FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[Malapropismic Depository]

I am in favor of a rushing-oriented attack.

There's still a couple major questions.

Can our RB's stay healthy, and can we address the holes in our O-Line ?

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

I don't see how you can rank Haskins above Daniel Jones who just threw for 24 TDs and 12 ints in his rookie season. Right now Haskins is at the bottom of that group until he plays his way out of that position. 

[HTTRDynasty]

24 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I don't see how you can rank Haskins above Daniel Jones who just threw for 24 TDs and 12 ints in his rookie season. 

 

By looking beyond raw stats.

[redrobert]

Honestly the cool thing is that Haskins and Jones will be going head to head (assuming health) for the next 4 years minimum. 

 

As to the debate after year one, slight lean to Jones IMO. Haskins did have significant disadvantages, coaching and college experience mainly. Jones however showed more maturity and better decision making overall.

 

Expect a huge leap from Haskins this season and his upside far exceeds Jones. Again just one guy’s opinion...

[Burgundy Yoda]

3 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

By looking beyond raw stats.

I don't care how good someone looks if they aren't getting touchdowns and they're throwing interceptions. You can't write of statistics that easily, Haskins has a mountain to climb. 

[Riggo#44]

36 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I don't care how good someone looks if they aren't getting touchdowns and they're throwing interceptions. You can't write of statistics that easily, Haskins has a mountain to climb. 

How many of those TDs were in garbage time?

How many were a result of a dump off, where the receiver did 90% of the work?

Raw stats can be very misleading in all sports. This analyst watched how they played, not just the results, which is far more informative. 

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

How many of those TDs were in garbage time?

How many were a result of a dump off, where the receiver did 90% of the work?

Raw stats can be very misleading in all sports. This analyst watched how they played, not just the results, which is far more informative. 

 

He played for the Giants so I'm sure they were all in garbage time. Still, 24/12 is really freaking good for a rookie, Daniel Jones does have a massive fumbling problem that definitely cost the Giants a game or two as well I would imagine. 

 

You can't fault a QB for dumping it off to the receiver and the receiver taking it to the house. That's the right play for the QB to make, it's literally what Tom Brady has been doing for years. I'm not saying the analyst is wrong here is wrong, I think he's pretty spot on with Dwayne's 8-14th best QB projection. I just find it odd how he's so high yet Jones is so low after he had much better results. It almost seems like a Skins fan made the tier list. 

[Riggo#44]

You can absolutely blame the QB for dumping it off if it's not the right play. If there are 3 other, better options that he doesn't see? That isn't a good process, just a good result in spite of, not because of, the QB.

[MartinC]

7 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I don't see how you can rank Haskins above Daniel Jones who just threw for 24 TDs and 12 ints in his rookie season. Right now Haskins is at the bottom of that group until he plays his way out of that position. 

By watching the film not the box score.

[MartinC]

4 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I don't care how good someone looks if they aren't getting touchdowns and they're throwing interceptions. You can't write of statistics that easily, Haskins has a mountain to climb. 

 

Sports is about the end result - absolutely.

 

But you hear coaches talk all the time about ‘trust the process’. The end result is a product of that process - which in the context of grading a QB is not just what happened but how and why did it happen (and what should have happened). Grading that tells you a lot about how repeatable those results are likely to be and allows you to project forwards. There is also an element of grading the physical skill ‘arm talent’. 
 

Nothing is written in stone though. I’m probably as high on Haskins as anyone on this board, but I’m also not blind to the possibility (heck probability given the history of bust rate of QBs in the NFL) that Haskins does not develop. But hand on heart if you asked me to pick between Haskins and Jones to hitch my wagon to as a coach over the next 5 years I’m taking Haskins every time. He has a superior skill set as a thrower, gets off his first read better and has a better pocket sense and movement. About the only thing Jones has on Haskins from a physical perspective is superior mobility. 
 

The other thing Jones reportedly has on Haskins though is the ‘gym rat, loves to watch film, first in last out’ thing. Now that’s very important - and Haskins has shown that when he’s not the starter that he does not prepare as well as he should. That’s real. But there is also some stereotyping going on here - the marginal skill set QB who studies hard and out works the physically superior but ‘lazy’ guy who spend too much time on social media etc etc. 
 

By reports from people like John Keim Haskins is doing everything you could want this offseason to prepare. If we put talent around him (not least at both tackle spots) and a good scheme and game planning he has a chance to be very good.

[Burgundy Yoda]

3 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

You can absolutely blame the QB for dumping it off if it's not the right play. If there are 3 other, better options that he doesn't see? That isn't a good process, just a good result in spite of, not because of, the QB.

Of course if the dump off doesn't go for much yardage and there were better options then the QB should be held liable. If the dump off goes to the house though then the QB deserves some credit for finding the playmaker. Daniel Jones didn't strike me as a QB who just dumped it off to receivers when I watched him, I thought he made a lot of NFL caliber throws this season. 

[dyst]

8 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I don't see how you can rank Haskins above Daniel Jones who just threw for 24 TDs and 12 ints in his rookie season. Right now Haskins is at the bottom of that group until he plays his way out of that position. 

One plays for the Giants and the other plays for the Redskins. If Haskins was on the Giants, this board would be murdering him for the year he just had. Year #2 and beyond its open game, but in year one, Jones defiantly looked better.

[Burgundy Yoda]

32 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

Sports is about the end result - absolutely.

 

But you hear coaches talk all the time about ‘trust the process’. The end result is a product of that process - which in the context of grading a QB is not just what happened but how and why did it happen (and what should have happened). Grading that tells you a lot about how repeatable those results are likely to be and allows you to project forwards. There is also an element of grading the physical skill ‘arm talent’. 
 

Nothing is written in stone though. I’m probably as high on Haskins as anyone on this board, but I’m also not blind to the possibility (heck probability given the history of bust rate of QBs in the NFL) that Haskins does not develop. But hand on heart if you asked me to pick between Haskins and Jones to hitch my wagon to as a coach over the next 5 years I’m taking Haskins every time. He has a superior skill set as a thrower, gets off his first read better and has a better pocket sense and movement. About the only thing Jones has on Haskins from a physical perspective is superior mobility. 
 

The other thing Jones reportedly has on Haskins though is the ‘gym rat, loves to watch film, first in last out’ thing. Now that’s very important - and Haskins has shown that when he’s not the starter that he does not prepare as well as he should. That’s real. But there is also some stereotyping going on here - the marginal skill set QB who studies hard and out works the physically superior but ‘lazy’ guy who spend too much time on social media etc etc. 
 

By reports from people like John Keim Haskins is doing everything you could want this offseason to prepare. If we put talent around him (not least at both tackle spots) and a good scheme and game planning he has a chance to be very good.

Haskins has elite traits that I saw that did not show up much at Ohio State. His pocket awareness is really quite impressive, the guy sees everything and senses when the castle around him is crumbling. I didn't see this much at Ohio State because that offensive like kept his jersey extremely clean most of the game. Most of the talk was about his arm talent.

 

I agree with your assessment on Haskins and Jones but I may lean Jones being a bit more accurate with more mobility. Haskins had a few games last year that really made me question his accuracy overall. The Detroit game is engrained into my skull, I still can't get over how many times he missed Terry McLaurin that game. They just got done playing a full season together at Ohio State but he played like that was his first game with Terry. 

 

I have Jones as a more mobile Derek Carr type of player impact wise. He probably won't ever be great but certainly better than what that analyst said. Haskins probably turns out pretty good too, he has a higher ceiling so in 5 years he could definitely be the better choice if he puts the work in. 

[MartinC]

16 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

 

I agree with your assessment on Haskins and Jones but I may lean Jones being a bit more accurate with more mobility. Haskins had a few games last year that really made me question his accuracy overall. The Detroit game is engrained into my skull, I still can't get over how many times he missed Terry McLaurin that game. They just got done playing a full season together at Ohio State but he played like that was his first game with Terry. 

 

I have Jones as a more mobile Derek Carr type of player impact wise. He probably won't ever be great but certainly better than what that analyst said. Haskins probably turns out pretty good too, he has a higher ceiling so in 5 years he could definitely be the better choice if he puts the work in. 

Accuracy was something that really concerned me with Haskins early last season and in his first couple of starts. He missed some throws badly. His feet and eyes were just not in synch - I think a lot of that was down to just not being prepared and knowing what he was doing. Mechanically he throws with a low elbow as well which means when he does miss he often misses high. He did get a lot better in that respect the more he played and the more comfortable he became.

 

Carr had a far superior arm to Jones. He was very talented physically but he got the crap beaten out of him and didn’t have a whole lot to work with on a bad team - just another example of how QB development is as much a function of what’s around the QB from an organisational perspective as the QB himself.

[dyst]

Elite level QBs rise to the occasion regardless of talent around them. They would still be talented. A bad offensive line isn’t what did Carr in. A bad offensive line isn’t want did Ramsey in. These guys just weren’t that good. At best, maybe they would have been journeymen type of QBs if they had a better line, but certainly not anything more than that.

[goskins10]

2 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

Haskins has elite traits that I saw that did not show up much at Ohio State. His pocket awareness is really quite impressive, the guy sees everything and senses when the castle around him is crumbling. I didn't see this much at Ohio State because that offensive like kept his jersey extremely clean most of the game. Most of the talk was about his arm talent.

 

I agree with your assessment on Haskins and Jones but I may lean Jones being a bit more accurate with more mobility. Haskins had a few games last year that really made me question his accuracy overall. The Detroit game is engrained into my skull, I still can't get over how many times he missed Terry McLaurin that game. They just got done playing a full season together at Ohio State but he played like that was his first game with Terry. 

 

I have Jones as a more mobile Derek Carr type of player impact wise. He probably won't ever be great but certainly better than what that analyst said. Haskins probably turns out pretty good too, he has a higher ceiling so in 5 years he could definitely be the better choice if he puts the work in. 

 

 

So for their respective starts, Jones had a comp % of 61.8% and Haskins was 59.1%. That computes out to less than 1 additional comp per 30 atts. As for mobility, I saw Haskins looking for the pass more as th season went along instead of running. However, when you look at the Philly game - which I just re-watched - he ran the RPO several times and worked it very well. One time, he faked the pitch then when the defenders came to him AP was open he still pitched it. 

 

Daniels biggest flaw is fumbles. He had 18 with 11 lost in 13 games, 12 starts. He is fumbling about 1.5 times a game losing almost 1 per game! Haskins fumbled 6 times on 9 gms, 7 starts with only 2 lost. 

 

Haskins steadily got better as the season went along. And unlike @MartinC I was not a Haskins fan before or during the draft. I did not want a QB as I still believe outside Murray, the rest of the QBs were not true 1st rd talent, they were just the best of that draft so they worked their way into the 1st rd. So I was very critical of haskins early games - and rightfully so. He was putrid. But as you watch his progression, anyone watching honestly has to see tremendous improvement. 

 

When compared to Daniels, I believe Daniels started way ahead of Haskins but he never really improved much. Outside the Redskins game in fact he got worse. Where Haskins got better every game. Each game he mastered something new. Now he had and still has a long way to go. But for me, while they started with Daniels clearly better, they ended in about a dead heat with much more upside to Haskins. 

 

It is still out whether Haskins reaches that potential. And Daniels could cure the fumble issue and get more accurate, especially as they tailor the offense to his game. But the last part should happen for Haskins too. RR and Scott Turner will adjust their offense to work to Haskins strengths, or at least they should. So I like Haskins chances of being the long term solution better than Daniels. But it's still an open question for both. 

 

[HTTRDynasty]

1 hour ago, dyst said:

Elite level QBs rise to the occasion regardless of talent around them. 

 

Tell that to Tom Brady last year.

 

Some of the takes in this thread crack me up.

[dyst]

38 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Tell that to Tom Brady last year.

 

Some of the takes in this thread crack me up.

4000+ yards, 24TDs, only 8 INT. Once again leading his team to the playoffs with a 12 win season in his 19th year. Like I said, elite talent finds a way despite whatever handicap they are faced with. 
 

Those are exceptionally amazing numbers for a QB who by all accounts was missing pieces even more so given his age. Brady is on the decline in his career anyways. 
 

The level of football knowledge with some fans is laughable.

[HTTRDynasty]

12 minutes ago, dyst said:

4000+ yards, 24TDs, only 8 INT. Once again leading his team to the playoffs with a 12 win season in his 19th year. Like I said, elite talent finds a way despite whatever handicap they are faced with. 
 

Those are exceptionally amazing numbers for a QB who by all accounts was missing pieces even more so given his age. Brady is on the decline in his career anyways. 
 

The level of football knowledge with some fans is laughable.

 

Holy....

 

It looks like I gave you too much credit for actually watching the games.  Anyone who watched the Patriots last year knew the defense carried that team.  Brady ranked 18th in passer rating, behind Case Keenum and Gardner Minshew, and one spot ahead of Jacoby Brissett.

 

But if you actually watched the games, you would see it wasn't due to any kind of severe regression on his part.  It was largely due to the talent around him.

 

No QB wins consistently "regardless of the talent around him".  That's ridiculous. 

[dyst]

22 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Holy....

 

It looks like I gave you too much credit for actually watching the games.  Anyone who watched the Patriots last year knew the defense carried that team.  Brady ranked 18th in passer rating, behind Case Keenum and Gardner Minshew, and one spot ahead of Jacoby Brissett.

 

But if you actually watched the games, you would see it wasn't due to any kind of severe regression on his part.  It was largely due to the talent around him.

 

No QB wins consistently "regardless of the talent around him".  That's ridiculous. 

Lordy my goodness, like trying to get through a thick wall. Tom Brady, the GOAT QB, is in his 19th year (40 something years old), unheard of, and yet he still managed to put up those stats. He is older, his arm isn't as good because of age, his mobility is worse because of age, his speed is slower because of age, and to your own point, his offensive talent was not there this year and yet, he still put up those numbers and helped the team to a 12 win year. If that does not show that elite talent finds a way to prosper despite his surroundings then I am not sure what to tell you. If Brady had better offensive weapons, his numbers would have absolutely been better, but the fact that he was able to do what he did despite the teams shortcomings on offense is an attribute to HIS level of talent. Which brings me back to my point, guys like David Carr didn't suck because of the offensive line. Some guys just are not that good at QB. Shocking I know.

 

 

 

[HTTRDynasty]

So... what is your point?  You're agreeing with me, then disagreeing with me, then agreeing with me.  

 

3 hours ago, dyst said:

Elite level QBs rise to the occasion regardless of talent around them. 

 

This is what you said.  Brady is an elite QB.  He was eliminated in the Wildcard round, which is a disappointing season for him by anyone's measure.  The main reason for that was the lack of offensive talent around him.  He didn't "rise to the occasion" and carry his team deep into the playoffs, despite being an elite QB.

[dyst]

21 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

So... what is your point?  You're agreeing with me, then disagreeing with me, then agreeing with me.  This is what you said.  Brady is an elite QB.  He was eliminated in the Wildcard round, which is a disappointing season for him by anyone's measure.  The main reason for that was the lack of offensive talent around him.  He didn't "rise to the occasion" and carry his team deep into the playoffs, despite being an elite QB.

This is not very difficult to understand. A good QB can make the entire team better, including a bad offensive line. David Carr didn't suck because of the offensive line. He sucked because he wasn't a good QB. Put Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady etc, behind that same Texans offensive and they will more than likely do much better than David Carr could. Good QBs can read a defense, can maneuver within the pocket. Bad QBs can't do this. They almost never learn it. David Carr wasn't going to go from David Carr to GOAT behind an all pro line. He would still suck. That is a very simple point. 

 

 

To add to this point: Let's take Matt Schaub who by no means is elite but he is at least better than David Carr. Carrs last year he got sacked 41 times. The next year with Schaub as QB, he got sacked only 16 times. I'm sure the line improved in that one year but come on, that clearly shows some QBs make their offensive line look much better while other QBs suck and can't get out of their own way (i.e. David Carr)

[HTTRDynasty]

1 minute ago, dyst said:

A good QB can make the entire team better, including a bad offensive line. 

 

That is a very different statement than this:

 

4 hours ago, dyst said:

Elite level QBs rise to the occasion regardless of talent around them.

 

And you have no idea how those QBs would have performed in different situations.  It's all just hypothetical.  

 

We do know that Brees's teams have gone .500 or worse when he hasn't had enough talent around him.  We do know Nick Foles has gone from looking like a career backup to a SB MVP, with the only difference being the talent and coaching around him.  I could keep going, but I hope you understand the point.

 

The circumstances around Haskins last year mattered far more than you seem to realize.

[MartinC]

19 minutes ago, dyst said:

This is not very difficult to understand. A good QB can make the entire team better, including a bad offensive line. David Carr didn't suck because of the offensive line. He sucked because he wasn't a good QB. Put Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady etc, behind that same Texans offensive and they will more than likely do much better than David Carr could. Good QBs can read a defense, can maneuver within the pocket. Bad QBs can't do this. They almost never learn it. David Carr wasn't going to go from David Carr to GOAT behind an all pro line. He would still suck. That is a very simple point. 

 

You realise Carr was the first overall pick in the draft for an EXPANSION team? He was thrust onto a team that was literally in its first year with a collection of players from an expansion draft an new coaching staff and new ... well everything.

 

A good experienced vet QB likely would have done better than Carr. But a rookie? And Carr didn't do badly by the way - he was playing decent football and progressing his first 3 years. But the sack numbers he was taking were insane - and yes some of that was on him holding the ball, but some of it was on the dysfunction around him which included scheme and play calling. He got to a 7 win season his 3rd year but the sacks just caught up with him - I think he just got gun shy. Got a Super Bowl ring though from his time as a backup with teh Giants.

 

19 minutes ago, dyst said:

 

 

To add to this point: Let's take Matt Schaub who by no means is elite but he is at least better than David Carr. Carrs last year he got sacked 41 times. The next year with Schaub as QB, he got sacked only 16 times. I'm sure the line improved in that one year but come on, that clearly shows some QBs make their offensive line look much better while other QBs suck and can't get out of their own way (i.e. David Carr)

 

True. A QB can absolutely help an O'Line. But then so can a coach help both. Dom Capers was fired for Gary Kubiac for start of the 2006 season. Carrs sack numbers fell quite a bit, his completion percentage went through the roof (went to 68%) but his deal was up and end of that year Kubiac wanted to bring in a guy he was more comfortable with in his sytem from his time at Atlanta in Schaub. 

 

Its rarely as simple as "he sucked". Situation, supporting cast, coaching - it all matters.