Lamar Jackson leaves denver game with knee injury

[Scott7975]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he is getting worse as a passer. I disagree there. I get the "can you see him getting past Mahomes, Allen and Burrow?" argument... and consistently, no I can't. I can't see Lamar reaching multiple Superbowls and have said that from the start. But is there a path to one in a lightening in a bottle season? Sure. Chase did play when they beat the Bengals btw. On a FG drive at the end that was pretty much all Jackson.

 

The bigger point though, even if he never gets to a Superbowl is what is the alternative for the Ravens? It is the exact argument I had when people were nonsensically saying the Cowboys should let Dak go. You can't stand and shout "stop the world I want to get off." It sucks for teams with QBs in the bottom half of the top 10 that the market isn't good at distinguishing the good (Lamar, Dak, Carr) from the great. But that is the market. Your alternative is to say stop the world I want to get off and suck until you find someone who is top 3 in the NFL. That is not a plan. It is a wing and a prayer. 

 

When you have a guy as good as Lamar you have to lean into it and build around him accordingly. The Ravens have done that well in terms of scheme. Not sure they have done as great a job with offensive weapons. But actually their mine issue this year and last has been keeping their guys (Lamar included) healthy. 

 

Thats fair but I dont see how you can disagree with him getting worse as a passer though.  Since his MVP year he has statistically mostly went down.  Now obviously that was an otherworldly year but some stats have drastically gone down.  His TD% is almost cut in half since then.  His comp% has dropped 4%.  His int percent has gone up.  His rating has gone down every single year. Every year I have people tell me look... he's getting better.  Sorry, but he isnt.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Scott7975

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Thats fair but I dont see how you can disagree with him getting worse as a passer though.  Since his MVP year he has statistically mostly went down.  Now obviously that was an otherworldly year but some stats have drastically gone down.  His TD% is almost cut in half since then.  His comp% has dropped 4%.  His int percent has gone up.  His rating has gone down every single year. Every year I have people tell me look... he's getting better.  Sorry, but he isnt.

 

The MVP year was a total one off. I said right after that season "he will never have a year like that again." It was a career year. Judging every other year by that and saying "regression" isn't fair. 

 

When you watch the games, you have to appreciate the nuances of what he is doing. He is never going to be a great passer. I am not saying that. His big limitations throwing the ball outside the numbers are going to remain. But he has improved some of his nuances. He plays the position with more patience and he is still producing with less in terms of the offense around him. I think he is a better Quarterback now than when he was MVP. But I'm not saying the flaws that stop him being a great passer are fixed or even are fixable tbh. 

[No_Matter_What]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he is getting worse as a passer. I disagree there. I get the "can you see him getting past Mahomes, Allen and Burrow?" argument... and consistently, no I can't. I can't see Lamar reaching multiple Superbowls and have said that from the start. But is there a path to one in a lightening in a bottle season? Sure. Chase did play when they beat the Bengals btw. On a FG drive at the end that was pretty much all Jackson.

 

The bigger point though, even if he never gets to a Superbowl is what is the alternative for the Ravens? It is the exact argument I had when people were nonsensically saying the Cowboys should let Dak go. You can't stand and shout "stop the world I want to get off." It sucks for teams with QBs in the bottom half of the top 10 that the market isn't good at distinguishing the good (Lamar, Dak, Carr) from the great. But that is the market. Your alternative is to say stop the world I want to get off and suck until you find someone who is top 3 in the NFL. That is not a plan. It is a wing and a prayer. 

 

When you have a guy as good as Lamar you have to lean into it and build around him accordingly. The Ravens have done that well in terms of scheme. Not sure they have done as great a job with offensive weapons. But actually their mine issue this year and last has been keeping their guys (Lamar included) healthy. 

Agreed re having no other choice than paying good QBs once you have one, as well as re Dak, Carr, Lamar being in this group.

 

Just curious where you stand with Murray. Would you pay him too? I guess I would let him go, even though he clearly has the ability.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, No_Matter_What said:

Agreed re having no other choice than paying good QBs once you have one, as well as re Dak, Carr, Lamar being in this group.

 

Just curious where you stand with Murray. Would you pay him too? I guess I would let him go, even though he clearly has the ability.

 

On pure ability, sure. And I said that when he was in his contract negotiation. I just dunno about maturity with Kyer and I know there have been issues with that in recent weeks for Lamar and if they are repeated it would give you pause. But with Kyler it feels like there are people in the building that don't believe in him as a leader. It is the stuff it is hard to quantify as a fan on the outside. 

[dave mcbride]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he is getting worse as a passer. I disagree there. I get the "can you see him getting past Mahomes, Allen and Burrow?" argument... and consistently, no I can't. I can't see Lamar reaching multiple Superbowls and have said that from the start. But is there a path to one in a lightening in a bottle season? Sure. Chase did play when they beat the Bengals btw. On a FG drive at the end that was pretty much all Jackson.

 

The bigger point though, even if he never gets to a Superbowl is what is the alternative for the Ravens? It is the exact argument I had when people were nonsensically saying the Cowboys should let Dak go. You can't stand and shout "stop the world I want to get off." It sucks for teams with QBs in the bottom half of the top 10 that the market isn't good at distinguishing the good (Lamar, Dak, Carr) from the great. But that is the market. Your alternative is to say stop the world I want to get off and suck until you find someone who is top 3 in the NFL. That is not a plan. It is a wing and a prayer. 

 

When you have a guy as good as Lamar you have to lean into it and build around him accordingly. The Ravens have done that well in terms of scheme. Not sure they have done as great a job with offensive weapons. But actually their mine issue this year and last has been keeping their guys (Lamar included) healthy. 

I think Prescott is a lot better than just “good” now and is the sort of qb who has it in him to make more than just one SB appearance. He has to overcome his head coach, although the defensive coaching is excellent. Now that Jimmy G is down, I think Dallas is pretty clearly the best team in the NFC.

[Captain Hindsight]

17 minutes ago, No_Matter_What said:

Agreed re having no other choice than paying good QBs once you have one, as well as re Dak, Carr, Lamar being in this group.

 

Just curious where you stand with Murray. Would you pay him too? I guess I would let him go, even though he clearly has the ability.

Murray is interesting case. He is very talented and no doubt has the ability to be a game changer at the position. The moment you have the lawyers draft up a homework clause, you know you are screwed.

 

Big wow plays. Consistently inconsistent 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I think Prescott is a lot better than just “good” now and is the sort of qb who has it in him to make more than just one SB appearance. He has to overcome his head coach, although the defensive coaching is excellent. Now that Jimmy G is down, I think Dallas is pretty clearly the best team in the NFC.

 

I was the guy who said Dak Prescott was at least a second round talent in that draft. In a weaker NFC it is very possible he makes multiple Superbowls. He is one of the most over-criticised players in the league IMO. Comes with the territory though. Romo was as well.

[Royale with Cheese]

16 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I think Prescott is a lot better than just “good” now and is the sort of qb who has it in him to make more than just one SB appearance. He has to overcome his head coach, although the defensive coaching is excellent. Now that Jimmy G is down, I think Dallas is pretty clearly the best team in the NFC.

 

You think the Cowboys are clearly better than the Eagles?

[dave mcbride]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

You think the Cowboys are clearly better than the Eagles?

I do. I realize that many won’t agree with me, but I think Dallas would have beaten Philly with relative ease had Prescott started that game earlier in the season. I just think that the Cowboys’ overall talent level is super-bowl caliber. They have a lot of great players on both sides of the ball.

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I do. I realize that many won’t agree with me, but I think Dallas would have beaten Philly with relative ease had Prescott started that game earlier in the season. I just think that the Cowboys’ overall talent level is super-bowl caliber. They have a lot of great players on both sides of the ball.

 

I think the Cowboys are going to be another playoff disappointment.  I think Dak fills up the stat sheet but will underperform in the playoffs.

[PetermansRedemption]

This should help his contract talks. Hopefully he has a good agent…

[CincyBillsFan]

To be clear and based on the replays I've seen Jackson's knee injury came in the pocket, not while he was running.

 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he is getting worse as a passer. I disagree there. I get the "can you see him getting past Mahomes, Allen and Burrow?" argument... and consistently, no I can't. I can't see Lamar reaching multiple Superbowls and have said that from the start. But is there a path to one in a lightening in a bottle season? Sure. Chase did play when they beat the Bengals btw. On a FG drive at the end that was pretty much all Jackson.

 

The bigger point though, even if he never gets to a Superbowl is what is the alternative for the Ravens? It is the exact argument I had when people were nonsensically saying the Cowboys should let Dak go. You can't stand and shout "stop the world I want to get off." It sucks for teams with QBs in the bottom half of the top 10 that the market isn't good at distinguishing the good (Lamar, Dak, Carr) from the great. But that is the market. Your alternative is to say stop the world I want to get off and suck until you find someone who is top 3 in the NFL. That is not a plan. It is a wing and a prayer. 

 

When you have a guy as good as Lamar you have to lean into it and build around him accordingly. The Ravens have done that well in terms of scheme. Not sure they have done as great a job with offensive weapons. But actually their mine issue this year and last has been keeping their guys (Lamar included) healthy. 

 

QB and maybe kicker (though that one doesn't matter much) are the only two positions in the league where there isn't at least 32 two very good to great players to go around.

 

That is where teams get in trouble paying these guys top $$ hoping they can get by with him, but typically weakens the rest of the team around him as not enough money left to go around.  There's a long list of QB's who got fairly large 2nd contracts only to never see the end of it as teams finally figured out this guy isn't cutting it and better to reset, usually happening after a coaching change.

[GunnerBill]

31 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

QB and maybe kicker (though that one doesn't matter much) are the only two positions in the league where there isn't at least 32 two very good to great players to go around.

 

That is where teams get in trouble paying these guys top $$ hoping they can get by with him, but typically weakens the rest of the team around him as not enough money left to go around.  There's a long list of QB's who got fairly large 2nd contracts only to never see the end of it as teams finally figured out this guy isn't cutting it and better to reset, usually happening after a coaching change.

 

The problem is the major inefficiency in the QB market and you are right it is because demand outstrips supply. There are like three tiers of guys and then the teams who just flat out don't have a QB....

 

There is the elite tier: Josh, Mahomes, Burrow (who knows whether you still put Rodgers here or not, depends how he feels)

Then a bunch of franchise guys: this is the tier the Dak, Stafford, Lamar, Carr, Herbert (he can make the top group but he hasn't yet) etc fall in

Then there are the placeholder starters: Jared Goff and Jimmy G are the classic examples of this right now

Then there are the teams who don't have a quarterback: Colts, Jets, Saints, Panthers etc...

 

There are obviously always a few teams who haven't worked out which of these their young guy falls in... but broadly it is those 4 tiers. The problem is the market delineates between tier 2 and 3 pretty well, but not very well between tiers 1 and 2. So rather than the tier 2 guys costs $6-8m a year less which might be one or even two extra impact players they are pretty much the same price when they sign their deals. So you have a couple of seasons before the market has jumped again where you are hamstrung. Because the elite guys make up for those 1 or 2 extra impact players you are missing. The franchise guys don't quite do that. 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

44 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The problem is the major inefficiency in the QB market and you are right it is because demand outstrips supply. There are like three tiers of guys and then the teams who just flat out don't have a QB....

 

There is the elite tier: Josh, Mahomes, Burrow (who knows whether you still put Rodgers here or not, depends how he feels)

Then a bunch of franchise guys: this is the tier the Dak, Stafford, Lamar, Carr, Herbert (he can make the top group but he hasn't yet) etc fall in

Then there are the placeholder starters: Jared Goff and Jimmy G are the classic examples of this right now

Then there are the teams who don't have a quarterback: Colts, Jets, Saints, Panthers etc...

 

There are obviously always a few teams who haven't worked out which of these their young guy falls in... but broadly it is those 4 tiers. The problem is the market delineates between tier 2 and 3 pretty well, but not very well between tiers 1 and 2. So rather than the tier 2 guys costs $6-8m a year less which might be one or even two extra impact players they are pretty much the same price when they sign their deals. So you have a couple of seasons before the market has jumped again where you are hamstrung. Because the elite guys make up for those 1 or 2 extra impact players you are missing. The franchise guys don't quite do that. 

 

How can you create a list like this and leave out Brady??  LOL  Actually was curious which group you'd put him in today.  He's kind of a wildcard as still very good probably belongs in the franchise group and could argue elite, but knowing that signing him is a big risk as one of these days he will completely fall off the cliff.

[DrDawkinstein]

2 hours ago, CincyBillsFan said:

To be clear and based on the replays I've seen Jackson's knee injury came in the pocket, not while he was running.

 

 

 

Yep, just like Josh's elbow injury. Tua's concussions. Heck, Jimmy G's injury came while scrambling barely out of the pocket on a pass play.

 

The pocket is the most dangerous place for a QB to be.

 

MORE designed runs to keep Josh healthy please!

[GunnerBill]

21 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

How can you create a list like this and leave out Brady??  LOL  Actually was curious which group you'd put him in today.  He's kind of a wildcard as still very good probably belongs in the franchise group and could argue elite, but knowing that signing him is a big risk as one of these days he will completely fall off the cliff.

 

I'd now put him in the franchise group. To win with Tom now you need a lot around him. We saw that at the end in New England and have seen it in Tampa. He has won Superbowls with worse rosters than this Tampa one... but that was when he personally did more on a more consistent basis. 

[TheWeatherMan]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I was the guy who said Dak Prescott was at least a second round talent in that draft. In a weaker NFC it is very possible he makes multiple Superbowls. He is one of the most over-criticised players in the league IMO. Comes with the territory though. Romo was as well.

He had an all pro offensive line, 2 great backs, 3 great WR’s and an above average TE yet still lost in the first round of the playoffs to a Jimmy G led team.  Dak is extremely inconsistent and in no way worthy of the contract he signed.  If JA was the QB got the Cowgirls that would 100% be the best team in football 3 years running.  

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

He had an all pro offensive line, 2 great backs, 3 great WR’s and an above average TE yet still lost in the first round of the playoffs to a Jimmy G led team.  Dak is extremely inconsistent and in no way worthy of the contract he signed.  If JA was the QB got the Cowgirls that would 100% be the best team in football 3 years running.  

 

This bit is correct. But again it comes back to the point. What are you supposed to do if you don't have a top 3 Quarterback? Bills fans have suddenly become total QB snobs. We have Josh and other teams don't so nobody anyone else has is any good. Dak isn't elite. But he is a darn good QB. A top 10 QB. 

[Gugny]

9 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

 If JA was the QB got the Cowgirls that would 100% be the best team in football 3 years running.  

 

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

This bit is correct. 

 

How can you agree with that?  I've read it at least 10 times and still have no idea what it says!!