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

[Koolblue13]

[Conn]

Gibson is going to be gone, I don’t feel the need to debate him too much. He’s okay in space, not as good as his profile would lead you to believe, isn’t as fast as his measurables led us to believe and the athleticism is usually wasted due to the poor vision. The fumbles aren’t even my main issue with him, he’s just not a great player (though he could have developed into a better player in a better offense early in his career, likely). I said two years ago his ceiling was healthy peak Tevin Coleman and I think I overshot it. 
 

Brian Robinson is fine, he’s above replacement level in some things. He’s good catching the ball with a head of steam, his receiving ability out of the backfield has been a pleasant surprise. I also don’t think he has good vision. He’s not worthy of being a bellcow (not something I care about much though, I’m fine with a talented rotation) and could be part of a successful, productive RB rotation if we had a more talented, explosive counterpart to pair him with. Achane would have been sweet obviously. Robinson is nothing special though, most teams have a Robinson equivalent. 
 

Rodriguez could be good, could be limited. No way to tell with the number of touches he’s received. Seems to have the best vision on the roster, but he’s also benefiting from what a lot of fresh-legged young RB’s do when watching live and that’s the “hair on fire” effect he has while running. It’s visually pleasing to watch the effort and violence he runs with so it skews the perception of the actual production on those runs. I call it the Zac Stacy effect. Fans love to see it which is why so many preseason UDFA’s get hype and then never see the field (in this vein I’d really like to poach Deneric Prince from the Chiefs practice squad). Will Rodriguez turn out to be good and well-rounded enough to make an impact here? No idea but watching him run sure feels good. I don’t think he has the athleticism to really be a guy who breaks off explosive plays, and that’s what I really want from anyone who’s going to split touches in our future backfield. But maybe he could grow to be a dependable backup who you don’t mind covering breathers for your more explosive guys, or during injury, etc.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Conn

[Skinsinparadise]

I used to TA stats in another life.

 

And my professor focused more on how you can use stats -- in that context for politics to spin a narrative.

 

It's not that stats lie.  It's that its easy to use different stats to spin different narratives.

 

And as far as narratives stats come off cooler when they go against conventional wisdom like hey the Commanders line only looks like they suck but they are really good.  

 

But if you follow whomever is parading the selective stats you see them pushing a agenda.  Even here  for example anything that makes this O line look better and Howell look bad, its by chance people who don't believe in Howell pushing those stats.  And vice versa on the other side.  That's no coincidence of course.

 

People can say ALL the stats converge to their side of the argument but that's BS.  Heck I can use the exact same outfit that they use to push their point to push the opposite point.  It's not a clear path on any of these debates.

 

Lets start with PFF.  Their own favorite metric ironically is what i have below for the o line.  So they get them ranked 21st.  OK if people don't want to believe that they believe in blocking efficiency, just look up their current holisitc rankings of the unit, they also have them ranked 21st and are sliding over time, not moving up.  They ranked the unit 27th before the season.   I bet we end up there or close to it considering they are ranked 21st against the softer part of the schedule.

 

They have Brian Robinson with one of the highest numbers for yards after contact.  Actually just short ironically of Bijan on that front.  Gibson (3.27) and Rodriguez (3.71) actually ranked high on average yards after contact. 

 

Then on some metrics these dudes look bad.  It's whatever you choose to highlight.  The point is who is at fault the O line, play calling or these specific RBs?

 

But we aren't robots to stats and PFF.  We are watching these games, are you guys really smitten with the pass blocking?  Do you really think this O line is plowing massive holes for the RBs?  It's not about whether you think Brian Robinson is great but its about do you think the blocking for him has been really good.

 

If people want to blow off what some of us see OK.  But how about Keim who has criticized both the run blocking and pass blocking?  Cooley?  Jay?  

 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Skins24]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

CRod comes in during the 3rd when most teams are resting their starting defense and we're mostly throwing, so the run isn;t defended.

 

Yeah, no. Rodriguez has only ran twice on 3rd down. In the Giants game when he ran three times in a row, and in the Cardinals game, to run out the clock.

Our RBs have been average at best this year, no doubt. But yeah, there's no way you can definitively say B Rob and AG have ran better....or even are better than CR. From what little - and that should be emphasized - we haven't seen much so we really don't know - but from what little we have seen, he has run cleaner, crisper.

Now B Rob can be an absolute tank, and he's had a knack for the end zone. And when not fumbling, AG has explosive potential. But as an every down back, to gain those positive yards on first and second down, to take pressure off the QB (as this is a QB thread right?) we have not seen anything from BR and AG to suggest they're better at that than CR. This year.

[Koolblue13]

Just now, Skins24 said:

Yeah, no. Rodriguez has only ran twice on 3rd down. In the Giants game when he ran three times in a row, and in the Cardinals game, to run out the clock.

Our RBs have been average at best this year, no doubt. But yeah, there's no way you can definitively say B Rob and AG have ran better....or even are better than CR. From what little - and that should be emphasized - we haven't seen much so we really don't know - but from what little we have seen, he has run cleaner, crisper.

Now B Rob can be an absolute tank, and he's had a knack for the end zone. And when not fumbling, AG has explosive potential. But as an every down back, to gain those positive yards on first and second down, to take pressure off the QB (as this is a QB thread right?) we have not seen anything from BR and AG to suggest they're better at that than CR. This year.

3rd quarter, not 3rd down. 

[Skins24]

2 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

3rd quarter, not 3rd down. 

Got it 👍

All else still stands

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

 

Spoiler alert…I’ve been Josh Harris this entire time lol

Edited October 26, 2023 by BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93

[Est.1974]

10 minutes ago, Conn said:

Gibson is going to be gone, I don’t feel the need to debate him too much. He’s okay in space, not as good as his profile would lead you to believe, isn’t as fast as his measurables led us to believe and the athleticism is usually wasted due to the poor vision. The fumbles aren’t even my main issue with him, he’s just not a great player (though he could have developed into a better player in a better offense early in his career, likely). I said two years ago his ceiling was healthy peak Tevin Coleman and I think I overshot it.

Gibson is one of the most overrated players of recent times. Probably a reflection on how much we’ve sucked. 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Est.1974

[Thinking Skins]

I was doing some research in my spare time. One is my favorite QB of all time and the guy I like to compare Sam to (Elway) and the other is a guy who I didn't think struggled early but looking at his numbers he did seem to have somewhat of a higher than normal sack rate that's worth investigating. 

 

John Elway 1983
4    4 sacks in 8 attemps 50 %
3    7 in (21) 29, 24%
3    10 in (33) 62, 16%
2    12 in (11) 73, 16%
3    15 in (10) 83, 18%
2    17 in (15) 98, 17%
2    19 in (31) 129, 15%
4    23 in (28) 157, 15%
0    23 in (24) 181, 12.7%
5    28 in (44) 225, 10.8%
0    28 in (34) 259, 10.8%

 

 

Sam Howell 2023
6    6 in (31), 19%
4    10 in (39) 70,  14.2 
9    19 in (29) 99, 19.2
5    24 in (41) 140, 17
5    29 in (51) 191, 15
5    33 in (23) 214, 15.4
6    39 in (42) 256, 15.2

 

Tom Brady 2001
0    0 (10) 10 0%
1    1(23) 33 3%
4    5(24) 57 7%
3    8(54) 111 7%
0    8(20) 131 6%
2    10(38) 169 5.9
3    13(31) 200 6.5%
7    20(21) 221 9%
2    22(27) 248 8.9%
4    26(26) 274 9.5%
3    29(28) 302 9.6%
3    32(28) 330 10.6%
5    37(35) 365 10.1%
3    40(19) 384 10.4%
1    41(29) 413 9%
    
Now the Brady numbers are not near the Howell numbers, but the Elway nubners? C'mon. He turned it around but those sack numbers are crazy. Another QB that had bad sack numbers early in their career and turned it around was Big Ben (for a number of years). 

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

5 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Gibson is one of the most overrated players of recent times. Probably a reflection on how much we’ve sucked. 

Omg yes. 
 

He’s easily number 1. Never seen a guy play so much worse than his measurables.

 

And it’s really not his fault bc he was asked to be a RB for the first time in the NFL. In hindsight that was an insane ask of the poor guy. 

[Est.1974]

On a more positive note for the QB thread, Howell would be my 2024 starter without question at this stage.

[Thinking Skins]

Honestly, if you go through the PFR passing leaders page and go through their early years, you'd be surprised how many of them struggled early on. I mean they act like just because we're in a new era Howell isn't supposed to struggle. 

[Conn]

12 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I was doing some research in my spare time. One is my favorite QB of all time and the guy I like to compare Sam to (Elway) and the other is a guy who I didn't think struggled early but looking at his numbers he did seem to have somewhat of a higher than normal sack rate that's worth investigating. 

 

John Elway 1983
4    4 sacks in 8 attemps 50 %
3    7 in (21) 29, 24%
3    10 in (33) 62, 16%
2    12 in (11) 73, 16%
3    15 in (10) 83, 18%
2    17 in (15) 98, 17%
2    19 in (31) 129, 15%
4    23 in (28) 157, 15%
0    23 in (24) 181, 12.7%
5    28 in (44) 225, 10.8%
0    28 in (34) 259, 10.8%

 

 

Sam Howell 2023
6    6 in (31), 19%
4    10 in (39) 70,  14.2 
9    19 in (29) 99, 19.2
5    24 in (41) 140, 17
5    29 in (51) 191, 15
5    33 in (23) 214, 15.4
6    39 in (42) 256, 15.2

 

Tom Brady 2001
0    0 (10) 10 0%
1    1(23) 33 3%
4    5(24) 57 7%
3    8(54) 111 7%
0    8(20) 131 6%
2    10(38) 169 5.9
3    13(31) 200 6.5%
7    20(21) 221 9%
2    22(27) 248 8.9%
4    26(26) 274 9.5%
3    29(28) 302 9.6%
3    32(28) 330 10.6%
5    37(35) 365 10.1%
3    40(19) 384 10.4%
1    41(29) 413 9%
    
Now the Brady numbers are not near the Howell numbers, but the Elway nubners? C'mon. He turned it around but those sack numbers are crazy. Another QB that had bad sack numbers early in their career and turned it around was Big Ben (for a number of years). 

There is nothing valuable about research like this FYI. If it’s fun for you that’s fine, but how Elway handled pressure literally 40 years ago has no relevance to today’s game. The rules are different, athletes are different, the way teams can build rosters is different due to the Free Agency salary cap era, NFL roster composition/strategy is different due to the rookie wage scale, the game as a whole is different due to the total and complete takeover in importance of QB’s, the passing game, pass rushers, etc. 

 

These factors all change how long teams can take to develop QBs, how long they can give young QBs, how teams view their championship windows in relation to rookie contract lengths, etc. Developing and seeing “enough” from a young QB now is totally different than it was 40 years ago.

 

You can’t learn anything from stuff like this. Especially when you’re cherry-picking guys who are by their very nature outliers in any data set (incredible top of the draft freak prospects like Elway and incredible underdog GOAT miracles like Brady). 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Conn

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

this is from one of the rare defenders of the unit this year

 

 

 

[Thinking Skins]

Just now, Conn said:

There is nothing valuable about research like this FYI. If it’s fun for you that’s fine, but how Elway handled pressure literally 40 years ago has no relevance to today’s game. The rules are different, athletes are different, the way teams can build rosters is different due to the Free Agency salary cap era, NFL roster composition/strategy is different due to the rookie wage scale, the game as a whole is different due to the total and complete takeover in importance of QB’s, the passing game, pass rushers, etc. 

 

You can’t learn anything from stuff like this. Especially when you’re cherry-picking guys who are by their very nature outliers in any data set (incredible top of the draft freak prospects like Elway and incredible underdog GOAT miracles like Brady). 

Thanks. Valuable information from one person. 

 

But there was a question a while back that asked and another statement made that Howell whether there were any QBs who had ever recovered from a sack rate like Howell's. I understand if its not your cup of tea and i'm not here to ruffle feathers. So if you want me to go on a hiatus for a while just say the word. 

[Conn]

5 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Thanks. Valuable information from one person. 

 

But there was a question a while back that asked and another statement made that Howell whether there were any QBs who had ever recovered from a sack rate like Howell's. I understand if its not your cup of tea and i'm not here to ruffle feathers. So if you want me to go on a hiatus for a while just say the word. 

Not at all, I enjoy your posts—I certainly didn’t mean to come across as harshly as I did in the “doesn’t have value” comment, I meant more in an analytical capacity. You could argue all information, as long as it’s factual, adds context and is useful. So I should have worded that less asshole-y, apologies. 
 

But what I meant in a greater sense about those number, I think, still came across. The game and the context within which teams build rosters, evaluate young QBs, and develop them has changed too much due to copious external and internal factors for those numbers multiple generations ago to matter. It truly doesn’t matter how someone like Elway or Brady responded to early career pressure (and not only because they are both outliers regardless) for countless reasons.
 

You need to be looking at modern data of modern QBs who were more recently young and developing. All QBs of all pedigrees. A wide sample of a representative grouping of players within the same context Howell is operating within—the modern NFL. 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Conn

[Warhead36]

22 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

Omg yes. 
 

He’s easily number 1. Never seen a guy play so much worse than his measurables.

 

And it’s really not his fault bc he was asked to be a RB for the first time in the NFL. In hindsight that was an insane ask of the poor guy. 

He should have been used as a gadget/scatback type. Like Chris Thompson. Utilize his hands and speed more. His vision and wiggle in crowds suck. Somehow though we tried to convert him into a power back LMAO.

 

I effing loathe this coaching staff/FO.

[Going Commando]

Wonder if Gates is hurt?

 

I don't like benching him for Larsen when. Stromberg needs reps to develop.  The season is over, we all know it.  Why are guys who have a chance to be here next year not playing?

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Conn said:

You need to be looking at modern data of modern QBs who were more recently young and developing. All QBs of all pedigrees. A wide sample of a representative grouping of players within the same context Howell is operating within—the modern NFL. 

Edited just now by Conn

This gets into the discussion I was having with some analysts on twitter. The NFL is changing too much too fast to only consider data relevant that is recent. There are modern QBs that remind me of Howell from a numbers perspective (Big Ben) and old school OBs (Elway). The problem is that each counterexample I try to bring up is met with something like this "well that one is too old school" or "his style of game is too different from Howell" or "he has a running game though" and so they don't allow for a fair fight. I posted this here because normally people here are tamer, but I got the same reaction. 

 

meh. 

 

The game of football has not changed that much since Elway. Yes there is FA. Yes there is a rookie cap. Yes there are much different offenses and defenses and schemes are much different and players are much different. But football is still football.

 

But I like the Elway comparison as opposed to say Brees because if you look at most of our games (Arizona, Denver, Philly, heck even Chicago, Giants) there was a comeback element to them, there was that we're not out of it no matter how much we're down. 

 

That's why I'm big on seeing that Elway started with a big sack rate too. Because he held onto the ball too. He has that same gene too. And PFF wasn't around then, but I bet he didn't have the all pro OL he had later in life (he was THE top draft pick). 

[Skinsinparadise]

15 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

Wonder if Gates is hurt?

 

I don't like benching him for Larsen when. Stromberg needs reps to develop.  The season is over, we all know it.  Why are guys who have a chance to be here next year not playing?

 

Don't think he's hurt.  Keim in his podcast this week mentioned don't be surprised if Gates is replaced at center, nothing to do with his injury.  Rivera hinted at the same in his own press conference.

 

It is possible though that he gets moved to LG.

15 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

Wonder if Gates is hurt?

 

I don't like benching him for Larsen when. Stromberg needs reps to develop.  The season is over, we all know it.  Why are guys who have a chance to be here next year not playing?

 

Agree about playing Stromberg.

 

I guess not as to Gates to guard, so he's benched

 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Conn]

19 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

This gets into the discussion I was having with some analysts on twitter. The NFL is changing too much too fast to only consider data relevant that is recent. There are modern QBs that remind me of Howell from a numbers perspective (Big Ben) and old school OBs (Elway). The problem is that each counterexample I try to bring up is met with something like this "well that one is too old school" or "his style of game is too different from Howell" or "he has a running game though" and so they don't allow for a fair fight. I posted this here because normally people here are tamer, but I got the same reaction. 

 

meh. 

 

The game of football has not changed that much since Elway. Yes there is FA. Yes there is a rookie cap. Yes there are much different offenses and defenses and schemes are much different and players are much different. But football is still football.

 

But I like the Elway comparison as opposed to say Brees because if you look at most of our games (Arizona, Denver, Philly, heck even Chicago, Giants) there was a comeback element to them, there was that we're not out of it no matter how much we're down. 

 

That's why I'm big on seeing that Elway started with a big sack rate too. Because he held onto the ball too. He has that same gene too. And PFF wasn't around then, but I bet he didn't have the all pro OL he had later in life (he was THE top draft pick). 

Okay we’ll set aside how much the game and rules have changed (though much of why I think that’s important isn’t because of how the game is played—it’s because the rookie wage scale and salary cap effect how patient teams can afford to be with young QBs now compared to in the 80’s—not at all).

 

But why do you see this as useful. What are you trying to glean, is I guess my question. Cherry-picking Elway in 1983, one of the most talented QB prospects of all time. Prototypical size, HOF arm and pocket movement. Why does seeing how this specimen of a QB grew out of his sack issues 40 years ago apply to Sam Howell in 2023 at all. 
 

What is your goal with the comparison? Brees and Big Ben, also drafted 20+ years ago before the rookie wage scale era, before tons of rules changes. Both HOF types anyways. What can you gain in relation to Howell from looking at how eventual HOF QB’s in a different era developed? The guys you’re looking at are all by their nature outliers, I have to repeat that. 
 

So what are you looking for? Hope? 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Conn

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

22 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

Wonder if Gates is hurt?

 

I don't like benching him for Larsen when. Stromberg needs reps to develop.  The season is over, we all know it.  Why are guys who have a chance to be here next year not playing?

I mean we know it’s over but they certainly don’t. 

[Going Commando]

11 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

I mean we know it’s over but they certainly don’t. 

It honestly feels like the coaches have been going through the motions and are trying not to make it obvious that they've quit to the players.  The players have been more invested in the grind of the season than they have, and it's a testament to having good dudes in the locker room that they haven't quit yet.  I think the coaches know it's over, and that none of them are going to be back next year.  How can they not?  The famous owner is openly tweeting criticism of their losses and basically letting everyone know they are finished.

[Llevron]

1 hour ago, Stihl89 said:

The RBs overall are just bad and not electric 

 

I find the fact that Curtis Samuel only has 2 rushes really ****ing bonkers in an offense that's supposed to be so revolutionary and tricky. Like.....do they not know who this dude is? How are we not using him to hit the edge and just out run people? 

[zCommander]