jletha
-
Posts
1,045 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by jletha
-
-
You're misunderstanding what "supporters" feel with a poll like that.
Most of "us" feel that EJ has a chance to develop into a quality starting QB. That is significantly different than saying he will.
Well obviously he has a chance, the questions is basically do you think that chance is greater than 50%? Do you think its more than likely or less than likely he will develop.
-
I'll keep looking for some backup on that guy's claim, but how about this: The top-10 all-time rookie QB ratings has Charlie Batch at number 10 with an 83.5 rating. Manuel's rookie rating was 80.3 or not that far off of Batch...
http://vikefans.com/index.php/topic/14328-best-rookie-qb-seasons-in-nfl-history/
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/ManuEJ00.htm
All of that stuff is crap. its comparing guys in completely different eras to today first of all. Second, teams that draft QBs really high are often terrible terrible teams. So the Peyton Mannings, who are regarded as the best, will have bad stats their rookie year every time where a guy drafted later will walk into a much better situation. Rookie season stats are really not that telling for a guys future development, but they do show some things. All I know is that I have watched every EJ snap he has ever taken and the guy isnt getting better and he is definitely not a top 20 rookie of all time.
-
you are mistaken I do not believe I used the word awesome.
I may have indicated that you feel every other QB out there is better than EJ.
So in closing I will say once more many many people feel EJ stands a chance of being good, and from casual observations that group outweighs the detractors at least by 3-1
have a nice weekend.
Where are these people outside of the city of Buffalo? Every fan base loves their guy so this isnt surprising but there is almost no one outside of Buffalo that believes in EJ.
-
That's a foolish statement. If a back up rb can garner a fourth rounder so can one of the top 20 rated rookie passers in NFL history.
Come one man. You know this isnt true.
-
Do you also feel that J'vlle should cut Blake Bortles? After all, his rookie year was not very good - guess he'll never be any good...
I didnt watch Bortles enough to say but no I think two years is the minimum. After next year if he loses his starting job and doesnt seem to be developing I wouldnt be surprised if they cut him or try to trade him. EJ isnt coming off of his rookie year. He played in his rookie year, got injured but he did play. He then had entire offseason and came into camp terrible. He was then awful in the actual games, had his receivers turning on him and not trying and thus lost his job. Reports after that from what I heard from someone I know that had access to the practices is that he was still bad in practice against air throughout the season. If Bortles does all of that Id cut him
-
I think you're exaggerating the reaction at OTAs...I seem to recall a lot of "good day, bad day" stuff. Unprepared is the wrong word -- I still say inexperienced. Everyone said the guy knows the playbook.
unprepared wasnt the right word but from what I remember it was a lot more bad days than good days. The good days were always so exciting because we thought maybe he turned a corner or something clicked. I remember there was about 2-3 good days in a row once and we freaked out. In camp it should be almost all good days because there is very little defense. The bad plays, let alone a bad day, should be few and far between unless you are working on something totally different because youre already good enough at everything else. I remember Joe B and Rodak getting ruined because they were being objective in their evaluation (im not supporting either in their journalism here). yea the guy maybe made some good throws with his bad throws but if hes 50/50 in training camp thats a bad day.
-
It certainly doesn't make financial sense, but if the coaching staff feels that there is little chance of EJ winning the starting job in camp, then there is little reason to keep him (and based on last year's camp, EJ doesn't have a chance in hell). We aren't auditioning for the backup position.
The ironic thing is that if EJ was picked in the 3rd round, this wouldn't even be an issue. But because he was overdrafted, fans have deluded themselves into thinking there's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow -- we just have to be patient. "It's Marrone's fault," "It's Hackett's fault," "You can't judge a QB after 14 games," are all prime examples of the wishful thinking that's spouted ad nauseam.
I would be surprised if he is cut, but I would understand.
I agree whole heartedly. Lets move forward as a franchise instead of just hoping. If the guy had it he would have shown that at some point. Every review from practice and especially training camp last year were terrible. In game play was bad as well. Maybe it was Marrones doing but hes not turning into someone hes not. Theres no way I can envision how McCown or Locker or whoever is markedly worse.
-
Imm admit that this doesnt make sense financially but from a football standpoint I have no major problem with it. As a fan I am going to trust Rex and Whaley until they do something to lose their trust but this isnt it. Do you think people in Jacksonville are happy they gave Gabbert all of those starts? Do the people in Cleveland regret on letting Quinn go so quickly? In hindsight dont you think Oakland regrets even starting Jamarcus even one time? If the player doesnt have it he doesnt have it, just let him go. EJ is never going to be a good starter in this league. A competent backup maybe but thats his ceiling. A year from now if EJ starts this whole season and proves what is extremely likely, that he is not good enough to be a starter, will everyone who is against this decide "Ok now we can cut him"? Why wait?
Id feel better if the rumor was that we were actively searching for a trade but my guess is theyve made calls and theres no market.
-
EJ. He can't develop sitting on the bench, and we still have no idea what we have in him. As I recall, Manning & Brees were worse in their first couple years, Rodgers & Kap rode the pine learning.
Ej should be given every fair opportunity to earn the starting job.
We certainly have an idea and it isnt good. He could improve but the odds of such a drastic transformation are not likely. Manning was definitely not worse in his first couple years, he was heralded at the best prospect since Elway but was drafted to a terrible team. His ability was always great, he just needed some work on decisions and stuff. EJ needs a LOT of work everywhere. If its EJ I hope its because he has drastically improved and won the job with good competition in camp fair and square, not just by default because we drafted him in the first and need to see what he can do. We know what he can do for the most part.
-
I think a lot of you guys got it wrong on a number of fronts. There's nothing random about analytics. There are more variables and interaction between the variables to explain than there are in baseball and other sports. To make a simple analogy, you can make macaroni & cheese with noodles, a little milk and the cheese. Pretty simple to figure out what you're going to get based on the ratio of those three things. Making the perfect pasta sauce from scratch is a lot more precise of an exercise. Considering the pasta sauce the allegory for the NFL, there isn't a "recipe" out there that tells you how to get to perfect. Then comes the issue in the NFL with the data itself. It changes year to year based on changes in rules year to year. So continuing the analogy, a tomato isn't "just" a tomato. One year it's a roma and the next a beefsteak. The raw data in the NFL is looked at as being the same, when it really is not.
At the end of the day, these analytics guys are mining for the factors that matter and the one's that don't matter in predicting success at the individual player level. It's incredibly complicated and involves lots of moving parts. I love the stats to be honest, so I find this incredibly interesting.
I think youre kind of underselling how complicated baseball actually is. There are many interacting variables in baseball and a lot of things influence every pitch that is thrown and the outcome. The MLB also changes its rules year-to-year just like most leagues do. They make changes where they seem necessary and the way its played has drastically changed over the years like the NFL, look at stealing numbers for example.
-
It started with baseball... why? Because in baseball, every single event has a given situation with it and far less randomness. A strike is a strike. One pitcher to one batter. One ball hit to one spot. Football is way more random and hockey even more so. I laugh at the WGR66 types who talk analytics all day long, in particular elementary measuers based on some simple probabilities. They stand behind them vociferously and when the improbable happens, they chalk it up to luck. Exactly. Luck is a huge component and it limits the use of prediction in football and hockey more so than in baseball.
the biggest advantage that baseball has isnt the non-randomness; baseball has plenty of randomness. Its the fact that the sample size is so large that they can generate stats with small confidence intervals, thus eliminating the possibility of them being ambiguous. With 30 teams, 162 games per team and 9 innings per game and X many pitches per game every player faces so many different scenarios that it becomes very easy to eliminate outside variable and focus on one piece of information. For example a new stat in baseball is called strikes above average, which measures one single players influence on a pitch he throws or has thrown to him being called a strike. In order to quantify this for a batter you would need the same player to face multiple pitchers multiple times with different umps and different catchers each time. Football just doesnt have the volume of available data in a lot of areas so its harder to get large trends and really useful data right now.
-
Not to speak for the OP, but I don't think he was suggesting coasting, just that from what we've seen so far out there he is probably our most likely and best starter fromt hose options come openning day.
Yea maybe coasting was not a good word, obviously were going to try as hard as possible. It just seemed like the whole post was about prepping for 2016 when we have a real chance at having the number 1 defense in 2015.
EJ is definitely not out only option. There are FAs to be signed and rookies to be drafted. Maybe a trade will come available.
-
if EJ stinks we get a great pick next year, possibly we pick a high as 15
What? 15 is not a great pick, not high enough to draft the franchise guys, look at this year.
The 2016 draft class at least right now looks way better,
Somehow every year next years class is better...
With this defense I dont know why anyone would be willing to just coast this year and set up for the next year. Nothing about that year is guaranteed. Mario and Kyle will be older, we could lose Dareus and Gilmore by then, Fred will be on his way out if not gone. The defense could look completely different and your solution is that a rookie QB that we grab with the 9th pick will lead us? How often does that happen? How about we do everything we can to win this year when the defense is more of a sure thing and also keep an eye on the future for QBs. great defenses rarely last for more then 3-4 years continuously and we need to try to capitalize this year
-
You don't give up 1/3 of your cap space to a QB if you think he needs to compete with EJ to determine the starter. JMO
IMO you do if thats what he costs to bring in and you want to throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks for QB.
Remember when Seattle brought in Flynn and drafted Russell Wilson in the same year while also having Tavaris Jackson on the roster? The situation can be similar in Buffalo. Just because a guy makes more money doesnt mean he has to start. If EJ develops then great. If Sam beats him out then great. If we draft someone and he ends up being the best then great. But if Im whaley Im bringing in every QB I can reasonably get to compete.
-
2 years ago. His best games were against teams that had like 2 wins all year. In a couple others, they were getting blown out and he put up garbage time stats. http://www.nfl.com/player/sambradford/497095/profile
No worries. I just hate anointing guys who haven't proven anything really and I have very serious concerns Bradford.
Whoever they bring in needs to compete for job in a fair competition. None of these guys are good enough to be handed a job. Because of they were, they won't be on the market.
Bradford would certainly have to compete for the starting job, it wouldnt be handed to him. Why are you so against Bradford coming in? Isnt it better to have multiple options at QB? Do you really feel that we are ok going into the season with just EJ as the guy with no backup plan in case he doesnt develop or actually regresses?
-
So include EJ as a piece in the trade.
Thats what Im saying. I said it earlier when McCown was brought in. Having a vet like Josh means we can include EJ in trades. Send EJ and a later pick to St Louis. They get a new QB with some potential for WAY less money, we get a new guy we feel will help us more + McCown.
-
No you are correct that is their approach. However, it is like anything when does an objective assessment become a subjective assessment. If you start from the position of loving player A and there is a miscommunication on a play between player A and player B who are you more likely to mark down?
I just don't believe it is nearly as objective as they would have you believe.
Yea thats true. I give people that handle too much credit often times.
-
If I remember correctly they dont just assign ratings based on the eye-ball test and how much they like a guy. I think they go through every play of every game and do a +/- of good plays and bad plays for the whole year. Then they run a statistical evaluation for each player and compare it to the average player. I think the z-score of the individual player's +/- comapred to league average is what assigns the elite, very good, good etc designation. They very well may think Mario is better than Kyle but thats just not what the numbers they have show. It may mean they need to tweak their evaluation but I dont see it as a "They love Kyle"
But maybe Im thinking of something else.
-
Bad plays made by mediocre QBs changed everything?
EJs pick six didng change much. EJ should have been pulled at half time of that game, the Watt pick was just a nail in the coffin as far as Im concerned. EJ was not progressing, he had a good game against Chicago when nobody had any tape on us and then regressed after that.
-
Gilmore>>>>>>>>>>>Cromartie not even close.
Gilmore now compared to Cromartie back then with Revis on the other side are comparable I would say. Much closer than youre indicating.
-
Not sure that is what they are doing but you make a very good point.
Yea Im obviously not sure either but I was just thinking. Just as an example, remember when we drafted EJ there were reports that Chip liked him. Perhaps we send some mid round picks and EJ to the Eagles for Foles. Having McCown allows them to make that deal comfortably. I havent really thought this trough completely but its an example.
-
Something I haven't seen mentioned is that this offers flexibility if we ever wanted to include EJ in some trades. If the front office really has grand plans, they may including bundling EJ with other pieces. In that case we will need someone on the roster as a backup. McCown could be that guy.
-
EJ is faster than Alex Smith, and he played pretty darn well with Roman's run game.
Yea I think Roman will set EJ up better than Marrone did but I mean specifically this type of offense showed in the article. They changed the offense from Alex Smith to Kaep. That said I still would rather have another QB, I just don't believe in EJ.
-
EJ has a much better chance at success under Roman, if we can't get anyone else to take the job from him.
I have watched most of the 49ers games the past 3-4 years and I really liked what they put together offensively. This year was a bad year for them due to the circumstances.
EJ is much much slower than Kaep. Two of the plays outlined there were dependent on Kaepernicks speed alone. EJ would have been tackled on both plays. HE is not nearly as elusive of a player. I think he will be mor eproductive in this offense than he has been with us but I dont think EJ is the best player to run this type of game. He can run when necessary but I havent seen any flash of elusiveness out of him in the open field.
Josh McCown anybody? Update: Is a Brown...end of story.
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Yea but by that logic there is no reason to draft any QB because the odds are it wont work out. Thats the point of evaluation to determine who will be on the positive side of the statistics. Based on what youve seen do you think EJ personally will become a franchise QB?