themurf Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 McNabb WAS a great player. The fact that the offense clearly looked better with him on the bench -- and it did, Murf -- says more about where McNabb is as a player now than Grossman. There's no difference between Donovan McNabb vs. Rex Grossman and Derrick Dockery vs. Kory Lichtensteiger. The first player in each example is a better talent, but the second player is a better fit for what the Redskins are currently trying to run on offense. Doesn't mean that Grossman and Lichtensteiger are better players -- just better for Shanahan's offense. Don't blame McNabb. Blame whoever gave up draft picks to acquire him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 There's a reason very few teams where interested in him last season and even less will be this offseason. Coaches watch film -- they saw and will continue to see he's declining fast. You compared McNabb to Brady and Manning.The difference is they're still great. If Brady was on the market, how many teams do you think would come calling? Trust me, we wouldn't have been the only team to make a real offer like we were for McNabb. Actually, the reason was that we were well into FA by the time the McNabb trade winds started to swirl. Why it didn't happen earlier is anyone's guess. Maybe because there were enough FA QBs available to other teams. Maybe because they were trying to decide WHICH QB was going to be traded (there were rumors about Vick and Kolb as well.) The team that really seemed to screw up in hindsight is Arizona. They were a day late, dollar short with Whitehurst, signed probably the worst QB available in FA with Anderson, then decided to hitch their star to Leinart, only to cut him before cutdown day. McNabb would have been an upgrade to anyone they had and didn't sniff at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 There's no difference between Donovan McNabb vs. Rex Grossman and Derrick Dockery vs. Kory Lichtensteiger. The first player in each example is a better talent, but the second player is a better fit for what the Redskins are currently trying to run on offense. Doesn't mean that Grossman and Lichtensteiger are better players -- just better for Shanahan's offense. Don't blame McNabb. Blame whoever gave up draft picks to acquire him. Oh, Shanahan got FLEECED in the trade. Even worse, we're going to get nothing for McNabb now because no one is going to want to pay him like a franchise QB. Teams that are interested -- and I predict there will be very few -- will just wait for us to cut him so they can sign him to a cheaper deal. Hey, I hope I'm wrong. Regarding Arizona, The Longshot. Yeah, they definitely blew it last season at the QB position. You would think McNabb would be a nice fit there in 2011, but I've heard Whisenhunt isn't a fan in any way. He wanted Bulger last year, but couldn't get the owner to ante up for him. Wouldn't be shocked to see Bulger there next year. Here's my crazy prediction. Rex Grossman, if he goes into camp as our starter, will have a better year than McNabb next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Well, I don't think there will be a "feature back" next year. Torain will be teamed up with someone, likely Portis. That would be a pretty dangerous combination. Torain and Davis could make a nice duo...Torain for the power stuff, Davis for when we need speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 Oh, Shanahan got FLEECED in the trade. Even worse, we're going to get nothing for McNabb now because no one is going to want to pay him like a franchise QB. No one thought the Redskins would get anything for Jason Campbell in a trade either. How did that work out again? If the Redskins are willing to accept a lower draft pick or a pick down the road, I think they'll get something for both McNabb and Albert Haynesworth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 No one thought the Redskins would get anything for Jason Campbell in a trade either. How did that work out again? If the Redskins are willing to accept a lower draft pick or a pick down the road, I think they'll get something for both McNabb and Albert Haynesworth. Given the rebuilding we may have to do...why not accept 2012 picks if they are a round or two higher? It would stock us up in the future and/or give us "currency" if we ever want to try to trade up in a later draft for a stud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 murf, Only issue I see here is that any fumble is a turnover opportunity, regardless of who recovers it. Grossman has fumbled four times and lost all four. That hurts his turnover rate. Howver, if you look at how many times McNabb has put the ball on the ground (10) he's averaging more turnover chances than the number you illustrate (20). Projecting to a full season, McNabb would have thrown 18 picks and fumbled roughly 12 times. That's 30... 10 more than your number of 20. Of course, this is if you view fumble lost as a more important stat than fumbles themselves. I don't. I also view forced fumbles as a more valuable indicator of a defender than fumbles recovered. Recovering a fumble on either side of the ball is as more about luck than skill. EDIT: Changed wording so my post actually makes sense. I have a headache Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 No one thought the Redskins would get anything for Jason Campbell in a trade either. How did that work out again? If the Redskins are willing to accept a lower draft pick or a pick down the road, I think they'll get something for both McNabb and Albert Haynesworth. Well, we were able to get some value for Campbell because we didn't NEED to ship him out. McNabb is going to be a similar matter, since I don't think his roster bonus next year kicks in until the season. It is similar with Haynesworth as well, tho I think teams are going to wait that one out a bit more than McNabb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Well, we were able to get some value for Campbell because we didn't NEED to ship him out. McNabb is going to be a similar matter, since I don't think his roster bonus next year kicks in until the season. It is similar with Haynesworth as well, tho I think teams are going to wait that one out a bit more than McNabb. Are McNabb and Worthless going to be going to the same team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 No one thought the Redskins would get anything for Jason Campbell in a trade either. How did that work out again? If the Redskins are willing to accept a lower draft pick or a pick down the road, I think they'll get something for both McNabb and Albert Haynesworth. Again, hope you're right and I'm wrong. I just think McNabb's contract is going to scare away interested teams. They'd rather wait for him to get cut and sign him to a cheaper deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 murf,Only issue I see here is that any fumble is a turnover opportunity, regardless of who recovers it. Grossman has fumbled four times and lost all four. That hurts his turnover rate. Howver, if you look at how many times McNabb has put the ball on the ground (10) he's averaging more turnover chances than the number you illustrate (20). It's not a turnover unless the other team capitalizes on it. No different than a quarterback nearly throwing an interception. I'm not interested in making half categories for hypothetical situations because "what if the Redskins didn't recover the ball ..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I like newcastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Again, hope you're right and I'm wrong.I just think McNabb's contract is going to scare away interested teams. They'd rather wait for him to get cut and sign him to a cheaper deal. If a team has any plans of integrating him into their offense, they are probably going to have to decide sooner rather than later on him. Such things take time to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 If a team has any plans of integrating him into their offense, they are probably going to have to decide sooner rather than later on him. Such things take time to learn. Yeah, especially with McNabb as we learned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It's not a turnover unless the other team capitalizes on it. No different than a quarterback nearly throwing an interception. I'm not interested in making half categories for hypothetical situations because "what if the Redskins didn't recover the ball ..." So, you don't believe that a fumble recovery is largely the product of luck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 So, you don't believe that a fumble recovery is largely the product of luck? This post is about statistics. Not luck. You might look at the fact that the Redskins were able to recover 90 percent of McNabb's fumbles and tell yourself, "Well that's not going to happen every year." But I'm not going to bend the stats to fit any sort of agenda. If they had lost nine of his 10 fumbles, then that's what you'd be reading. They didn't, so you're reading stats about the other guy who couldn't do as good of a job securing the football. End of story. That being said, I believe teams make their own luck. If you're smart and have solid depth, then if/when second rounder Ben Tate goes down in the preseason, you've got undrafted and unknown Arian Foster waiting in the wings. Are the Texans "lucky" that Tate got hurt? No. But it worked out for the franchise in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It's not a turnover unless the other team capitalizes on it. No different than a quarterback nearly throwing an interception. I'm not interested in making half categories for hypothetical situations because "what if the Redskins didn't recover the ball ..." I agree with you that Grossman is one of the worst QBs in history at protecting the football. But there is credence to the argument that a fumble is a 50/50 proposition. That's actually statistically verified. They way to think about it is this: Grosmman fumbled four times because he sucks. He lost all four fumbles because he is unlucky. Total fumbles is far far far more important than fumbles lost. It's logical, if your running back fumbled 25 times in one year but somehow managed to fall on every single one of them, would you continue to use him? After all, he's never turned the ball over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncr2h Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 And let's not act like a recovered fumble still isn't a major setback. You fumble the ball as a QB, you likely lost yards, took a sack, and we will now end up punting the ball. So it's not like a lost fumble is completely meaningless and Mcnabb is blame-free because we recovered his fumbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 It's logical' date=' if your running back fumbled 25 times in one year but somehow managed to fall on every single one of them, would you continue to use him? After all, he's never turned the ball over.[/quote']If grandma had balls, she'd be grandpa. You should know me well enough by now to know I don't deal in hypotheticals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 If grandma had balls, she'd be grandpa.You should know me well enough by now to know I don't deal in hypotheticals. It's not hypothetical. A fumble is a fumble is a fumble. It's not even stat bending. Every time you're credited with a fumble you're giving the opposition a possession possibility, and even in recovery it usually acts as a negative play. There is no skewing of anything on my end to fit an agenda. Grossman fumbled Four times. He averaged a fumble a game played. However, let's not make it out like McNabb was significantly better. Fumbling 10 times in 13 games is still not a positive statistic. And having quality scouts and talent evaluators that put quality backups and players in place isn't luck. It's the direct result of a good personnel department. Foster on the bench is entirely different than fumbling a football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheItalianStallion Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 There was A LOT of dropped passes this year by Cooley and a lot of them were first downs Hence first downs sustain drives and sustained drives pad stats.I was hoping you had the stats for dropped passes, dropped passes for first down, and the percentages. I think he was referring to Fred Davis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyGator Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Cutler has committed more turnovers than Rex in Chicago - both now have 31 starts with the Bears. Plus Cutler has been sacked 50% more than Rex was there. I don't think it's fair to analyze a three-game stretch when the games don't mean much. Rex was told to throw the ball deep in Skins territory on several occasions. These were evaluation games and BTW, Osi U of the Giants led the NFL in fumble recoveries with 10 so it just wasn't Rex. Plus I've never seen a QB in the NFL go in a game mid-way thru the season with just two minutes left. That was a fumble waiting to happen for most QBs out there, or at least an INT. He does need to protect the ball better, but some of that has to do with scheme. I've seen some QBs become turnover machines in the wrong scheme (e.g. Kurt Warner with the Giants). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Levi Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Well, I don't think there will be a "feature back" next year. Torain will be teamed up with someone, likely Portis. That would be a pretty dangerous combination. Super dangerous for the quarter and a half they are both healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Cutler has committed more turnovers than Rex in Chicago - both now have 31 starts with the Bears. Plus Cutler has been sacked 50% more than Rex was there.I don't think it's fair to analyze a three-game stretch when the games don't mean much. Rex was told to throw the ball deep in Skins territory on several occasions. These were evaluation games and BTW, Osi U of the Giants led the NFL in fumble recoveries with 10 so it just wasn't Rex. Plus I've never seen a QB in the NFL go in a game mid-way thru the season with just two minutes left. That was a fumble waiting to happen for most QBs out there, or at least an INT. He does need to protect the ball better, but some of that has to do with scheme. I've seen some QBs become turnover machines in the wrong scheme (e.g. Kurt Warner with the Giants). Someone with the word "Gator" in their name blindly defending Grossman no matter what? Hmmm. And people say I'm biased. The only way you could be more obvious is if you hired your son to work for you and stood at a podium while blaming everyone except Sexy Rexy for his screw-ups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsnut18231977 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Well the most humorous/fustrating stat I saw reading this thread is our record vs playoff teams. Are we serious?? 3-1 that's the things that I hassle over the entire off-season.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.