transplantbillsfan

41 pages on a 5th round pick and I'm trying hard? Okay...

5th round or later QBs who performed at or above Taylor's level for 30 or more sustained games. Brady (who I mentioned), Cassel, Bulger and Fitz are the guys who fall under that category. Romo is a UDFA, which obviously makes him a gem, but if we're including the UDFA QBs in this then it's significantly more of a lottery. Did you seriously include Siemian and Anderson? I said back to 2000 simply so we could get some reasonable numbers for comparison. I only went back to 2010 (also because of a lack of time) and 33 QBs were drafted between rounds 5-7. I think it'd be incredibly conservative to say that at least 100 QBs were drafted from 2000-2016 between rounds 5-7. Out of those, you had 5 guys total who turned into legit NFL starters on various levels after 30 starts. Conservatively, at best 5% of those guys pan out into something since 2000 in terms of being an NFL starter. If you want to include Romo and bring in all the UDFAs, that number is a lot lower. As I said, that doesn't mean you don't draft the guys and hope, but any of you banking on this are just being blind homers.

Yep Again... yep... people are ridiculous in how extreme their views are, and extremism invites opposition.

So I kind of left this out of the conversation because I know there are a handful of posters who are just going to yuck this up, but one of the other significant things Fahey discusses is what Taylor does for the running game. One of his bullet points in the shorthand skill set is how Taylor "diversifies the run game with designed run plays and options." A short excerpt:​ The defenders fear Taylor holding the ball so the backside defenders can't crack down to close off the space the running back gets. The Bills had the top-ranked running game by a large margin last year according to FootballOutsiders' DVOA rankings, which measure success rate on a play-by-play basis and adjust for the quality of the opposition. Taylor was as much a part of that success as McCoy or the offensive line. He diversifies the running game in such a way that a more typical NFL quarterback wouldn't.

The world didn't stop spinning, but you sure do keep spinning here. Just simply try the exercise. Identify all the QBs who sustained 30 NFL starts at or above Taylor's level since 2000 drafted in the 5th round or later. Sure, you could always strike the lottery if you play it. But what are your chances? Play it, but don't invest all your hopes (or money) in it, because you're highly unlikely to win anything meaningful. Same applies with Peterman... and any 5th round or later QB.

Ummm... are you serious here? Yes, Taylor was drafted by the Ravens, what does that matter? Find a 5th round pick or later who is a NFL starter at or above Taylor's level since 2000 over at least 30 starts. It doesn't matter if it's with the team who drafted him originally. I know the Bills didn't draft him, even if you think my wording insinuates we did. By 2018, either Taylor is the Bills starter, or we've used our 2nd 1st round draft pick to find a way to draft our "Franchise QB" in the 1st round next year. Peterman will hopefully turn into our long term backup. If he becomes a starter and a high level starter, it'd be fantastic but absolutely shocking to anyone who's not a Bills fan with a "OOOOOHHHH, look at the new shiny object in the form of a new QB!!!" mentality.

Yeah, from what I've heard and seen from him, I think and hope he can be our long term backup. People are talking about him as though he'll usurp Taylor... some are saying before the end of the year... a select few are saying Peterman will be the starter week 1. With those people, I've set forth an open bet that, barring an injury to Taylor, he'll be our starter week 1. I'm giving 3 to 1 odds. Surprisingly, I had a taker already who put down $100. Open for others, too. But people who have this position are just unrealistic and living in lala land. I'm not saying that to personally attack them. I'm saying this because it's just true. If Peterman is the week 1 starter and Taylor is still healthy and on the roster, it would be shocking, regardless of your feelings about Taylor as a QB.

Not that it's impossible, but it's hilarious that a 5th round QB is being buoyed up to such high aspirations. It's hilarious, though not surprising from Bills fans. May I ask this question, how many QBs drafted since 2000 after the 4th round have been as good as Taylor has been over his 30 total NFL starts? Make 30 games the threshold. I got Brady. Anyone else? It'd be awesome if Peterman becomes the next Brady, but Taylor's much more likely to demonstrate he's our long term answer than Peterman is. Might happen. Highly improbably, though. There's a reason he was passed over 4 times by every team and Buffalo didn't exactly leap to draft the guy considering they passed over him with their first 5th round draft pick. Even Buffalo and McDermott viewed him as a 5th round draft pick. That doesn't speak resoundingly about the guy. He's just likely going to be one of those names we talked about during draft time who'd be a "late round steal" that we forget about with time, like David Fales. Or like that guy KC drafted a few years ago. Or Garret Grayson, Or... Too many to count. We're Bills fans. We're too funny. We already have our "late round steal" as a starter at QB. Doubt it happens with Peterson, but I'd love it if it did.

Stats matter. But every single stat needs to be taken in the correct context.

Hmmm... seems a familiar sentiment

I'm not saying and I don't think Fahey is saying the numbers are definitive. And despite saying you're not dismissive, you're still pretty dug in your foxhole and don't seem willing to acknowledge the merits of what he finds. And I don't think you're wrong about everything you say. In Fahey's "shorthand skill set," which is a box at the beginning of every QBs chapter that involves 4-6 bullet points of strengths and weaknesses of the player, 2 of Taylor's weaknesses in that box include: -Avoids tight windows over the middle of the field. -Not an anticipation passer. All I did was provide numbers, but Fahey's chapters more anecdotally explain each QB. Granted, he feels strongly positive about Taylor, but he talks about weaknesses, too. And he talks about specific plays from specific games like the Seattle game, the Raiders game, the first Phins game, and the Cardinals game, among others. You keep bringing up what the coaches said as though it was incredibly damning and irrefutable evidence that Taylor's holding the team back. It's just funny to me because sometimes people label what coaches say as truth and sometimes they label it as coachspeak. I'm sure there's truth to what they said, but you stated the other day that you think the best thing that could happen this offseason would be for Peterman to show real promise in TC and win the starting job. It's just a weird position and just shows how dug in you are about Taylor. Why would you not, instead, wish that in Dennison's new offense, Taylor would demonstrate how much he can thrive? That seems a lot more realistic. People are just so damn dug into their positions that once they like or dislike a guy they NEED him to stay or be gone.

I don't even think you were involved in that conversation so I don't think it was directed at you.

What the hell are you talking about? Where are you getting $16 million from?

Jesus... you're citing scouting reports? Look, maybe Peterman becomes Buffalo's starter at some point. I'm SUPER happy he was there when our --SECOND-- 5th round pick came along. But anyone thinking this kid will start day 1 is just naive or blindly hopeful. I have a standing bet with anyone who wants and only one taker: barring injury, Taylor will not lose a QB competition (whatever farcical one might happen) and will be our starter week 1. 3 to 1 odds.

Wow... you really go to some extreme efforts to completely dismiss Fahey's findings. Passive aggressive? I thought I was pretty direct, actually.

Fine by me. Seems like a really narrow-minded way to go through life, though.

First of all, why do you say "I'm glad that you are still trying" ...? I'm just relaying Fahey's findings. And yeah, I think you're right to a degree; consistently making those tough throws in traffic and the anticipation throws are things that Taylor needs to work to do more consistently. Fahey acknowledges this, himself. But regarding Taylor's 2016 season, while Fahey says there was certainly bad with Taylor, "the good severely overshadowed the bad." But I think his last words in Taylor's chapter ultimately sum up his feelings: "You could ignore all the context. You could just point to the missed throws. It'd be about as rational as throwing out a four-course meal because your fork was bent. A four-course meal that you ordered for a fast food price." I agree. I wish more than just Fahey did this. I think this is why PFF can be so invaluable.

Shaw, Fahey explains everything in good detail, but he categorizes accuracy % along with failed receptions and created receptions. So, essentially, passes by Taylor that fall in the "failed receptions" category qualify positively towards accuracy % while "created receptions" qualify negatively towards accuracy %. In other words, accuracy % is very simply how accurate the pass is. An accurate pass by a QB that results in an incompletion because a defender makes an exceptional play on the ball would qualify positively towards accuracy %. Taylor is the 3rd best in the NFL in interceptable pass %, according to Fahey. He also breaks avoidable sacks into 3 categories : missed read, ran into sack, and process in the pocket He breaks unavoidable sacks into 4 categories: beaten blocker, blown assignment, coverage, botched snap According to Fahey, 4 of Taylor's 7 avoidable sacks were "missed reads" and 3 were "ran into sack."

If you don't trust the data, why don't you just go through and rewatch the 39 sacks as objectively as you can and categorize them yourself? I understand skepticism of subjectivity. But if you can use the same subjective criteria to evaluate QBs across the NFL comparatively and come up with numbers using a generally consistent evaluation criteria, it'd be pretty valuable, albeit not absolutely perfect. Considering Fahey's reputation and the fact that he makes his living doing this, I think it's fair to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's doing this. And by the way, I feel like some folks think Fahey is a Taylor homer, but this catalogue is almost 200 pages and outside of Taylor's own chapter and the actual data itself, he doesn't even mention Taylor in the introductory chapters.

This just sidesteps the point he was making that saying Taylor isn't an NFL level QB is profoundly stupid, which is true...

Completely different era. The ninja strikes again! I'd respond... but why bother considering you're just going to disappear when any reasonable counter-claim is presented as you always do.

Boy you make a lot of assumptions. How do you know Taylor's numbers look better than Rodgers? Or Brady? Or whoever you want to throw in there? Did you buy the catalogue and look? I never said who was above or below Taylor in any category. If not, what you're doing is just sad. And why the WRs don't get YAC you claim is Taylor's fault for where he chooses to throw the football...? How do you know how much choice the offensive system gave him in where he threw the football? Do you truly believe it's everyone who's credible? Or do they lose credibility if they disagree?

According to Fahey, 7 of Taylor's 39 sacks were avoidable. Of the leftover 32 sacks, 22 were because of a beaten blocker, 2 were because of a blown assignment, and 8 were coverage sacks. 8 QBs had more avoidable sacks than Taylor, including Matthew Stafford, Russell Wilson, Jameis Winston, and Alex Smith. Would you say that those QBs also have poor progression speed and pocket awareness?

​Fahey talks about this idea that Taylor had WRs running constantly wide open all over the field that he should have thrown to as a common misconception. He has his own explanations. I'm not going to copy and paste because that'd be a disservice. What I'd ask is this: How many of those plays where you saw a WR and TE running free all over the field did you also look at the factors impacting Taylor getting rid of the football?

Have you gone through every snap of not just Taylor but those 32 other NFL QBs and charted them using the same "eye test" you used to chart Taylor? If you have, I'd love to read your numbers. If you haven't, that's why his subjective analysis is better than yours.