-baloney stats that make him acceptable.

So your idea is effectively to erase the bad games, and then count the good games twice. Totally reasonable. Too bad they don't let me pick equities that way. 

[jgb]

2 hours ago, nico002 said:

lol obvious troll is obvious 

The word "troll" must be the most oft-misused word on this site. A troll is someone who expresses an opinion in bad faith, that they may not even believe, in order to harass or annoy. It does not mean "someone who disagrees with me," regardless how much personal distress you suffer as a result of those nasty contrary views.

1 hour ago, nico002 said:

Yet you keep ignoring the Herndon TD, or the inability to run for a 3rd and 4th and 1. And 3-4 other drive killing drops in the first two games. Or the Herndon fumble. All things out of the QBs control that would have kept drives going and off set “garbage time” stats. The idea that other QBs don’t ever fall behind is laughable, they all do and they all benefit from “prevent” defenses. Not to mention that every other QB out there has 1-3 guys that can take the ball make a play and make the QB look good. Those Hogan passes behind the line? Julio Jones is taking those to the house for Matt Ryan.  You can cherry pick as much as you want, it doesn’t change the fact that you are making blanket assumptions off two games. 

The point of considering the entire data set is that you don't have to account for each individual play. The bigger the sample size, the more confidence in the conclusions. It's the opposite of cherry-picking.

[Jetsfan80]

9 hours ago, BurnleyJet said:

To be fair to Sam’s had zero help, I also hate the coach. I’m genuinely worried if we do Draft Trevor Lawrence, we will ruin him also. You can’t have any young QB roll out with this sh*t show and no receivers.
 

I hope they can Gase soon, and JBC takes over the OC position, and they design an offence to use Darnold’s skills, just to see if he’s salvageable. That’s my hope for 2020. That how bad it’s got.

 

Yep.  At the very least it would raise Darnold's trade value if he can show anything at all down the stretch.

[Sperm Edwards]

28 minutes ago, OilfieldJet said:

It may be academically enjoyable to debate Sam now, but absent an injury (and Sam may not make it through all 16 games), we have him as the starter the rest of this year. We will know lots more by game 16, mechanics, accuracy, leadership, everything will become clear. That said, this year is an up or down outcome, no more handwringing, excuses or denials.

Agree with some but not all of this. He's not working on his mechanics this season. You work on that in the offseason months, or even in August; during the season you work on your opponent not changing your muscle memory. 

I don't know that everything is clear when the cast around him - on the field and on the sideline - is so poor. No, playing with backups isn't a true measure of a QB, but he left well over 300 yards and a handful of TDs on the field in a clip of 7 attempts to Anderson from 2019 alone. Passes to a wide open receiver, that a good QB completes (or ffs at least gets within arms' distance of his target). 

My biggest concern isn't losing out on Darnold playing well for someone else, because he still looks like he needs a lot of work and not just a lot of help on the field. My bigger concern is sticking with him because it was deemed unfair to judge him on his first 2 or 3 or 4 seasons.

So is he Ryan Tannehill or is he Blake Bortles? 

[jgb]

2 hours ago, nico002 said:

Who the hell knows? It’s been 2 years, there are two full seasons to go before they decision is made. This whole “rookie contract” window is the biggest BS going in the NFL. I guess KC is depleted of weapons now that mahomes got paid? Brees hasn’t had weapons his whole career either. Good thing Brady took a pay cut to allow NE to sign all those weapons.

If you don't know whether you'd pick up your 3rd year 1st round FQB's 5th year option, you don't have a FQB. 

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree with some but not all of this. He's not working on his mechanics this season. You work on that in the offseason months, or even in August; during the season you work on your opponent not changing your muscle memory. 

I don't know that everything is clear when the cast around him - on the field and on the sideline - is so poor. No, playing with backups isn't a true measure of a QB, but he left well over 300 yards and a handful of TDs on the field in a clip of 7 attempts to Anderson from 2019 alone. Passes to a wide open receiver, that a good QB completes (or ffs at least gets within arms' distance of his target). 

My biggest concern isn't losing out on Darnold playing well for someone else, because he still looks like he needs a lot of work and not just a lot of help on the field. My bigger concern is sticking with him because it was deemed unfair to judge him on his first 2 or 3 or 4 seasons.

So is he Ryan Tannehill or is he Blake Bortles? 

The opportunity cost of sticking with Sam now has greater net present value than the value of Sam becoming a FQB multiplied by the likelihood that he does.

[nico002]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

So you're not going to name anybody even though you take a position as though it's such commonplace occurrence. Nice cop out, but it's about what I expected.

But you go on thinking that it makes rational sense to judge Darnold exclusively by removing his bad games, to instead count his good games against tomato can opponents, and then amortize those good games over a full 16-game season to come up with phony-baloney stats that make him acceptable.

So your idea is effectively to erase the bad games, and then count the good games twice. Totally reasonable. Too bad they don't let me pick equities that way. 

I’m confused, who/what am I not naming? No one is judging Darnold by removing his bad games. I’m simply responding to the false narrative that Darnold has played 28 games and has shown nothing, when the reality is that in the vast majority of games he’s been a very good quarterback. A 20 game sample size is 10x more than a 2 game sample size. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

The opportunity cost of sticking with Sam now has greater net present value than the value of Sam becoming a FQB multiplied by the likelihood that he does.

I think so for two reasons (on top of the obvious: not panning out as hoped here in year 3)

1. He still does have trade value, and probably at least a day 2 pick (if not a 1st round pick) from a team that believes his woes are totally due to Gase/Jets.

2. He's got 1 more year in the low-cost range. After that he requires a serious financial commitment. Even his 5th year option isn't going to be cheap; it'll be pushing $30MM. It's $25MM already, before another $35-45MM/year deal or two get hashed out (Prescott, Jackson).

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, nico002 said:

I’m confused, who/what am I not naming? No one is judging Darnold by removing his bad games. I’m simply responding to the false narrative that Darnold has played 28 games and has shown nothing, when the reality is that in the vast majority of games he’s been a very good quarterback. A 20 game sample size is 10x more than a 2 game sample size. 

What?

18 hours ago, nico002 said:

Outside of the ghost game, which is the largest statistical outlier in NFL history (literally, look it up) his game average stats projected to 4K yards, 65% comp, and a 2-1 TD int ratio. Since week 9 of 2018 Sam has had TWO multi interception games. 

rofl

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, nico002 said:

I’m confused, who/what am I not naming? No one is judging Darnold by removing his bad games. I’m simply responding to the false narrative that Darnold has played 28 games and has shown nothing, when the reality is that in the vast majority of games he’s been a very good quarterback. A 20 game sample size is 10x more than a 2 game sample size. 

Who is arguing he has shown “nothing?” Darnold hasn’t shown enough to lead to the conclusion that he is a FQB or worth significant financial investment. If he’s below that line, does it really matter how far below? 

[jgb]

9 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What?

rofl

Tom Brady is tied for most lost SB’s as a starting QB in history. Choke artist!

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, jgb said:

Tom Brady has lost more SB’s than any starting QB in history. Choke artist!

Yeah but imagine how good he is if you remove those losses by labeling them as outliers. 

[ZachEY]

18 hours ago, nico002 said:

No one on earth was down on Sam coming off the 2019 season.

[ZachEY]

16 hours ago, dbatesman said:

Love doing this exercise with literally every single sh*tty QB we draft

But Eli Manning, dude

[ZachEY]

14 hours ago, Wonderboy said:

Right so according to your viewpoints guys like Jackson, Watson and Murray come to mind. Jackson and Murray while electric, are a big hit away from being RG III clones. I’ll take a pocket passer like Darnold any day over them since they are both a big hit from being squished like a waterbug. And Watson is going through it now isn’t he w/o Hopkins but who needs weapons. Sam is tough, can take a hit , was formerly a LB and TE. 

“Pocket Passer like Darnold?????”

I just spent the last two weeks hearing how Darnold is “best outside the pocket” and Gase is an idiot for not doing more of that.

Also, Lamar and Watson have missed less games than Darnold to date.  So, why not just say what you really mean....

[nico002]

24 minutes ago, jgb said:

Who is arguing he has shown “nothing?” Darnold hasn’t shown enough to lead to the conclusion that he is a FQB or worth significant financial investment. If he’s below that line, does it really matter how far below? 

Darnold has 3 full seasons to prove that he is worth the investment. So far he’s proven that he is on his way to such a contract if he keeps his current trajectory. 

[nico002]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What?

rofl

I fail to see how removing one outlier performance is equivalent to removing his bad games. If you want to use they game as an indicator of anything be my guest. I can’t help you. 

[jgb]

Just now, nico002 said:

Darnold has 3 full seasons to prove that he is worth the investment. So far he’s proven that he is on his way to such a contract if he keeps his current trajectory. 

Different opinions make the world go round but not the way I see it.

[nico002]

26 minutes ago, jgb said:

Who is arguing he has shown “nothing?” Darnold hasn’t shown enough to lead to the conclusion that he is a FQB or worth significant financial investment. If he’s below that line, does it really matter how far below? 

Read this thread, I was responding to a post who said something to the effect of even Darnolds 20 best games are below average. 

[Jetsfan80]

28 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What?

rofl

 

You see, according to nico, that game doesn't exist.  So it's not removing a game from the equation.  It's presenting Darnold's numbers in Nico's alternate universe where that game never happened.  

Quit trolling!!!

[Jetsfan80]

2 minutes ago, nico002 said:

I fail to see how removing one outlier performance is equivalent to removing his bad games. 

LOL

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, nico002 said:

I fail to see how removing one outlier performance is equivalent to removing his bad games. If you want to use they game as an indicator of anything be my guest. I can’t help you. 

He only had two multi-pick games in the last half of the season? 

So we can remove a terrible game but we can't remove drives where the defense purposely let him complete short passes because it ate up the clock to seal their win. Gotcha.

Also still waiting for you to come up with that long list of QBs who've boosted their seasons' qb ratings by 50% all by using weekly garbage time. 

[jgb]

30 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah but imagine how good he is if you remove those losses by labeling them as outliers. 

In a way I empathize with those who still believe in Darnold based on outliers... his entire college mythos was founded on the mother of all outliers

[jgb]

10 minutes ago, nico002 said:

Read this thread, I was responding to a post who said something to the effect of even Darnolds 20 best games are below average. 

That was an effective way of showing that even taking his best games he's not performing at a FQB level. That was someone playing by your rules and winning.

[nico002]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

That was an effective way or showing that even taking his best games he's not performing at a FQB level. That was someone playing by your rules and winning.

Not accurate? 

[jgb]

Just now, nico002 said:

Not accurate? 

It's really hard to understand what point you are trying to make.

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

That was an effective way or showing that even taking his best games he's not performing at a FQB level. That was someone playing by your rules and winning.

Yep, that was me.  Isolating only his final 8 games of last season, he was about QB15 compared to other season-long performances by the rest of the league's QB's.

Completely recovered from mono and feasting on weak defenses, Darnold was QB15.

Yeah, let's pay that guy $25M+ in 2022 and then $30M+ every season after that.

[nico002]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He only had two multi-pick games in the last half of the season? 

So we can remove a terrible game but we can't remove drives where the defense purposely let him complete short passes because it ate up the clock to seal their win. Gotcha.

Also still waiting for you to come up with that long list of QBs who've boosted their seasons' qb ratings by 50% all by using weekly garbage time. 

deshaun Watson this year 

The NE being an outlier isnt an opinion, it’s math.

Darnold has only has 2 multi pick games since week 9 of 2018, less than Russell Wilson or tom Brady. 

I don’t care how much you over analyze two games this year. No one is claiming that they were good performances. But you are making them out to be more than whet they are. 

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Yep, that was me.  Isolating only his final 8 games of last season, he was about QB15 compared to other season-long performances by the rest of the league's QB's.

Completely recovered from mono and feasting on weak defenses, Darnold was QB15.

Yeah, let's pay that guy $25M+ in 2022 and then $30M+ every season after that.

I would love to see what happens to the argument "no one can succeed with these weapons" if Sam lights it up today.