Why in the world am I doing this?!

saintfan · 02-01-2005, 12:35 PM

LOL. For some reason I expected a different response, and I can\'t imagine why.

JKool · 02-01-2005, 01:18 PM

Whodi, nice stuff. In order to keep this thread on track, I\'ve quoted your excellent work here quite extensively:

Kool, I am sorry if you feel my tone was demeaning. could it be you just took it that way?

I have been known to be a bit on the sensitive side.

I think in this case it was a little of both. This post of yours, while just as intelligent as all the earlier ones was much more pleasant to read. Do you think perhaps you toned it down just a bit?

I\'m more of a discusser than an arguer most of the time. I don\'t like to have to feel defensive. If I say something wrong, I want to be corrected; however, I don\'t want to be replied to, I wan\'t the points discussed. I think this post of yours shows alot of that kind of virtue - a lot of people seem to think it is a shouting match or a pissing contest, I don\'t really like that.

Just because there is a way I view the NFL and knowing about its past and past players, does not mean if someone doesn\'t they know less than me. I never feel that way. sorry if you took it that way. Because I am a fan of the NFL is what I said, and not just a fan of the black and gold. That does not knock anyone else, at least I don\'t think so. That just quantifies where I say I draw my knowledge from. That does by no means knock anyone else. Again, for the second time, I apologize if you took it that way, but that was not the intention.

I see the distinction you\'re aiming at. My question wasn\'t meant to challenge your knowledge at all - it is both vast and impressive. My point was an argument like this: do you remember x? would only be a good argument if most people were like you - knowing much about the entire NFL over a lot of time. Again, I remember a handful of hall of famers. Thus, if you wanted to show that someone wasn\'t a good football player, the fact that I can\'t remember them isn\'t evidence one way or the other, right?

On the the QBs. I simply pointed out Brees is at least over 60% for his career completion on worse teams than AB. I don\'t know how pointing out he was up and down ON WORSE TEAMS makes your point, my point being he at least completes 60% of his passes and AB does not nor has he ever. If that is incorrect, I will withdraw it.

You are right on both points. I don\'t know why I even comment on the Brees thing, that was dumb. Apologies.

The thing is there are very good QBs who do not have a career 60% - McNabb, for example. So saying anyone who can\'t muster a 60% is pretty much worthless is just a bit of an overstatement. In fact, in my VERY BRIEF and not too conclusive search, I found most QBs who last awhile in the NFL have roughly a 58-63%.

On the other QB issue, you are right. I took first year starters and not rookies.

This is something I conceded a long time ago in this thread. QBs take several years to develop before they play. The guys you listed are evidence for that claim - a possible view is that they matured in just one year on the bench! Those guys are all good QBs. Thus, I agree that if we drafted a guy, we may get a guy who is ready to play at the level you want if he rides the pine for a year. Who will QB for that year? I even suggested this may be an option - draft a guy this year, let AB play this year and if the guy is ready the following year, GREAT! If not, we didn\'t toss our guy who may be able to get it done.

The guys I looked at were guys who came in and played right away - Leftwich and Boller. I think their stats are a better indication of what a guy coming right in here will do.

So the issue is first year starters can do better than AB, but I have only found one rookie who has done so, that is true. But let\'s go back to the fact not all rookies QBs start their first year, so it is hard to find an accurate gauge of a rookie who has accomplished that task.

I fully agree. It is still my thesis that QBs take a few years to develop. I used this point earlier to say that an additional risk of drafting a replacement of a departed AB is that he may not develop fast enough that our window won\'t close before he is ready. Furthermore, we have at hand two good examples of guys who started right out of the blocks on teams similar to ours. Is this argument that wrong?

Also, like I previously stated, drafted rookie QBs usually don\'t come into the league with a Joe Horn and a Deuce and a Stallworth to work with. So while I will concede I have not found a rookie who has done it, I will also push into evidence my previous statements about bad teams getting to draft rookie QBs high and what some guys did their first year as starters.

I think this is a good argument. I took it very seriously. Boller and Leftwich are guys on middling teams, very much like ours (with the exception perhaps of the skill at WR, though I think you and I disagree a bit on the magnitude of that fact with respect to a potential QBs stats). The guy we draft may do slightly better than these two did, given that we have a second WR. However, given our earlier analysis, there is reason to think that guy would still be worse than AB over the next two years.

Also, AB has not completed 60% of his passes, why would we demand it from a rookie? Seems kinda unfair to me.

I agree. You were the one who suggested we could get a rookie that was 60%. I was claiming the guy we got would not be 60% given the statistical evidence. In fact, demanding 60% from your QB is a good goal, but not a reasonable expectation - especially under the conditions on our team (again I cite Leftwich and Boller as examples, though I concede our team may be in slightly better position - we do have other problems that they didn\'t though).

I appreciate you pointing out AB and the Niners game, but where are the Niners drafting again? So your point would be if we could get AB to play teams who pick first in the draft more often, he will get to shine. As an opposite view to the Niners game, I give you the Dallas game, so we may be at an impass here. I\'ll also throw in the Atlanta game with their starters resting for free. Just terrible performances in wins.

My example was merely there to show that there are games where AB has won the game pretty well on his own. The fact that the Niners suck is irrelevant to that point. They sucked just as much against AB as they did against the whole team, and our running game still only gained like 50 yards and our defense gave up almost 400 yards (including 180 on the ground) and 27 points. Thus, I simply agree with you that AB has sucked in games we won, but I simply will not agree with you that AB CANNOT win a game - there is one (and I\'m sure there are more).

Impasse is a fine result with me. I wasn\'t saying that AB is going to win us games on his own, but some people were saying he couldn\'t. I\'m happy to say we don\'t really know which of those are true.

I\'ll say as I said before, either you are just looking to argue or you are not reading what I am saying.

Whodi, you say so much, how is a guy supposed to keep up. I feel a bit like a \"Whodi Scholar\" some days...

In all seriousness dude, I\'m sorry I made you feel like I wasn\'t listening. I\'m doing my best to keep up.

The Salary figures I posted to you were from 2003,and I made it a point to mention the fact that for the LBs, most were not in their first year of the contract so no bonus money was included, WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY IF WE SIGN A GUY AS A FREE AGENT. Most of those were just base salaries cause they weren\'t free agent deals. So even some of the most mediocre made at least 2 mil, without bonuses. Now as I said, the guys who we are after will be pursued by numerous teams, so that figure WILL BE HIGHER. Also, the Ts were well above the range you set. So I ask, why didn\'t you just agree with me?

I do agree. We will be paying slightly more than those sallaries you listed (btw thanks for finding that, it was interesting). Here is my revised view. We can get three guys who are OTs and/or LBs for 2-6 mil (roughly) each. This may mean we don\'t get the top guy in the FA pool at that position (e.g. Orlando Pace), but there is a glut of fine OTs this year and a goodly number of experienced and tough MLBs (also MLBs tend to be a bit cheaper than OLBs). We still haven\'t heard from our cap-ologists on whether there will be enough room for us to spend that much.

So on McNabb and AB if you feel McNabb is not a better QB, and we want to throw out stas, wins losses and passer rating, how the hell do we evaluate a QB after that?

That isn\'t what I said. I said that McNabb was a damn fine QB. You\'ll see that I acknowledge many (most?) of the problems with AB. The point about McNabb is this: here is a guy who is a damn fine QB (we both agree) who isn\'t meeting the demands you\'re setting for AB. Sure McNabb gets a pass for all the intangibles, etc, but if you think the stats alone show AB sucks, then you have to think McNabb sucks for the same reason. My secondary points was this: ABs stats show him to be good enough to win some games, even if they don\'t shine.

Flip a coin?

Some days I feel like that would get the job done better...

What criteria do we use? Does it factor in that the first season that McNabb got a pro bowl caliber receiver as AB has had in Joe Horn, he destroyed any stats AB could ever hope of posting? Does that factor in at all?

Yes. If you\'re comparing McNabb to AB. However, we were merely talking about aggregate stats, so, no.

Simple question, would you trade AB for McNabb straight up?

I don\'t think that is a simple question. My quick answer is... yes. However, I\'m not sure what that proves, since I\'ve already said that I think McNabb is a good (to great) QB?

I would, and don\'t know many who wouldn\'t. So what now will be the criteria for judging QBs if not stats, win/losses, or passer rating?

That is a both fair and excellent question. I guess, I don\'t know; I\'d be happy to hear some suggestions though. I certainly think W-L are irrelevant (see earlier argument). I think that BMG gave a pretty good argument earlier in this thread. You sort of try and look at everything at once, maybe? I guess, it depends on what you are trying to evaluate. I don\'t think that stats are irrelevant, they just aren\'t conclusive - they\'re more like a guide or map than they are like a hammer or fist. I think it is interesting to discuss the thing we call intangilbles. I guess, I don\'t know.

So you don\'t see AB as incompetent. I do. We will have to disagree.

Ok.
AB\'s stats don\'t show he\'s incompetent. His on field play, while up and down, doesn\'t show that. In fact, it seems to me that most people just think he\'s kind of frustrating and not at the top of the pack - there are very few who seem to think that he just isn\'t an NFL quality QB, period. Sure, somedays he\'s incompetent, but other days he sure isn\'t.

Perhaps this matters: \"seem him AS incompetent\". Is that just some sort of value judgement? I can maybe understand how someone might see him AS incompetent, but to see THAT he IS incompetent seems to me a bit of an overstatement.

I don\'t see how you can say he cut his INTs last year, but not see the fumbles.

I guess I\'m confused about this statement. I granted the fumbles.

And other than that, he throws enough INTs that his ratio is not 2-1 in any other season than last year, but again we will have to ignore the fumbles.

Those stats I used for that were the last two years. He\'s not 2-1, he\'s more like 3-2. That is still better than 1-1 though (and the number of TDs is much higher in those cases - the ratio hides that).

This was stated before but I guess it was lost, AB fumbled just as much this year as he did last year, the difference, we recovered more. That\'s it. So if people say Deuce has a fumbling problem, I am sure AB leads the team. To me, that is incompetent.

Being the team leader in fumbles makes one incompetent? I think your point is more fine grained than that, so I\'ll just express my confusion at this point. Duece developed a fumbling problem. That is interesting, but has little to do with AB.

It may not be to you, and that\'s fine.

It doesn\'t sound like you think it is fine. Look, I agree AB has many problems. Incompetent to what? Play in the NFL? I don\'t agree. Win the SB? I don\'t see it. Lead our team? Maybe. Keep from opening his big mouth? Agreed.

I guess, I just don\'t see what you mean by incompetent.

He also led the league in red zone turnovers. That is another sign of incompetence to me. If it isn\'t to you, that is fine also. But I am damn certain we can get a rookie to do THAT.

Of course, we don\'t want a rookie to do that. I don\'t see what that has to do with anything.

I never said the offense-defense thing goes one way, the point you made DID. Go back and read it if you don\'t believe me. You placed all the blame for AB on a poor defense and that simply isn\'t true and I countered it.

I thought I said that our having a poor defense was a reason that AB\'s passer stats may be lowered. If I didn\'t say that, I am both sorry and shocked. It doesn\'t follow from that that AB\'s passer stats couldn\'t also have made the defense\'s stats worse. I didn\'t mean to imply that.

You said: \"I also fail to see how where his defense was ranked explains a low completion percentage and passer rating. You are gonna have to explain that one to me Kool.\"

I figured we probably agreed on this one, but I was merely responding to a well put challenge.

I\'d said this: \"ABs stats have actually improved every season that he has started a full season in terms of passer rating (which is a rough summary of all the QB stats) until this year (when the running game was down, the line sucked and our defense sucked) - 76 in 01, 80 in 02, 89 in \'03. Thus, I\'m no longer sure I agree with this AB keeps getting worse thingy. He\'s roughly the same or better.\"

You never said there was a give and take and it was both sides.

I agree that it is my fault for not stating my point better. Sorry. What I meant is what I just said above; I should have been clearer.

So maybe you should stop trying to make it seem as if it was one way.

My bad.

Of course the point I counter with will be the opposite. That\'s simple debate. But had you initially stated it was both ways, I would have had no argument with that.

I don\'t know if I missed anything else.

I don\'t think you missed anything. Good work, as always, Whodi. I hope I haven\'t missed anything either?

PS - On the Three Amigos thing. Nicely done. I still thought they were pretty good, but maybe it was because I was a kid and I am misremembering that. Stop destroying my fond childhood memories... snif.

PPS - Seriously dude, this has been a very good disucssion in this thread. It has made me think pretty hard, and my view is moderating some (maybe even more).

[Edited on 1/2/2005 by JKool]

[Edited on 1/2/2005 by JKool]

saintswhodi · 02-01-2005, 02:44 PM

Dang Kool, you tackled everything. Nicely done. But these things are getting longer and longer so I will save us both some time. First,

is for you. You are a classy dude, and put out decent arguments and aren\'t just out to try to make anyone look silly. That hopefully is what keeps our arguments on even keel, and not deteriorating like others generally do. Much respect to you my man.

I know I took notice of that you said, and even though I felt I may not have been doing what your initial inkling was, I tried a slightly different approach. I see you approved.

Truly, the fact someone doesn\'t remember a player is not a an indicator of their knowledge, and I tried to express that. It is something I pride myself on though, and don\'t really expect it from others. My bad if you felt I did.

For what it\'s worth, if we drafted a guy I KNEW was gonna take over for AB after next year, i would be fine with him staying. As it is, we have shippet our every piece of competition he has had, and his salary is too high to just be a stop gap. That doesn\'t lend me a lot of confidence, but I will go along with that. So let\'s hope they draft a guy.

I will also agree a guy COULD come in and do worse than AB, but you know on which side my bread is buttered. I don\'t BELIEVE they would. But that is a matter of faith and has no basis in fact. So I will take the middling approach that a new guy(rokie or journeyman) could do worse, but he could also do better.

If I suggested 60% passer completion, then I stick by it. Most decent QBs are at that number are higher. There are starters who are below, but they rarely go far i.e. McNabb. His completion percentage sky-rocketed this year, and they got over the hump even without TO. AB NEVER gets 60%, and that\'s a fact. EVER. Makes it that muchharder IMHO. I have no evidence that suggests though that another guy could come in and get 60%, but winning QBs seem to be at that level or higher.

Impasse on whether AB can win a game or not.

That\'s another shake at the 50 and go in different directions argument.

We both agree McNabb is definitely a cut above AB, stats aside. Though I would point to Donovan\'s supporting cast pre-TO as a good reasonf or that. Nonetheless, it shows starts aren\'t always the whole story. So if we don\'t use stats, then the ones AB puts up should be just as irrelevant. And if we don\'t use W/L or passer rating, I also have no idea where we go form there. Like/dislike? My list gets even longer for replacing AB if that\'s the case.

I like your ratio for AB, but TD/INT ratio is not the whole story. TD/turnover ratio is. If we look at TD/turnover ratio, I am sure it would be worse than 3-2. I guess that is where we may look at this different. A fumble is just as bad as an INT, and probably worse from the QB since the defense generally gets the ball in good field position(not downfiled like an INT) or have prevented us from scoring with another red zone turnover. So withthe fumbles, the ratio is more like 45 TDS 37 turnovers which is more like 1.2-1 or 2.4-2 or whatever. That ain\'t cutting the mustard for me.

On the salaries, if we are gonna get an impact guy like everyone wants, say at least an impact LB and an impact T, the LB will be in the 5 mil range for next year and the T in the same arena, depending on base and bonus. That\'s at least 10 mil on two impact players each at a key position of need. So we can say the 2-6 mil range, but it will be more like the 4-6 mil range. AB\'s salary off the books sure would help that. But our cap guy hasn\'t spoken, so I will leave that alone.

I don\'t want any confusion so let me clarify on this point. I think AB is incompetent and unable to lead us period, let alone to the Superbowl. I do not feel we will ever win in any significant manner with him as QB, thus my joke about bringing Blake back and letting him give AB a 7-4 head start on his record like he did the playoff year. I have no confidence in him taking us anywhere for a full season. I used to, in spades. But not any more.

No prob on the 3 amigos. Like I said, they may have been better later, but not during the first Superbowl year for Elway, which is what was being spoken of.

An the excellent work is mainly on your part, keeping me in line. Good points brotha. I am leaning more towards seeing where you are coming from, but I am sold on AB not being the answer.

saintswhodi · 02-01-2005, 02:46 PM

I tried to find middle ground on a lot, and clarify some other positions, I don\'t know if it saved time or not, so you can let me know. :P

JKool · 02-01-2005, 03:51 PM

Whodi,

(1)

(2) I like the point on fumbles, but I think that is a point for another thread. I have a view on AB and the fumbles, but it doesn\'t seem to go directly to whether AB should stay or go.

(3) I think what we\'ve shown is that in the case of AB, his stats aren\'t conclusive one way or the other. That doesn\'t mean that were they used for making particular arguments (or if they were better or worse) they wouldn\'t matter. I do think that stats can be used for a number of things; they just aren\'t getting the job done in deciding this.

(4) One of the best things that came out of this for me was a much better understanding of what a rookie could do and in what time frame depending on facts about the team he is drafted to.

(5) I think an impasse on whether or not AB can win games rather than not simply lose them is a serious discovery. Nice work.

(6) I think we had a lot of common ground to begin with. I also think I learned a lot. This thread, no matter what anyone else says, was very much worth it for me. Thanks for all the insights. Maybe someone will pick up on \"how to evaluate a QB\" and help us both learn something there?

(7) Thanks for saving time. I don\'t think I could commit myself to another monster post like that previous one.

JKool · 02-01-2005, 03:53 PM

Oh yeah,

AND

saintswhodi · 02-01-2005, 04:03 PM

:thumbsup:

02-01-2005, 12:35 PM	#81
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Why in the world am I doing this?! LOL. For some reason I expected a different response, and I can\'t imagine why.

02-01-2005, 01:18 PM	#82
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Why in the world am I doing this?! Whodi, nice stuff. In order to keep this thread on track, I\'ve quoted your excellent work here quite extensively: Kool, I am sorry if you feel my tone was demeaning. could it be you just took it that way? I have been known to be a bit on the sensitive side. I think in this case it was a little of both. This post of yours, while just as intelligent as all the earlier ones was much more pleasant to read. Do you think perhaps you toned it down just a bit? I\'m more of a discusser than an arguer most of the time. I don\'t like to have to feel defensive. If I say something wrong, I want to be corrected; however, I don\'t want to be replied to, I wan\'t the points discussed. I think this post of yours shows alot of that kind of virtue - a lot of people seem to think it is a shouting match or a pissing contest, I don\'t really like that. Just because there is a way I view the NFL and knowing about its past and past players, does not mean if someone doesn\'t they know less than me. I never feel that way. sorry if you took it that way. Because I am a fan of the NFL is what I said, and not just a fan of the black and gold. That does not knock anyone else, at least I don\'t think so. That just quantifies where I say I draw my knowledge from. That does by no means knock anyone else. Again, for the second time, I apologize if you took it that way, but that was not the intention. I see the distinction you\'re aiming at. My question wasn\'t meant to challenge your knowledge at all - it is both vast and impressive. My point was an argument like this: do you remember x? would only be a good argument if most people were like you - knowing much about the entire NFL over a lot of time. Again, I remember a handful of hall of famers. Thus, if you wanted to show that someone wasn\'t a good football player, the fact that I can\'t remember them isn\'t evidence one way or the other, right? On the the QBs. I simply pointed out Brees is at least over 60% for his career completion on worse teams than AB. I don\'t know how pointing out he was up and down ON WORSE TEAMS makes your point, my point being he at least completes 60% of his passes and AB does not nor has he ever. If that is incorrect, I will withdraw it. You are right on both points. I don\'t know why I even comment on the Brees thing, that was dumb. Apologies. The thing is there are very good QBs who do not have a career 60% - McNabb, for example. So saying anyone who can\'t muster a 60% is pretty much worthless is just a bit of an overstatement. In fact, in my VERY BRIEF and not too conclusive search, I found most QBs who last awhile in the NFL have roughly a 58-63%. On the other QB issue, you are right. I took first year starters and not rookies. This is something I conceded a long time ago in this thread. QBs take several years to develop before they play. The guys you listed are evidence for that claim - a possible view is that they matured in just one year on the bench! Those guys are all good QBs. Thus, I agree that if we drafted a guy, we may get a guy who is ready to play at the level you want if he rides the pine for a year. Who will QB for that year? I even suggested this may be an option - draft a guy this year, let AB play this year and if the guy is ready the following year, GREAT! If not, we didn\'t toss our guy who may be able to get it done. The guys I looked at were guys who came in and played right away - Leftwich and Boller. I think their stats are a better indication of what a guy coming right in here will do. So the issue is first year starters can do better than AB, but I have only found one rookie who has done so, that is true. But let\'s go back to the fact not all rookies QBs start their first year, so it is hard to find an accurate gauge of a rookie who has accomplished that task. I fully agree. It is still my thesis that QBs take a few years to develop. I used this point earlier to say that an additional risk of drafting a replacement of a departed AB is that he may not develop fast enough that our window won\'t close before he is ready. Furthermore, we have at hand two good examples of guys who started right out of the blocks on teams similar to ours. Is this argument that wrong? Also, like I previously stated, drafted rookie QBs usually don\'t come into the league with a Joe Horn and a Deuce and a Stallworth to work with. So while I will concede I have not found a rookie who has done it, I will also push into evidence my previous statements about bad teams getting to draft rookie QBs high and what some guys did their first year as starters. I think this is a good argument. I took it very seriously. Boller and Leftwich are guys on middling teams, very much like ours (with the exception perhaps of the skill at WR, though I think you and I disagree a bit on the magnitude of that fact with respect to a potential QBs stats). The guy we draft may do slightly better than these two did, given that we have a second WR. However, given our earlier analysis, there is reason to think that guy would still be worse than AB over the next two years. Also, AB has not completed 60% of his passes, why would we demand it from a rookie? Seems kinda unfair to me. I agree. You were the one who suggested we could get a rookie that was 60%. I was claiming the guy we got would not be 60% given the statistical evidence. In fact, demanding 60% from your QB is a good goal, but not a reasonable expectation - especially under the conditions on our team (again I cite Leftwich and Boller as examples, though I concede our team may be in slightly better position - we do have other problems that they didn\'t though). I appreciate you pointing out AB and the Niners game, but where are the Niners drafting again? So your point would be if we could get AB to play teams who pick first in the draft more often, he will get to shine. As an opposite view to the Niners game, I give you the Dallas game, so we may be at an impass here. I\'ll also throw in the Atlanta game with their starters resting for free. Just terrible performances in wins. My example was merely there to show that there are games where AB has won the game pretty well on his own. The fact that the Niners suck is irrelevant to that point. They sucked just as much against AB as they did against the whole team, and our running game still only gained like 50 yards and our defense gave up almost 400 yards (including 180 on the ground) and 27 points. Thus, I simply agree with you that AB has sucked in games we won, but I simply will not agree with you that AB CANNOT win a game - there is one (and I\'m sure there are more). Impasse is a fine result with me. I wasn\'t saying that AB is going to win us games on his own, but some people were saying he couldn\'t. I\'m happy to say we don\'t really know which of those are true. I\'ll say as I said before, either you are just looking to argue or you are not reading what I am saying. Whodi, you say so much, how is a guy supposed to keep up. I feel a bit like a \"Whodi Scholar\" some days... In all seriousness dude, I\'m sorry I made you feel like I wasn\'t listening. I\'m doing my best to keep up. The Salary figures I posted to you were from 2003,and I made it a point to mention the fact that for the LBs, most were not in their first year of the contract so no bonus money was included, WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY IF WE SIGN A GUY AS A FREE AGENT. Most of those were just base salaries cause they weren\'t free agent deals. So even some of the most mediocre made at least 2 mil, without bonuses. Now as I said, the guys who we are after will be pursued by numerous teams, so that figure WILL BE HIGHER. Also, the Ts were well above the range you set. So I ask, why didn\'t you just agree with me? I do agree. We will be paying slightly more than those sallaries you listed (btw thanks for finding that, it was interesting). Here is my revised view. We can get three guys who are OTs and/or LBs for 2-6 mil (roughly) each. This may mean we don\'t get the top guy in the FA pool at that position (e.g. Orlando Pace), but there is a glut of fine OTs this year and a goodly number of experienced and tough MLBs (also MLBs tend to be a bit cheaper than OLBs). We still haven\'t heard from our cap-ologists on whether there will be enough room for us to spend that much. So on McNabb and AB if you feel McNabb is not a better QB, and we want to throw out stas, wins losses and passer rating, how the hell do we evaluate a QB after that? That isn\'t what I said. I said that McNabb was a damn fine QB. You\'ll see that I acknowledge many (most?) of the problems with AB. The point about McNabb is this: here is a guy who is a damn fine QB (we both agree) who isn\'t meeting the demands you\'re setting for AB. Sure McNabb gets a pass for all the intangibles, etc, but if you think the stats alone show AB sucks, then you have to think McNabb sucks for the same reason. My secondary points was this: ABs stats show him to be good enough to win some games, even if they don\'t shine. Flip a coin? Some days I feel like that would get the job done better... What criteria do we use? Does it factor in that the first season that McNabb got a pro bowl caliber receiver as AB has had in Joe Horn, he destroyed any stats AB could ever hope of posting? Does that factor in at all? Yes. If you\'re comparing McNabb to AB. However, we were merely talking about aggregate stats, so, no. Simple question, would you trade AB for McNabb straight up? I don\'t think that is a simple question. My quick answer is... yes. However, I\'m not sure what that proves, since I\'ve already said that I think McNabb is a good (to great) QB? I would, and don\'t know many who wouldn\'t. So what now will be the criteria for judging QBs if not stats, win/losses, or passer rating? That is a both fair and excellent question. I guess, I don\'t know; I\'d be happy to hear some suggestions though. I certainly think W-L are irrelevant (see earlier argument). I think that BMG gave a pretty good argument earlier in this thread. You sort of try and look at everything at once, maybe? I guess, it depends on what you are trying to evaluate. I don\'t think that stats are irrelevant, they just aren\'t conclusive - they\'re more like a guide or map than they are like a hammer or fist. I think it is interesting to discuss the thing we call intangilbles. I guess, I don\'t know. So you don\'t see AB as incompetent. I do. We will have to disagree. Ok. AB\'s stats don\'t show he\'s incompetent. His on field play, while up and down, doesn\'t show that. In fact, it seems to me that most people just think he\'s kind of frustrating and not at the top of the pack - there are very few who seem to think that he just isn\'t an NFL quality QB, period. Sure, somedays he\'s incompetent, but other days he sure isn\'t. Perhaps this matters: \"seem him AS incompetent\". Is that just some sort of value judgement? I can maybe understand how someone might see him AS incompetent, but to see THAT he IS incompetent seems to me a bit of an overstatement. I don\'t see how you can say he cut his INTs last year, but not see the fumbles. I guess I\'m confused about this statement. I granted the fumbles. And other than that, he throws enough INTs that his ratio is not 2-1 in any other season than last year, but again we will have to ignore the fumbles. Those stats I used for that were the last two years. He\'s not 2-1, he\'s more like 3-2. That is still better than 1-1 though (and the number of TDs is much higher in those cases - the ratio hides that). This was stated before but I guess it was lost, AB fumbled just as much this year as he did last year, the difference, we recovered more. That\'s it. So if people say Deuce has a fumbling problem, I am sure AB leads the team. To me, that is incompetent. Being the team leader in fumbles makes one incompetent? I think your point is more fine grained than that, so I\'ll just express my confusion at this point. Duece developed a fumbling problem. That is interesting, but has little to do with AB. It may not be to you, and that\'s fine. It doesn\'t sound like you think it is fine. Look, I agree AB has many problems. Incompetent to what? Play in the NFL? I don\'t agree. Win the SB? I don\'t see it. Lead our team? Maybe. Keep from opening his big mouth? Agreed. I guess, I just don\'t see what you mean by incompetent. He also led the league in red zone turnovers. That is another sign of incompetence to me. If it isn\'t to you, that is fine also. But I am damn certain we can get a rookie to do THAT. Of course, we don\'t want a rookie to do that. I don\'t see what that has to do with anything. I never said the offense-defense thing goes one way, the point you made DID. Go back and read it if you don\'t believe me. You placed all the blame for AB on a poor defense and that simply isn\'t true and I countered it. I thought I said that our having a poor defense was a reason that AB\'s passer stats may be lowered. If I didn\'t say that, I am both sorry and shocked. It doesn\'t follow from that that AB\'s passer stats couldn\'t also have made the defense\'s stats worse. I didn\'t mean to imply that. You said: \"I also fail to see how where his defense was ranked explains a low completion percentage and passer rating. You are gonna have to explain that one to me Kool.\" I figured we probably agreed on this one, but I was merely responding to a well put challenge. I\'d said this: \"ABs stats have actually improved every season that he has started a full season in terms of passer rating (which is a rough summary of all the QB stats) until this year (when the running game was down, the line sucked and our defense sucked) - 76 in 01, 80 in 02, 89 in \'03. Thus, I\'m no longer sure I agree with this AB keeps getting worse thingy. He\'s roughly the same or better.\" You never said there was a give and take and it was both sides. I agree that it is my fault for not stating my point better. Sorry. What I meant is what I just said above; I should have been clearer. So maybe you should stop trying to make it seem as if it was one way. My bad. Of course the point I counter with will be the opposite. That\'s simple debate. But had you initially stated it was both ways, I would have had no argument with that. I don\'t know if I missed anything else. I don\'t think you missed anything. Good work, as always, Whodi. I hope I haven\'t missed anything either? PS - On the Three Amigos thing. Nicely done. I still thought they were pretty good, but maybe it was because I was a kid and I am misremembering that. Stop destroying my fond childhood memories... snif. PPS - Seriously dude, this has been a very good disucssion in this thread. It has made me think pretty hard, and my view is moderating some (maybe even more). [Edited on 1/2/2005 by JKool] [Edited on 1/2/2005 by JKool]
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

02-01-2005, 02:44 PM	#83
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Why in the world am I doing this?! Dang Kool, you tackled everything. Nicely done. But these things are getting longer and longer so I will save us both some time. First, is for you. You are a classy dude, and put out decent arguments and aren\'t just out to try to make anyone look silly. That hopefully is what keeps our arguments on even keel, and not deteriorating like others generally do. Much respect to you my man. I know I took notice of that you said, and even though I felt I may not have been doing what your initial inkling was, I tried a slightly different approach. I see you approved. Truly, the fact someone doesn\'t remember a player is not a an indicator of their knowledge, and I tried to express that. It is something I pride myself on though, and don\'t really expect it from others. My bad if you felt I did. For what it\'s worth, if we drafted a guy I KNEW was gonna take over for AB after next year, i would be fine with him staying. As it is, we have shippet our every piece of competition he has had, and his salary is too high to just be a stop gap. That doesn\'t lend me a lot of confidence, but I will go along with that. So let\'s hope they draft a guy. I will also agree a guy COULD come in and do worse than AB, but you know on which side my bread is buttered. I don\'t BELIEVE they would. But that is a matter of faith and has no basis in fact. So I will take the middling approach that a new guy(rokie or journeyman) could do worse, but he could also do better. If I suggested 60% passer completion, then I stick by it. Most decent QBs are at that number are higher. There are starters who are below, but they rarely go far i.e. McNabb. His completion percentage sky-rocketed this year, and they got over the hump even without TO. AB NEVER gets 60%, and that\'s a fact. EVER. Makes it that muchharder IMHO. I have no evidence that suggests though that another guy could come in and get 60%, but winning QBs seem to be at that level or higher. Impasse on whether AB can win a game or not. That\'s another shake at the 50 and go in different directions argument. We both agree McNabb is definitely a cut above AB, stats aside. Though I would point to Donovan\'s supporting cast pre-TO as a good reasonf or that. Nonetheless, it shows starts aren\'t always the whole story. So if we don\'t use stats, then the ones AB puts up should be just as irrelevant. And if we don\'t use W/L or passer rating, I also have no idea where we go form there. Like/dislike? My list gets even longer for replacing AB if that\'s the case. I like your ratio for AB, but TD/INT ratio is not the whole story. TD/turnover ratio is. If we look at TD/turnover ratio, I am sure it would be worse than 3-2. I guess that is where we may look at this different. A fumble is just as bad as an INT, and probably worse from the QB since the defense generally gets the ball in good field position(not downfiled like an INT) or have prevented us from scoring with another red zone turnover. So withthe fumbles, the ratio is more like 45 TDS 37 turnovers which is more like 1.2-1 or 2.4-2 or whatever. That ain\'t cutting the mustard for me. On the salaries, if we are gonna get an impact guy like everyone wants, say at least an impact LB and an impact T, the LB will be in the 5 mil range for next year and the T in the same arena, depending on base and bonus. That\'s at least 10 mil on two impact players each at a key position of need. So we can say the 2-6 mil range, but it will be more like the 4-6 mil range. AB\'s salary off the books sure would help that. But our cap guy hasn\'t spoken, so I will leave that alone. I don\'t want any confusion so let me clarify on this point. I think AB is incompetent and unable to lead us period, let alone to the Superbowl. I do not feel we will ever win in any significant manner with him as QB, thus my joke about bringing Blake back and letting him give AB a 7-4 head start on his record like he did the playoff year. I have no confidence in him taking us anywhere for a full season. I used to, in spades. But not any more. No prob on the 3 amigos. Like I said, they may have been better later, but not during the first Superbowl year for Elway, which is what was being spoken of. An the excellent work is mainly on your part, keeping me in line. Good points brotha. I am leaning more towards seeing where you are coming from, but I am sold on AB not being the answer.

02-01-2005, 02:46 PM	#84
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Why in the world am I doing this?! I tried to find middle ground on a lot, and clarify some other positions, I don\'t know if it saved time or not, so you can let me know. :P

02-01-2005, 03:51 PM	#85
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Why in the world am I doing this?! Whodi, (1) (2) I like the point on fumbles, but I think that is a point for another thread. I have a view on AB and the fumbles, but it doesn\'t seem to go directly to whether AB should stay or go. (3) I think what we\'ve shown is that in the case of AB, his stats aren\'t conclusive one way or the other. That doesn\'t mean that were they used for making particular arguments (or if they were better or worse) they wouldn\'t matter. I do think that stats can be used for a number of things; they just aren\'t getting the job done in deciding this. (4) One of the best things that came out of this for me was a much better understanding of what a rookie could do and in what time frame depending on facts about the team he is drafted to. (5) I think an impasse on whether or not AB can win games rather than not simply lose them is a serious discovery. Nice work. (6) I think we had a lot of common ground to begin with. I also think I learned a lot. This thread, no matter what anyone else says, was very much worth it for me. Thanks for all the insights. Maybe someone will pick up on \"how to evaluate a QB\" and help us both learn something there? (7) Thanks for saving time. I don\'t think I could commit myself to another monster post like that previous one.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-01-2005, 03:53 PM	#86
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Why in the world am I doing this?! Oh yeah, AND

02-01-2005, 04:03 PM	#87
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Why in the world am I doing this?! :thumbsup: