Josh Allen Stat ... wow

[thebandit27]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

was it HIM that was good, or McVay?

 

 

Both IMO. No man is an island 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Both IMO. No man is an island 

 

then you're completely ignoring year one Goff.

 

[thebandit27]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

then you're completely ignoring year one Goff.

 

 

Year 1 Goff was a train wreck 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, thebandit27 said:

 

Year 1 Goff was a train wreck 

 

Exactly. Then McVay shows up, and all the sudden he's Joe Montana 2.0?

 

It ain't Goff. Now that McVay's fallen off, so has Goff.

 

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, Mango said:

Josh has made some improvements. I wouldn't call him terrible, I also wouldn't call him good. He is electric to watch though

 

The reason he's so polarizing and his stats are tough to analyze is because he's ridiculously inconsistent. There are times, like the first 29 minutes and 30 seconds of the Patriots game, where he is EJ Manuel bad. And then there are times, like the other 30 minutes and 30 seconds of the Patriots game, where he looks like a top 5 QB. He is sometimes deadly accurate to impossible spots, and other times misses passes that backup QBs would make 9 times out of 10. I can't think of another QB that fits that profile. The closest I can think of is Jameis Winston this year, but he's even more extreme at the positive and negative ends. I suspect that even if Allen continues to waver between awful and incredible he will be our QB for a while but it would be nice if he ever cleans up the lower end of his play. I think a lot of this discussion is premature. His overall trend up to this point is clearly positive but it's not predictive of what he'll do over the next couple years.

Edited December 24, 2019 by HappyDays

[Hapless Bills Fan]

33 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

Yep, I like looking at numbers . He does need to take another step and I believe the vast majority of Bills' fans acknowledge that. However, I also believe that if you go below the surface when looking at the numbers, and do some real analyses, you will find a lot to be encouraged about in regard to Allen's potential to take that next step. Will he? I don't know. Can he? I absolutely believe he can.

 

At the very least, I don't understand the certainty that he can't.

 

What Allen has already accomplished, is all stuff he's simply not supposed to have been able to do.  The increased accuracy on the short   So at the very least, it seems to me he's earned the "Can he?  DamnifIknow!" benefit of the doubt.

 

As for me, I'm not betting against him.

[DCOrange]

33 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I'm an Allen Guy since pre-draft, and I can name 12 as of this moment:

Mahomes

Wilson

Brees

Brady

Rivers

Jackson

Goff

Rodgers

Cousins

Stafford

Ryan

Dak

 

Not sure I'd go much past those guys though. That was an interesting exercise because I expected to get to 15 before I really started to question if guys belonged ahead of him. It actually started at 10 or 11.

I definitely disagree with Rivers and Goff being included, but you also didn't mention Deshaun Watson who I would say is indisputably better right now. I'd also argue for Wentz and Roethlisberger and probably a couple others that I would say are on par with Allen.

[thebandit27]

Just now, DCOrange said:

I definitely disagree with Rivers and Goff being included, but you also didn't mention Deshaun Watson who I would say is indisputably better right now. I'd also argue for Wentz and Roethlisberger and probably a couple others that I would say are on par with Allen.

 

Ah crap. I meant to put Watson on there.

 

I think Ben is done, and Wentz is too inconsistent to be clearly ahead IMO

[DCOrange]

4 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Ah crap. I meant to put Watson on there.

 

I think Ben is done, and Wentz is too inconsistent to be clearly ahead IMO

Yeah, I think Ben and Wentz are at least debatable, and obviously saying Ben is better right now is assuming he comes back and is the same guy he's been in recent years. I'm not sure consistency is really something Allen has in his favor compared to Wentz though.

[GoBills808]

4 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

It might. Here's a quick start. There are several sites that look at drops and they tell somewhat different stories because drops are a somewhat subjective thing.

 

Here's one:  http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/tmleaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=232&type=Receiving

 

They list the Bills as having the 3rd highest total of drops in the league!!!!!!!!!!!!! 22 drops. League average is about 17. That means the Bills have dropped around five more passes than average. If you added in five completions to Josh's stats, his completion percentage would go up to 59.8%, soaring all the way up from 32nd to 31st.

Really bad math. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

Exactly. Then McVay shows up, and all the sudden he's Joe Montana 2.0?

It ain't Goff. Now that McVay's fallen off, so has Goff.

 

To be fair, I think Year 1 Goff sort of proves Bandit's "No man is an island" point.

Goff's Year1 OC was Rob Boras (now our TE coach).

 

That year, Case Keenum also looked like a hot mess.  Next year with Shurmur,  Keenum plays for the NFC Championship -

Against Nick Foles, who not coincidentally looked like a hot mess the previous year on the Rams, with Boras as OC

 

I believe that Rob Boras may be a fine TE coach (although Knox pass drop rate ?????) 

Being able to make 3 NFC championship and Superbowl contending/winning QB  look like hot messes, is some kind of special record.

 

It's not just McVay, but there's no denying that for the vast majority of QB, the pieces around them make a huge difference.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It's not just McVay, but there's no denying that for the vast majority of QB, the pieces around them make a huge difference.

 

Except around here, and in the case of Allen.

 

That's the point of all this.

 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

33 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I say to this point in their respective careers, yes.

 

I'm being fair IMO.

 

No real measuring stick per se; just personal opinion 

Yeah I was wondering if there was an objective question involved like who would I want next week ? in the playoffs?, for their careers?, for the rest of career? etc. So you're just saying based on what they've done in the careers they've performed better to this point. Which raises the question is that fair to Josh? Because it is not reality to think if McBeane called McVay and said we'll give you Josh for Goff straight up in the off season that McVay can't agree and hang up the phone fast enough. I mean things like contracts matter too.

[Kelly the Dog]

11 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Singletary has 41 targets in 12 games.  That's >3 targets per game. 

 

Thus clearly "ever" is not true. 

 

 

Most of the passes to Singletary are not checkdowns. They don't even run many checkdown routes. 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

2 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Except around here, and in the case of Allen.

 

That's the point of all this.

 

Although I would add, that around here is probably more likely the vocal minority we see everywhere today.

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I'm an Allen Guy since pre-draft, and I can name 12 as of this moment:

Mahomes

Wilson

Brees

Brady

Rivers - not in 2019

Jackson

Goff -  just no now and forever

Rodgers

Cousins

Stafford

Ryan - not anymore

Dak - just no now and forever

 

Not sure I'd go much past those guys though. That was an interesting exercise because I expected to get to 15 before I really started to question if guys belonged ahead of him. It actually started at 10 or 11.

 

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

I'm not saying Allen's rushing makes him an accurate passer.  What I am saying is that when judging Allen as a QB you must include rushing yards, rushing 1st downs & rushing TD's in the assessment.  For example in recent games we've seen Allen convert two 4th & 1 plays that most QB's could not have done.  On both those drives we scored TD's following those conversions.  That's a BIG deal in a game.

 

Or put another way guys like Jackson & Allen can be highly productive QB's completing between 55 - 60% of their passes if they're making plays with their legs.  There is an evolution occurring in NFL quarterbacking right before our eyes.  It's becoming more like the college game where a QB's running game adds a lot to the overall production out of the QB position.

 

 

the original posts point was that the TD to turnover ratio was good for an inaccurate guy. To present rushing TDs within that thesis isn’t particularly honest.

 

i wasn’t debating if he was productive or good or... I was sticking to the OP calling out he has 22 combined tds as an “inaccurate” passer when a quarter are runs 

[GoBills808]

9 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

the original posts point was that the TD to turnover ratio was good for an inaccurate guy. To present rushing TDs within that thesis isn’t particularly honest.

 

i wasn’t debating if he was productive or good or... I was sticking to the OP calling out he has 22 combined tds as an “inaccurate” passer when a quarter are runs 

Or you could just not be deliberately obtuse and figure out what the OP was saying

 

Last 12 weeks- 31 other QBs have thrown more picks than Allen #inaccurate

[TwistofFate]

5 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Do you mean the same Barkley that, for a career, has a 59% completion rate, 10 TDs, 19 INTs, and a QB rating of 67?

 

Do you mean the same Barkley that was 9 - 16 (56%) for 127 yds, 0 TDs, 1 INT (in the red zone), and a 54 QB rating in the 1st NE game this year?

 

You need to say no more. This says everything we need to know.

Yes, the same Barkley who came off the bench in the 4 quarter and drove the team down the field to score the go ahead TD Zay Jones dropped (for which he was cut for) and put up nearly more yardage in the final minutes of the game than Allen did in nearly a full game. 

 

Yes, that Barkley. 

 

Ps (love how you edited out my final sentence)

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

There is an "Ignore" feature. 

 

Details vary per OS, but generally hover over the Username.  A pop-up box will appear with x-Ignore user as a feature.  Select it, and a window will open allowing you to input the Username(s) you wish to ignore, and the board features in which you wish them to be ignored.   Hope this helps.  PM if further assistance is required.

 

If you are unable to find any feature yourself and unable to get an answer in the Customer Service forum, you may PM a mod and request assistance.  It may take a day or two to get a response, because Life.

 

 

thanks for the info

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I dunno about crying, but 1) there is an Ignore feature 2) it is not appropriate to make a post on a discussion forum, then instruct others not to respond. 

I was unaware of the ignore feature and when you are consistently harrassed by the same member over and over I believe it is warranted to make a comment. 

 

 

[syhuang]

8 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

And a 1-5 record when he's under 60% completion vs 9-0 when he's over 60.

 

No one likes to touch that stat though.  

 

12 hours ago, Dr.Sack said:

If Allen completes more than 60% of his passes in a playoff game I’d be impressed. So far the one constant in our losses outside of the Pittsburgh game is when Allen’s completion % is sub 60% we lose. He’s 1-5 on the year his lone victory being over a Duck led anemic Pittsburgh offense.  

Correlation doesn't equal causation. You implies that it's Allen having lower than 60% completion causes Bills to lose, but you do not consider other factors that can affect his completion percentage in these losses, for example, opponent's defense ranking in these losses. In these 6 games (1-5) you listed, the opponent defense ranking in terms of pass completion percentage is #1 (Pats x 2), #2 (Ravens), #5 (Eagles), #7 (Steelers), and #11 (Browns). The defense Allen faced in these games has to be taken into account. However, you simply saw sub 60% in these 6 games and concluded it's the causation without considering other factors.

 

If you insist it's a causation and not a chance it's a correlation, let me ask you a simple question. If there is a factor, let's call it X, and BIlls' record is 1-3 with X but 9-2 without it, is X also a causation of the losses, similar to how you interpret sub 60% completion in these 6 games? If not, what other factors should be considered when analyzing stats in losses? and why do you not consider any other factors in your theory that completion percentage is the causation of the losses?