The (only!) official ES all things Kirk Cousins should we shouldn't we off-season thread.

[Taylor 36]

14 minutes ago, Bonez3 said:

I'm not suggesting it's insulting. I'm looking at the end game. If he signs it, he gets the 24 mil and only other guarantee from Skins next year would be 34 mil.

 

I wouldn't continue negotiating in any way. KC is gonna produce same or more this year. It's that simple. And when he does, he will be looking at 34 mil guaranteed for 1 year or a contract that has THAT as a leverage point. 

 

Really easy to identify leverage here

I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, if he signs a LTD that guarantees 60+ million, it would be a much safer and smarter plan.  First, it would be more money than the 58 million he would be guaranteed IF the Redskins tagged him this year AND next (huge if there).  Second, if he gets badly injured this year, he would have missed out on making nearly three times as much with the LTD if he doesn't sign it.  Plus, a LTD offers him a lot of stability for his family and his piece of mind. If I was Kirk, I would tell my agent that if they offer a LTD anytime before July 15, they have to sit down and talk.  Unless, of course, that LTD is something insulting, like 6 million a year.

[PartyPosse]

28 minutes ago, Bonez3 said:

I'm not suggesting it's insulting. I'm looking at the end game. If he signs it, he gets the 24 mil and only other guarantee from Skins next year would be 34 mil.

 

I wouldn't continue negotiating in any way. KC is gonna produce same or more this year. It's that simple. And when he does, he will be looking at 34 mil guaranteed for 1 year or a contract that has THAT as a leverage point. 

 

Really easy to identify leverage here

Well, yes and no. I get the prospect of being tagged next year for an obscene amount but there's a reason players don't like being tagged despite the guaranteed money in that anything can happen during the year. Nothing is guaranteed beyond and if I'm the Redskins and Kirk and his agent won't negotiate once he gets tagged then i'm not gonna wait til the next year to find a new QB. Let him play the one year year and then draft someone and hopefully have them play in the second half depending on where we are in the standings.

 

It's also dangerous for Kirk based on how his teammates end up viewing him if he's not even trying to commit to the team. If you're Trent Williams and signed longterm and your job is to protect a guy who basically says give me money or go **** yourselves, how much incentive do you have to keeping the dude upright? I know they are all professionals and such but remember how rough the second and third years of the RG3 era were because we felt the team just didn't care enough to keep Griffin healthy? 

 

If Kirk signs the tag and won't negotiate I would take the first deal that gets offered (within reason). If he goes to SF, he'll get a serious reality check when his weapons go from Desean, Reed, Garcon, Crowder et al to Bruce Ellington, Jeremy Kerley and Garrett Celek. Kyle Shanahan hasn't proven squat as a HC and SF is no where close to competing on either side of the ball with or without Kirk. If he decides to go this route of not negotiating and gets traded to the niners, I feel like in the long run he'll end up losing out on a lot more money. 

[Birdlives]

24 minutes ago, Bonez3 said:

I'm not suggesting it's insulting. I'm looking at the end game. If he signs it, he gets the 24 mil and only other guarantee from Skins next year would be 34 mil.

 

I wouldn't continue negotiating in any way. KC is gonna produce same or more this year. It's that simple. And when he does, he will be looking at 34 mil guaranteed for 1 year or a contract that has THAT as a leverage point. 

 

Really easy to identify leverage here

 

 

Not as easy as you think. The Skins carried over 15 mil in space from last year to this year because they knew they might have to pay Kirk on a 1 year 24mil deal. They still managed to sign a marquee FA at a position of need and despite a tougher schedule did not lose any ground or get worse. They can do the same thing again this year and carry over enough cap space to have the threat of the FT or Transition tag available. The transition tag allows right of first refusal and is expected to be 28.8mil, so in other words, a modest raise. Meanwhile if they go that route, or the FT route, Kirk will have to wait until he's 31, playing on 1 year deals before he can test free agency.

 

I think people in general are underestimating this possibility. It looks very real to me. If I'm the Redskins I may have no intention of tagging Kirk again for 34mil, but I certainly will hold on to the option as long as I can, even if it means having another modest offseason and relying on my GM to sign low end players and continuing to build primarily through the draft. Let's not forget that its in Kirks own best interest to get a deal done, not just for the security and stability, but because it also frees the team up to sign players that can help Kirk continue to look good.

[Unbias]

16 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

You might be surprised.

 

Again, it's not about the production dropping, it's about how severe the drop is.  The drop for Cousins with and without Reed at full health has to be concerning to the FO, especially considering the fact that Reed is likely one or two concussions away from retirement.

 

...

 

Cousins is basically equivalent to Andy Dalton without his elite weapon.  Andy Dalton is making $16 million per year, with $17 million guaranteed.

 

For starters, great analysis and a good way to think of things outside the box. Where I think the analysis falls downs a bit: 

 

1 - You'd also have to look at some advanced stats around the quality of defense they played against in both scenarios. Unfortunately it's not as simple as QB + #1 weapon compared to no #1 weapon. There are many moving parts. 

 

2 - Dalton signed his contract in 2014, so those number are very outdated. If he was a FA this year there's a good chance his contract would compare to what the rumors are for Kirk, not the other way around. 

 

Still, I like what you did there. Helped paint part of the picture. 

[Rskins06]

The tag this year is much different than last year, which is the reason (IMO) so many are concerned.  Last year, we tagged him, didn't come up with a LTD but had him for 19M which didn't hurt the cap.  Now, we tag him at 23.9M, again, that alone is not the issue as there is cap space to pay him.  HOWEVER, I believe if you tag him this year, there is no way you can do it next year and pay him 34M, which means you either sign him next year (for ALOT more money) or let him go, getting nothing in return!  That being said, his price will only go up if he has another solid year.  I have no idea why the FO is even messing around with this, unless they truly don't believe Kirk is worth it.  That is pure speculation as there aren't stories to back it up, just seems odd a deal has not been done yet.

 

I know it is a risk, but I would Tag him with the non exclusive, let the market show what he is worth.  If someone bites, you don't take anything LESS than the 2 1st round picks for compensation.  You don't trade picks, you take those picks AND keep all of our picks.  I really don't want to lose KC, he is ABSOLUTELY the best QB this team has had in 20 years or so and will not doubt set EVERY record if he stays.  But the longer this plays out, the worse it will be for this organization. 

 

If they do tag him again, I hope they don't **** this **** up by not getting a LTD done before 15 July!!

[XtremeFan55]

Believe it or not....I think the reason why Cousin's case is unprecedent is because he is NOT greedy.   I think he wants his freedom to able to go wherever he wants.   This might seem strange to most but Cousins has shown that he is not like some of the dumb jocks out there that squander their new found wealth and end up broke after football.  The guy lives humbly even after the huge raise last year.  He still drives his grandmother's old conversion van.  He is not one of those party hard entourage type guys that throws themselves $300,000 birthday parties.   A smart guy who lives within his means could be set for life over just last years contract which was really $10 million after taxes and his agent's commission.  $10 million at 6% per year gives him $600,000 income for life. Add this years approximately $12-13 million net and Cousins is sitting on $22-23 million which is more than enough to live comfortably for life.  Everything from here on is just icing on the cake.  I really believe he is forcing the Redskins to give him his freedom to pursue where he wants to play.  The fact that he defended the Shanahans after being fired by Snyder probably because the Shanahans stuck their neck out for him makes me think he has been waiting for this opportunity to play again with Kyle and show the NFL what could have been if Snyder would have listened to the Shanahans and benched the Golden Child who didn't have a clue on how to play the quarterback position.  Looking for a max contract is more to force his exit IMO.  This team has been so dysfucnctional for so long that that I would do the same thing.  There have been many insightful posts in here that ring true...like whether Gruden will be fired if the Redskins don't make the playoffs this year even if they keep Cousins but lose several key players like DeSean and Garcon...making the future here murky.   Have to give Cousins credit...he knows what the atmosphere is like inside Redskins Park.  From his standpoint the 49ers must look more stable to him.

[Unbias]

There was an interesting PFT article written a while ago about Kirk where they can franchise this year, then transition him in 2018. Essentially the cost for each year would be: 

 

2017 = $23.94M (I think many agree this will most likely happen)

2018 = $28.78M (2017 franchise tag + 20%)

 

Granted, if they use the transition tag they don't get any direct draft pick compensation if someone else signs him, but it gives Washington the chance to match any offer provided, so essentially they can look at his market rate and choose to commit to it or not.

 

This would be very frustrating because all the fans that thought Washington should have given him a LTD last year will have over a year to complain. 

 

It also opens up a team to arrange a contract that works directly against Washington's cap structure, meaning if 2018 is a tight cap year for them the team can give a $30M guaranteed salary for that year as opposed to a signing bonus making it very difficult for them to match. 

[Cooleyfan1993]

Did the skins wait until the franchise tag deadline last year to tag him, or did they tag him earlier than that? 

[Wildbunny]

Still find it hard to believe that someone that said not so long ago that signing a LTD would give him more freedom to lead would be reluctant to sign that LTD if he ever comes up.

As long as we don't downplay him, he'll sign happily.

[Unbias]

16 minutes ago, XtremeFan55 said:

Believe it or not....I think the reason why Cousin's case is unprecedent is because he is NOT greedy.   I think he wants his freedom to able to go wherever he wants.   This might seem strange to most but Cousins has shown that he is not like some of the dumb jocks out there that squander their new found wealth and end up broke after football.  The guy lives humbly even after the huge raise last year.  He still drives his grandmother's old conversion van.  He is not one of those party hard entourage type guys that throws themselves $300,000 birthday parties.   A smart guy who lives within his means could be set for life over just last years contract which was really $10 million after taxes and his agent's commission.  $10 million at 6% per year gives him $600,000 income for life. Add this years approximately $12-13 million net and Cousins is sitting on $22-23 million which is more than enough to live comfortably for life.  Everything from here on is just icing on the cake.  I really believe he is forcing the Redskins to give him his freedom to pursue where he wants to play.  The fact that he defended the Shanahans after being fired by Snyder probably because the Shanahans stuck their neck out for him makes me think he has been waiting for this opportunity to play again with Kyle and show the NFL what could have been if Snyder would have listened to the Shanahans and benched the Golden Child who didn't have a clue on how to play the quarterback position.  Looking for a max contract is more to force his exit IMO.  This team has been so dysfucnctional for so long that that I would do the same thing.  There have been many insightful posts in here that ring true...like whether Gruden will be fired if the Redskins don't make the playoffs this year even if they keep Cousins but lose several key players like DeSean and Garcon...making the future here murky.   Have to give Cousins credit...he knows what the atmosphere is like inside Redskins Park.  From his standpoint the 49ers must look more stable to him.

Aside from the horrible punctuation I agree with much of what you said. 

 

I'd add that I think it's largely about respect. He was overlooked in the draft and then spent the first few years of his career in RG3 shadow despite outplaying him in practices. Finally he gets a chance to start and the same team that drafted him won't commit to him as a franchise guy by compensating him like one. 

 

I see the contract being more about him aligning himself with a team that's willing to say he's their guy, both in the media and financially. He's been scratching and clawing to get everything he has since he arrived in the league. He's got to feel like he's put enough on the field for some team to want him long term. 

[Wildbunny]

1 minute ago, Unbias said:

Aside from the horrible punctuation I agree with much of what you said. 

 

I'd add I think it's about respect. He 'fell' down in the draft and was in RG3 shadow despite outplaying him in practices. Finally he gets a chance to start and the same team that drafted him won't commit to him as a franchise guy by compensating him like one. 

 

I see the contract being more about him aligning himself with a team that fully wants to commit with him for the next 6 years. He's been scratching and clawing to get everything he has since he arrived in the league. He's got to feel like he's put enough on the field for some team to want him long term. 

That was another FO, another coaching staff...

The guys here, ie Scot and Jay, put their balls on the table, and mostly their careers in Washington for him. He owes them at least that.

 

Still find it fun to see guys believing he would love to go play for a HC that had no trouble letting him rot on the bench for 2 years. Kirk owes him at least that as well.

 

So I really don't get why Kirk would be loyal to Kyle S. more than Jay G.? I really don't get that kind of thinking, even through the media.

[RemoveSnyder]

28 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

HOWEVER, I believe if you tag him this year, there is no way you can do it next year and pay him 34M, which means you either sign him next year (for ALOT more money) or let him go, getting nothing in return! 

 

This part is incorrect. Just thought you might want to know. The correct information however is here in the thread. 

 

Take care. 

[Rskins06]

6 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

 

This part is incorrect. Just thought you might want to know. The correct information however is here in the thread. 

 

Take care. 

Not sure what part was incorrect.  If you tag him this year, the Franchise (exclusive) tag next year is $34/$35M.  I know the non exclusive tag is $28M and if you do that then, why not now?  Why not use the non exclusive now, if someone wants him, they will have to give up 2 1st RD Picks.  This way, IF he does leave, you get something in return.  Problem is leverage, KC and his agent hold ALL of the leverage.

 

IMO, you tag him this year, you don't get a LTD done, he will be a FA next year because of the cost of the tag, then you get nothing in return.

[Wildbunny]

3 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

Not sure what part was incorrect.  If you tag him this year, the Franchise (exclusive) tag next year is $34/$35M.  I know the non exclusive tag is $28M and if you do that then, why not now?  Why not use the non exclusive now, if someone wants him, they will have to give up 2 1st RD Picks.  This way, IF he does leave, you get something in return.  Problem is leverage, KC and his agent hold ALL of the leverage.

 

IMO, you tag him this year, you don't get a LTD done, he will be a FA next year because of the cost of the tag, then you get nothing in return.

He was thinking Transition Tag next year.

And we signed him for the non exclusive last year as well. Didn't had many suitors or so it seems. Don't know where I read it, but if SF wants him that's two 1st RD picks, this year and next, (except if they sign him after the draft, which could screw us). So that's pick #2. We can then also trade 17 to NE for Garopolo. Which NE would do ASAP for a guy on his rookie contract. Not exactly how I'd like it to be played, but at least here, we have some kind of a plan B.

[Est.1974]

Well the tags are starting to hit across the NFL, so we should have something 'soon' from the team.

[Skins-in-CT]

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Well the tags are starting to hit across the NFL, so we should have something 'soon' from the team.

 

Soon as in Wednesday at 3:59 PM EST 

[Wildbunny]

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Well the tags are starting to hit across the NFL, so we should have something 'soon' from the team.

In a little bit more than 48 Hours...

[PartyPosse]

It's clear we're gonna tag him. If they want to sign up to a LTD best to just get it out of the way now. 

[Jumbo]

15 minutes ago, Unbias said:

Aside from the horrible punctuation 

 

 

   

btw fwiw, "unbias" is not a word. "unbiased" is a word.

 

 hadn't said anything before now because it's inconsequential to me, but the punctuation thing left me thinking you might care.

[Birdlives]

15 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

He was thinking Transition Tag next year.

And we signed him for the non exclusive last year as well. Didn't had many suitors or so it seems. Don't know where I read it, but if SF wants him that's two 1st RD picks, this year and next, (except if they sign him after the draft, which could screw us). So that's pick #2. We can then also trade 17 to NE for Garopolo. Which NE would do ASAP for a guy on his rookie contract. Not exactly how I'd like it to be played, but at least here, we have some kind of a plan B.

 

 

We never found out if he had any suitors because he signed the tag without seeking a deal elsewhere. Once he signed the tag, he was effectively under a 1 year contract and no team would be able to talk to him. They would've had to talk to the Redskins.

[Unbias]

23 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

That was another FO, another coaching staff...

The guys here, ie Scot and Jay, put their balls on the table, and mostly their careers in Washington for him. He owes them at least that.

 

Still find it fun to see guys believing he would love to go play for a HC that had no trouble letting him rot on the bench for 2 years. Kirk owes him at least that as well.

 

So I really don't get why Kirk would be loyal to Kyle S. more than Jay G.? I really don't get that kind of thinking, even through the media.

 

I don't think he'd be more loyal to Kyle per say, but rather San Fran seems they are more willing to financial commit than Washington.

 

At the end of the day there are only a small number of coaches that you can look 2+ years out and say with some level of confidence that they will still be calling the shots (Belicheck,Tomlin and maybe Carroll). I think it would be bad judgement for a player in the prime of their career to pick their location based on the current coach because at the end of the day that person is one bad season from being canned, you aren't a part of picking the next coach and the only things making it tough to cut you is your level of play and your contract.

 

I'd make an argument that some players will favor a system over another, but IMO that all comes back to the money. They feel a certain system will make them more valuable and ultimately help them earn more money while they are in the league for 4-15 years. 

[Unbias]

8 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

   

btw fwiw, "unbias" is not a word. "unbiased" is a word.

 

 hadn't said anything before now because it's inconsequential to me, but the punctuation thing left me thinking you might care.

No doubt it's ironic I post about punctuation while having a user name that isn't a real word....

 

It also seems odd that I appear to be communicating clearly with minimal grammatical errors, but didn't realize my user name had a red squiggily line under it (BTW squiggly was spelled wrong in the last sentence)...

[London Kev]

Just now, Unbias said:

No doubt it's ironic I post about punctuation while having a user name that isn't a real word....

 

It also seems odd that I appear to be communicating clearly with minimal grammatical errors, but didn't realize my user name had a red squiggily line under it (BTW squiggly was spelled wrong in the last sentence)...

 

Hyphenated. 

Non-hyphenated.

 

Grammar can be a real **** sometimes.

[HTTRDynasty]

41 minutes ago, Unbias said:

 

For starters, great analysis and a good way to think of things outside the box. Where I think the analysis falls downs a bit: 

 

1 - You'd also have to look at some advanced stats around the quality of defense they played against in both scenarios. Unfortunately it's not as simple as QB + #1 weapon compared to no #1 weapon. There are many moving parts. 

 

2 - Dalton signed his contract in 2014, so those number are very outdated. If he was a FA this year there's a good chance his contract would compare to what the rumors are for Kirk, not the other way around. 

 

Still, I like what you did there. Helped paint part of the picture. 

 

Thanks man.  I thought it would be interesting to actually see the numbers from other QBs with and without their elite weapons instead of just speculating about it.

 

1. Yes, I know it's not a perfect comparison due to defenses faced, injuries to other key players, etc. but that's the main reason I compiled 5 years of data instead of 1 or 2.  I wanted as large a sample size as possible so that other factors would theoretically have less of an impact over time (especially since I don't know the other teams inside and out like I do the Skins).  Also, Julio and AJ Green we both drafted in 2011, so it made sense to use 2011 as the starting point.

 

2. I don't agree that Dalton would get paid what the rumors are for Kirk now (i.e. top paid or one of the top paid APY/Guaranteed Dollars for QBs in the league).  To support this position, I will point to the contracts that Matt Stafford and Matt Ryan signed in 2013 (a year before Dalton singed his deal):

 

Matt Stafford - 3 yrs., $53 million, $17.67 million APY, $41.5 million guaranteed

Matt Ryan - 5 yrs., $103.75 million, $20.75 million APY, $42 million guaranteed

 

Also, the contract that Alex Smith signed in 2014 (the same year as Dalton's contract)

Alex Smith - 4 yrs., $68 million, $17 million APY, $45 million guaranteed

 

So the Bengals paid Dalton an APY that was lower than Stafford and Ryan by over $1 million, and $1 million lower than Alex Smith.  But the guaranteed money is the real area to look at here.  Dalton's 6 yr. contract with $17 million guaranteed is WELL below what these other QBs signed for - with two signing one year earlier and one signing in the same year. 

 

The interesting thing is that in 2015, Dalton was playing like a top 5 QB and that contract looked like an absolute steal.  A major reason he was playing so well?  He was throwing to AJ Green, Tyler Eifert, and Mohamed Sanu, with Jeremy Hill and Gio Bernard in the backfield.  What happened in 2016?  He fell way back down to earth.  What was the primary reason?  They lost Sanu to the Falcons in FA.  Then Eifert only played 8 games during the season, while Green and Bernard played 10.

 

Dalton is a QB who relies heavily on his weapons to make him look like a top QB.  Cincy knew that when they signed him, so they structured that into his contract with a boatload of incentives:

 

Dalton would receive $1 million per subsequent year if he plays in 80 percent of the snaps and reaches the divisional round of the playoffs. He receives $500,000 per subsequent year if he plays in 80 percent of the snaps and reaches the conference title. And, he receives $1.5 million per subsequent year of his contract if he plays in 80 percent of the snaps and reaches the Super Bowl.

 

I think it's pretty clear that Kirk is not a Brady, Ryan, Stafford, etc. who can play like a top QB without his elite weapon.  He is much more like a Dalton who needs his weapons healthy and active to play at a high level.  This is why I wouldn't mind an APY figure like $24 million for Kirk, but that guaranteed money needs to be well below what Luck received or what Ryan/Stafford/Carr will receive.  I think the front office feels the same way, which is why they offered such a low guaranteed amount last year and probably will again this year IMO.

[ncr2h]

18 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Kirk Cousins - Last Two Years ( since some posters here are so quick to discount his 2013 and 2014 seasons):

 

Kirk Cousins w/ Healthy Reed - 23 games:

70.19% completion percentage

292 YPG

1.91 Passing TDs per game / 0.22 Rushing TDs per game

0.57 INTs per game

107.39 passer rating

 

Kirk Cousins w/o Reed or with Injured Reed - 9 games:

63.41% completion percentage

262 YPG

1.11 Passing TDs per game / 0.44 Rushing TDs per game

1.11 INTs per game

85.58 passer rating

 

Cousins is basically equivalent to Andy Dalton without his elite weapon.  Andy Dalton is making $16 million per year, with $17 million guaranteed.

First of all, thank you for doing the analysis.  This was an interesting take, but I think ultimately there are some problems.

 

Problem 1: Just Because Reed Improves Cousins Doesn't Mean Reed Will Improve Other QBs to Cousins' Level

The main problem I have is that the underlying assumption would appear to be that we could plug in any old QB with Jordan Reed and they would put up numbers similar to Kirk.  We have tangible evidence that this is not the case - in 2014, Cousins posted far superior numbers to McCoy and Griffin despite basically "spotting" them Jordan Reed.  Reed was injured for ~75% of Cousins' pass attempts that year, but he was on pace for 5,000 yards (led the league in yards/game and yards/attempt) and 30 TDs (and, yes, nearly 30 INTs).  McCoy and Griffin struggled with turnovers and scoring despite having the benefit of a healthy Jordan Reed.  In fact, it could at least be questioned whether Jordan Reed would even be considered an elite weapon without Cousins throwing him the ball.  For his career, here's Jordan Reed's career numbers with and without Cousins:

 

With Cousins: 175 catches on 237 targets (74%) for 1,904 yards (8.0 yards/tgt), 17 TDs; 12.8 adjusted yards per reception (pro-rated for 16 games: 1,050 yards, 9 TDs)

Without Cousins: 82 catches on 107 targets (77%) for 818 yards (7.6 yards/tgt), 4 TDs; 11.0 adjusted yards per reception (pro-rated for 16 games: 727 yards, 4 TDs)

 

Applying the same logic to Reed that you're applying to Cousins, should we really have extended a guy who plays like a top 5 TE with Cousins in the lineup but is basically NFL average when Cousins is out of the lineup?

 

So, if the FO is concluding that Kirk is an average QB being made to look good by Reed, I think they're making a big mistake considering that we've already seen what happened with Griffin and McCoy.

 

Problem 2: Flaws in the Metrics

The first issue I see with your metrics is that they aren't adjusted for the strength of the defense.

 

The second problem I see is that the non-Reed sample size is so small that it's unintentionally skewing to a portion of Kirk's career that is no longer particularly relevant.  It's obvious that the Tampa win in 2015 was a clear watershed moment for Kirk, where he morphed from an average QB into a top 5 QB (statistically).  The non-Reed sample that you're using is skewed because 1/3 of the games Reed has missed since 2015 came in the pre-TB timeframe.  This may not seem like a big deal, but it actually is.  For example, here are Kirk's stats in 2016 with and without Reed.  Note how the difference is much less significant (big drop in TDs offset by big drop in INTs, fewer sacks, ends up still posting Pro Bowl DYAR):

 

W/ Reed: 319/467 (68%) for 3,812 yards (8.2 y/a), 20 TDs (4.3%), 10 INTs (2.1%), 19 sacks (3.9%), 7.4 ANY/A, 80 DYAR/game (equates to 1,276 per 16 games)

W/O Reed: 87/139 (63%) for 1,105 yards (7.9 y/a), 5 TDs (3.6%), 2 INTs (1.4%), 4 sacks (2.8%), 7.5 ANY/A, 64 DYAR/game (equates to 1,024 per 16 games) 

 

The third problem is that "per game" stats are not really meaningful*.  If you throw the ball 100 times in a game, and get 500 yards and 3 TDs, your "per game" stats look really good but you actually played a pretty ****ty game.  If you're not going to use a defense-adjusted metric like DYAR, DVOA, or ESPN QBR, at least use "per attempt" metrics like Y/A, ANY/A, TD%, INT%, etc.  A QB who loses a lot might end up throwing the ball a lot more, inflating his "per game" stats.  A winning QB might not throw the ball very much because his team built a lead, and therefore his "per game" stats might be lower.

 

Here's a better way to present Kirk's stats (I'm including 2014):

W/ Reed: 686/989 (69%) for 8,056 yards (8.1 y/a), 49 TDs (5.0%), 21 INTs (2.1%), 46 sacks (4.4%), 7.5 ANY/A, 72 DYAR/game (equates to 1,151 per 16 games)

W/O Reed: 225/364 (62%) for 2,737 yards (7.5 y/a), 15 TDs (4.1%), 11 INTs (3.0%), 11 sacks (2.9%), 6.5 ANY/A, 49 DYAR/game (equates to 782 per 16 games)

 

Focusing on just the opponent-adjusted metric (DYAR), a DYAR of 1,000+ general indicates a Pro Bowl season (1,500+ is generally MVP level).  Notice that Cousins is still posting a respectable 782 DYAR per 16 games without Reed, just shy of a Pro Bowl level.  For reference, 782 DYAR would have been #8 in the NFL this season.  For reference, just 6 non-Cousins QBs in the league have averaged more than 782 DYAR per season since 2014: Brees, Prescott, Brady, Roethlisberger, Ryan, and Rodgers.  So, even without Jordan Reed, Kirk's numbers are very good (when adjusted for defense).

 

Anyway, this response became much longer than I wanted.  Really interesting analysis but I think it's possible that other people could look at the data and draw a different conclusion.

 

CLIFF'S NOTES:

1. The difference between Kirk's Reed and Non-Reed numbers is heavily influenced by the fact that you're essentially comparing two different QBs - Pre-Tampa Kirk and Post-Tampa Kirk.  If you look only at Post-Tampa Kirk, the difference largely (but not entirely) disappears.

2.  Adjusted for strength of defense, the difference shrinks even further.

3.  Even if we were to accept the notion that Reed turns Kirk from average to great, there's no evidence that he can do the same for other QBs.  In fact, there's evidence that he cannot (McCoy, Griffin).

 

*It is my opinion that DYAR per game is a good metric (I've never seen anyone else use this metric, but hear me out).  DVOA is the only other real alternative.  Unfortunately, DVOA is a per play metric, which rewards QBs who are highly efficient on a small number of pass attempts but penalizes QBs who are less efficient on a much larger volume of attempts.  It treats the guys who are being shielded by their offensive coordinators and punishes guys who are carrying their entire offense.  I think a good analogy is basketball - you might have a 6th man who is good at coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game and scoring points while your starters are out, but it would be foolish to think that you'd get the same level of production out of him if he was the #1 scoring option on your entire team.  So, DYAR per game is a good stat because it measures the total value that the QB added that game without punishing for how many attempts it took the QB to get it.