The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[jg77]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

You're going back to the same argument he had, which was "well, he didn't take many sacks"

 

Who cares? The entire point of the statistic is the number of sacks relative to the number of pressures. The raw number of sacks is definitely a number with no context.

 

As I mentioned, the context can also be thought about in terms of how little he passes when pressured compared to running. So if he runs a lot when pressured, obviously he's not throwing it up for grabs to avoid sacks and obviously he's not going to throw a lot of INTs since...well, since the ball is never in the air.

 

That's why those are two problematic stats that are IMO intertwined and will potentially cause a lot of problems in the NFL.

How is the raw number of sacks not the most important number?

[mistertim]

Just now, jg77 said:

How is the raw number of sacks not the most important number?

 

Oh my god.

 

You have to be trolling me. You have to be.

 

Why is this so difficult to understand? The pressure to sack ratio is about the number of sacks relative to pressures. So when a guy is pressured, how often is he sacked? If he gets sacked a lot relative to how many times he's pressured then that's a concerning thing because it may mean he responds very poorly to pressure.

 

If a guy is sacked 22 times but was pressured 160 times, then that sack number isn't that concerning because he had a low percentage of times he got sacked when pressured. If, on the other hand, he was sacked 22 times but was only pressured 90 times, then that's an issue because there were a very high percentage of times that he was pressured that he took a sack.

 

Low numbers of pressures and sacks can have many causes. Often it has to do with being behind a very good OL, for example. That's why it's the ratio that's important, and not so much the raw number.

[The Consigliere]

16 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

@The Consigliere with your long posts-diatribes -- you should find a way to distress.   Aren't you in California?  Just came back from a short trip from there, always strikes me how chill they are versus the NE.  

 

They haven't taken Daniels.  They can still take Maye.  Why exhaust yourself with angst when we don't even know it happens.

 

 

I'm a half poisoned glass guy, which is part of it, and periodically I boil over and just start ranting lol, hopefully with logic and well reasoned posts and arguments.

 

I will admit I'll find it hilarious if this class ends up like '04 and '00 rather than '99 or '18, and we just have a HOF type in Caleb, a Super bowl guy in Maye and a Lamar lite in Daniels and they're all great, maybe one of the latter 3 hit too lol.

 

I totally think that could happen. I actually like Daniels, but this is a business where the bust, or "he's a guy your gonna dalton/tannehill after his rookie deal" rate sits at more than 50%. I expect Caleb to hit but I do think the mental make up (is this a George/Leaf/RGIII mental make up problem that lowers his ceiling by half) worry is legit, I think Maye at worst is just a stat accumulator in the vein of a bigger Cousins, and thats at worst, and I think Daniels athleticism, if he can stay healthy and arm, mean he has a good chance at being at worst, Fields plus and for one year, Fields was average. 

 

Its hard for me to see any of the 3 being utter wastelands of nothing like Zach Wilson and Trey Lance, other than maybe injury with Daniels. 

 

But for me, that's not really it, its more, "Come on, man, this isn't hard, I want to hear quotes from the FO and coaches and think, "we're in good hands," I don't want to think we've got a clown show at the wheel like Captain Edward Smith and friends, running full speed into an ice field. I want them to be so dorky smart, I can follow the bread crumbs and kinda get how they get there and buy the process. But everything I read makes me less confident rather than more. 

 

 

 

[wit33]

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

You're going back to the same argument he had, which was "well, he didn't take many sacks"

 

Who cares? The entire point of the statistic is the number of sacks relative to the number of pressures. The raw number of sacks is definitely a number with no context.

 

As I mentioned, the context can also be thought about in terms of how little he passes when pressured compared to running. So if he runs a lot when pressured, obviously he's not throwing it up for grabs to avoid sacks and obviously he's not going to throw a lot of INTs since...well, since the ball is never in the air.

 

That's why those are two problematic stats that are IMO intertwined and will potentially cause a lot of problems in the NFL.

I despise these statistics when they're weaponized without context, but I'll entertain the surface-level discussion regarding pressure to sack percentages. How concerned are you about Drake Mayes having a sack rate within 1 percent of Daniels'? 

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Oh my god.

 

You have to be trolling me. You have to be.

 

Why is this so difficult to understand? The pressure to sack ratio is about the number of sacks relative to pressures. So when a guy is pressured, how often is he sacked? If he gets sacked a lot relative to how many times he's pressured then that's a concerning thing because it may mean he responds very poorly to pressure.

 

If a guy is sacked 22 times but was pressured 160 times, then that sack number isn't that concerning because he had a low percentage of times he got sacked when pressured. If, on the other hand, he was sacked 22 times but was only pressured 90 times, then that's an issue because there were a very high percentage of times that he was pressured that he took a sack.

 

Low numbers of pressures and sacks can have many causes. Often it has to do with being behind a very good OL, for example. That's why it's the ratio that's important, and not so much the raw number.

He can't be serious. Its basic mathematics/ratios/proportions. Its stuff you learn in like elementary school.

1 minute ago, wit33 said:

I despise these statistics when they're weaponized without context, but I'll entertain the surface-level discussion regarding pressure to sack percentages. How concerned are you about Drake Mayes having a sack rate within 1 percent of Daniels'? 

I do agree that, while it is an interesting stat, it has to be used in conjunction with game tape to understand the context. Not all sacks are created from the same circumstance. For example, Burrow has a high pressure to sack ratio but its because most of them are from 3rd downs when he's holding out for a big play to get into FG range or something. A lot of the sacks he took were on 3rd down where a sack and an incompletion are essentially the same(you have to punt).

 

The bad sacks are on early downs or sacks that take you out of scoring range that could have been avoided.

[jg77]

8 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Oh my god.

 

You have to be trolling me. You have to be.

 

Why is this so difficult to understand? The pressure to sack ratio is about the number of sacks relative to pressures. So when a guy is pressured, how often is he sacked? If he gets sacked a lot relative to how many times he's pressured then that's a concerning thing because it may mean he responds very poorly to pressure.

 

If a guy is sacked 22 times but was pressured 160 times, then that sack number isn't that concerning because he had a low percentage of times he got sacked when pressured. If, on the other hand, he was sacked 22 times but was only pressured 90 times, then that's an issue because there were a very high percentage of times that he was pressured that he took a sack.

 

Low numbers of pressures and sacks can have many causes. Often it has to do with being behind a very good OL, for example. That's why it's the ratio that's important, and not so much the raw number.

I think Jayden is good at avoiding pressure.  The p2s ratio doesn't concern me.

[mistertim]

6 minutes ago, wit33 said:

I despise these statistics when they're weaponized without context, but I'll entertain the surface-level discussion regarding pressure to sack percentages. How concerned are you about Drake Mayes having a sack rate within 1 percent of Daniels'? 

 

I am concerned about it with Maye. The reason I'm more concerned about it with Daniels is that I think it directly ties in with another worrying statistic, which is how rarely he throws vs runs when pressured. He is historically bad in this category. You can see it on film as well. The majority of the time when he's pressured he tends to almost immediately drop his eyes and look to run. And that was with a really good OL who usually gave him plenty of protection; he probably isn't going to have that in the NFL, at least at first. I just don't think that's at all sustainable in the NFL, especially running it that much with his slight frame.

Edited April 11 by mistertim

[RandyHolt]

I will assume I am the only one fearing PTSD if the Giants end up with JJ and he turns out the best in the class.

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, RandyHolt said:

I will assume I am the only one fearing PTSD if the Giants end up with JJ and he turns out the best in the class.

If we get our guy I'm not worried about who anyone else gets.

 

The concern is that I don't think Daniels will pan out and all signs point to him being our guy.

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, jg77 said:

I think Jayden is good at avoiding pressure.  The p2s ratio doesn't concern me.

 

I mean...I guess this is one way of dealing with the issue. Just make it vanish?

 

"Evanesco pressure-to-sack ratio!"

 

[mac8887]

1 minute ago, RandyHolt said:

I will assume I am the only one fearing PTSD if the Giants end up with JJ and he turns out the best in the class.

Not at all, I have the same worries. I know that JJ doesn’t have the number of attempts as these other QBs, but in the attempts he had, I saw no weakness to his game. I like the way that Paulson and Hoffman stated it. He is a B+ player across the board and an A- in some aspects. He is only 21 and has plenty of time to get better. I’m glad we are bringing him in for a visit. Hopefully he wows our FO and is the choice. He’s my favorite non crossdressing qb in the draft.

[The Consigliere]

31 minutes ago, jg77 said:

 

I think this was a pretty good explanation of the pressure to sack ratio. For those who are worried about...I mean the kid was only sacked 22 times. 

The problem is, did Jayden suddenly only play one college season, and if not, why are we looking at his pressure to sack ratio in his best season? I mean if Brian Thomas was killing it every season like he did in '23, he'd be going top 5, he didn't, he was meh throughout college until last year so he's going much later in the draft. Daniels was sacked a whopping 43 times in '22 and then 64 the 3 previous years combined. 

 

There's two things that hugely have bothered me when people have brought it up, #1 is how its been presented, but even more glaring is how Daniels is treated almost like a guy whose only season was 23. We do get that there are pressure to sack ratios in '19-'22 right? 

 

I'll concede that he showed great improvement in '23

if people will concede that that could just as much be about randomness, being a fifth year QB, and having the most talent he'd ever had by far too work with (and far more than any of the other QB's) in '23, so maybe, I don't know, maybe it was an outlier? Or when we play fantasy football, do we only look at a given players best year, and project their '24 season based upon that?

 

I feel like people are indulging things that they'd never do in their own analysis for their own fantasy teams, but doing it on the scale of our beloved Washington Football Team. We all know '23 was one season, AND IT WAS BY FAR HIS BEST in terms of Pressure to sack ratio/sacks given up etc. That could mean he's improved, finally, it could just as easily mean it was the nature of the '23 season, and has no sticking power, much like Pickett's '21 season. We just don't know, and even if '22 is things to come, its still a crap Pressure to sack ratio just like Maye's, its just its got another 4 people are ignoring in the shadows that were much, much, much worse and I don't know, considering sample size, probably tell the true story, or at least just as much as '23 did in terms of long term relevance. 

Edited April 11 by The Consigliere

[Jumbo]

2 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

I hope JJ absolutely nails his visit with us.

 

Though I'm a guy favoring Maye (genuinely concerned about JDs durability in the pros) I hope he does too. I hope the same for Maye and JD etc..

 

I hope every serious QB candidate they evaluate makes them really work to get to the decision.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I'm a half poisoned glass guy, which is part of it, and periodically I boil over and just start ranting lol, hopefully with logic and well reasoned posts and arguments.

 

I will admit I'll find it hilarious if this class ends up like '04 and '00 rather than '99 or '18, and we just have a HOF type in Caleb, a Super bowl guy in Maye and a Lamar lite in Daniels and they're all great, maybe one of the latter 3 hit too lol.

 

I totally think that could happen. I actually like Daniels, but this is a business where the bust, or "he's a guy your gonna dalton/tannehill after his rookie deal" rate sits at more than 50%. I expect Caleb to hit but I do think the mental make up (is this a George/Leaf/RGIII mental make up problem that lowers his ceiling by half) worry is legit, I think Maye at worst is just a stat accumulator in the vein of a bigger Cousins, and thats at worst, and I think Daniels athleticism, if he can stay healthy and arm, mean he has a good chance at being at worst, Fields plus and for one year, Fields was average. 

 

Its hard for me to see any of the 3 being utter wastelands of nothing like Zach Wilson and Trey Lance, other than maybe injury with Daniels. 

 

But for me, that's not really it, its more, "Come on, man, this isn't hard, I want to hear quotes from the FO and coaches and think, "we're in good hands," I don't want to think we've got a clown show at the wheel like Captain Edward Smith and friends, running full speed into an ice field. I want them to be so dorky smart, I can follow the bread crumbs and kinda get how they get there and buy the process. But everything I read makes me less confident rather than more. 

 

 

 

 

Cool. I hear you.  2 thoughts.

 

A.  We don't know they take Daniels.  i think Maye is still legit in the running.  

 

B. As far as it isn't hard, etc, and wondering about their intelligence-dorkiness if they do something else.  For starters they can very well make the dorky "smart" move.  But if they don't.  It's clear that many that personnel-FO guys-coaches disagree that this is a no brainer easy call.  They find it hard.  Plenty lean Daniels. 

 

I am a Maye guy myself.  And I don't mind going against the grain but it feels like we are here going against the grain.  That is, preferring Maye isn't going against the grain.  Plenty of others do, too.  But the point that its one slam dunk answer and that answer is clearly 100% Maye is definitiely going against the grain -- that's definitiely an outlier position.

 

And while i don't mind having an outlier position it does cross my mind that the masses could be right and I could be wrong.  

[The Consigliere]

33 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

He probably doesn't get in but if 28-3 doesn't happen, he does. He made a bunch of Pro Bowls and won an MVP.

Yep, people aren't familiar with how the HOF, much like Pro Bowls, has gotten diluted. In terms of QB's, the raw #'s piece is going to allow for a lot of crazy to happen over the next several years. Ryan's career #'s are pretty ridiculous, top 10 in multiple categories all time.

 

Now we know this is because:

#1 he was a good QB

#2 he played in the best era ever for good QB's to accumulate.

 

The same thing is gonna happen with Cousins six or seven years from now. Some people will talk up his candidacy because his raw stats are insane, others will laugh at him because he left no imprint whatsoever on the game in the playoffs, and in Ryan's case he did, he had several big time playoff runs, all coming short. 

 

Should he be in the hall? For me? No. But the stats say yes, but the stats are funny money due to rule changes the past 20 years making playing defense 1/2 to 1/4 what it once was in terms of tamping down production #'s. 

29 minutes ago, wit33 said:

I despise these statistics when they're weaponized without context, but I'll entertain the surface-level discussion regarding pressure to sack percentages. How concerned are you about Drake Mayes having a sack rate within 1 percent of Daniels'? 

The problem is you're using 2023. Not their careers. Jayden Daniels 2023 is not Daniels only season.

[The Consigliere]

25 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I am concerned about it with Maye. The reason I'm more concerned about it with Daniels is that I think it directly ties in with another worrying statistic, which is how rarely he throws vs runs when pressured. He is historically bad in this category. You can see it on film as well. The majority of the time when he's pressured he tends to almost immediately drop his eyes and look to run. And that was with a really good OL who usually gave him plenty of protection; he probably isn't going to have that in the NFL, at least at first. I just don't think that's at all sustainable in the NFL, especially running it that much with his slight frame.

Bingo, he runs into sacks, and gives up on passing way way too much. And again, his pressure to sack ratio is one across years, if it was only '23, he and Maye would yes, but nearly locked in as equally below average to bad, before '23 Daniels was flat out horrific, approaching Fields levels, though I'd probably say an order of magnitude better than him (sounds like he's the apotheosis of p2s). 

[Llevron]

I like when we argue about math because there really is only one answer so either im right or I learn something. 

 

 

[wit33]

3 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I am concerned about it with Maye. The reason I'm more concerned about it with Daniels is that I think it directly ties in with another worrying statistic, which is how rarely he throws vs runs when pressured. He is historically bad in this category. You can see it on film as well. The majority of the time when he's pressured he tends to almost immediately drop his eyes and look to run. And that was with a really good OL who usually gave him plenty of protection; he probably isn't going to have that in the NFL, at least at first. I just don't think that's at all sustainable in the NFL, especially running it that much with his slight frame.

Twitter analytics have evolved somewhat into salacious rumor mill fodder, reminiscent of the gossip magazines of the '90s. While analytics are often associated with intelligence and are relatively new, their acceptance by the media and public remains fairly high, albeit showing signs of losing steam. However, I find that a good amount of the analytics I encounter are lazy and incomplete for the most part. Most own my exposure of analytics is most on this board, so I don’t cast a wide net of exposure lol. 
 

Your believe he will get sacked a lot in the pros? 

[Est.1974]

19 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

Though I'm a guy favoring Maye (genuinely concerned about JDs durability in the pros) I hope he does too. I hope the same for Maye and JD etc..

 

I hope every serious QB candidate they evaluate makes them really work to get to the decision.

 

 

Couldn’t agree more. Let’s test our FO and see what they give us.

30 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

I will assume I am the only one fearing PTSD if the Giants end up with JJ and he turns out the best in the class.

Nope

[Dah-Dee]

52 minutes ago, jg77 said:

 

I think this was a pretty good explanation of the pressure to sack ratio. For those who are worried about...I mean the kid was only sacked 22 times. 

 

Honestly, I thought it reflected a terrible understanding of P2S, which is why shortly after that post I provided an actual example of a good, thorough P2S discussion article....

[NewCliche21]

22 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

Though I'm a guy favoring Maye (genuinely concerned about JDs durability in the pros) I hope he does too. I hope the same for Maye and JD etc..

 

I hope every serious QB candidate they evaluate makes them really work to get to the decision.

 

 

 

I think this is the only team-centered approach, truthfully. I would much rather have to make a hard choice between a bunch of future HOFers than pick "my guy" who's clearly above everyone else.

It only makes us better.

And I hope the rest of them have careers that are great when they don't negatively impact us.

[wit33]

21 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

Though I'm a guy favoring Maye (genuinely concerned about JDs durability in the pros) I hope he does too. I hope the same for Maye and JD etc..

 

I hope every serious QB candidate they evaluate makes them really work to get to the decision.

 

 

I completely understand the concerns about durability, and it would be reasonable for a front office to factor that into their decision-making process. However, I wouldn't base my decision solely on injury concerns when choosing between players. It's disappointing that mastering the baseball slide wasn't prioritized earlier in his youth, as it's a fundamental skill for QBs.

 

Ultimately, in the NFL, one must acknowledge the risk of injury and proceed accordingly; there are no guarantees with any player. IMHO

[Going Commando]

I don't want us to draft JJ McCarthy, but I also don't want to crap on him for the exact same reason I don't want to crap on Brock Purdy.  Put all of these QBs side by side and either he or Nix are the least physically impressive of the bunch by far.  Just doesn't have anywhere near the stature and power that Maye or Penix do.  A lot of the best QBs in the NFL right now were pretty wild bets on traits.  And it's going to look even more like traits are what matter the most if Anthony Richardson comes back healthy and kills it and Bryce Young ends up a bust.

 

But there is the Brock Purdy magic in JJ.  He's sharp and handling the QB job seems like it comes easy to him.  He walks the walk of being Captain QB.  Don't bet against guys that have that rock solid, unshakable confidence even when it feels unmerited.

 

It would be so typical if we spend all of this time arguing over Jayden and Maye and in the end, they both bust and ****ing JJ McCarthy ends up being the best QB from the class.

[Warhead36]

3 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

I don't want us to draft JJ McCarthy, but I also don't want to crap on him for the exact same reason I don't want to crap on Brock Purdy.  Put all of these QBs side by side and either he or Nix are the least physically impressive of the bunch by far.  Just doesn't have anywhere near the stature and power that Maye or Penix do.  A lot of the best QBs in the NFL right now were pretty wild bets on traits.  And it's going to look even more like traits are what matter the most if Anthony Richardson comes back healthy and kills it and Bryce Young ends up a bust.

 

But there is the Brock Purdy magic in JJ.  He's sharp and handling the QB job seems like it comes easy to him.  He walks the walk of being Captain QB.  Don't bet against guys that have that rock solid, unshakable confidence even when it feels unmerited.

 

It would be so typical if we spend all of this time arguing over Jayden and Maye and in the end, they both bust and ****ing JJ McCarthy ends up being the best QB from the class.

McCarthy will do really well for the Vikings throwing to Jefferson and Addison and being essentially an extension of O'Connell. Its a perfect situation. But he's not someone who is gonna elevate his franchise and that's what I want at #2 overall.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

14 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I like when we argue about math because there really is only one answer so either im right or I learn something. 

(X-4)^2=9 has more than one right answer