Bryant McKinnie...

[Fezmid]

Well, he has given up only one sack for an offense that can't remain on the field.

512929[/snapback]

According to the link posted above, he's allowed 4.25...

 

CW

[BADOLBILZ]

They both have played in 50 games. According to "SnapStats", McKinnie has given up 31.5 sacks in 50 games, and Williams has given up 29.75 sacks in 50 games.

 

http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/playerstats.asp?id=5893

http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/player...=5890&Submit=Go

512913[/snapback]

 

Nice reference. Williams has actually given up LESS sacks this year than Pace or Ogden. Why hasn't this guy been moved to LT! I'm rooting for him to get snaps in the rest of the games this year so his stat sheet reads 14 games played. IRON MIKE, that has a nice ring to it.

 

How do you interpret those stats? This is exciting, I had no idea he ranked so highly. I think he gets a bad rap. Did you know Rob Johnson has a passer rating almost identical to Donovan McNabb and Steve McNair? If he were black and his name were McJohnson, I bet things would be different. Know what I mean?

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

1.McKinnie is having a dominant year statistically, regardless of QB.  On top of that, he's getting props from pros.  He's a fixture on the line, playing in, I believe, 50 straight games.  What validation are you seeking?

 

2.Let me repeat, McKinnie held out for the same money the #7 pick got the year before.  Look it up, this issue was discussed at length on TSW at the time.  Was he supposed to take less?  Was he wrong to not sign for less and undercut a structured compensation system?  As for the arrest, a big yawn.  He and a teammate got in an argument.  Nobody got hurt.  He's well liked, the players call him Captain Steubing. 

 

3.Forget the money. The Big rap on MW isn't just his play, it's his lack thereof.  He's fat, he's hurt and he's a guard.  It's a bad scene.  I hope he snaps out of it, but I don't know who you think you're kidding with this weak defense of the guy.

512755[/snapback]

 

BADOL- I really do appreciate the insights of you and others who have more fully formed opinions of McKinnie and his play. I really am seeking infiormation because I have never seen him this year not being a Vike watcher.

 

I base my initial sense of what i can see which is:

 

A. The Vikes overall W/L and how they got there- As best as I can tell on the face of it there is nothing at all dominating about the Vikes offense or team. It is from this point that I begin at a point where anyone claims that an individual playeris key to this offense and is dominating. Perhaps one can claim that he is dominating it is just that his play makes no difference in terms of team results, but this speaks volumes in itself if it is the case. More likely, that player is not really dominating in his play.

 

The Vikes are merely average in W/L at 5-5. In these 10 games, I think one can only site 2 games in which they scored 33 and 27 points as being a result which might be called dominating (it can be that as in the MN game, the Vikes eeked over the 20 point mark which I think of as mere adequacy in the NFL but in this game it was the D that delivered on of their TDs so it is a stretch to call the offenses output in this game against one of the worst teams in the league more than poor really).

 

The starting point for me is a question of whether BM has been dominant this year? My initial answer as one who does not claim to have studied him is that one certainly cannot reach that conclusion based on the team's game results where their O has been average at best overall and actually performed adequateat best and mostly quite poorly if you look at their output in 8 of 10 games.

 

The validation of BM which I am looking for (but certainly do NOT demand or require) is some statistical indication of :ominating" play on his part in order for this judgment to make sense.

 

The stats are probably in this thread and the failing is on me as I have not followed all the many posts in the 8 pages amidst T-Day activity. The point you make of BM having 50 straight starts is a good INDICATOR of probably good play from him. However, this stat is merely an indicator of good play and is no where near "proof" he is dominating.

 

In fact, just as MW has played a lot for the Bills (though not as consistently as BM has played for MN) simply playing is not proof at all of consistently good play. Just as was requested in a post aove by Fezmid what are the stats that even indicate (much less prove) that BM is a dominating player this year. Perhaps Fexmid is just as stupid as me and missed them in this thread, but inquiring minds would love to know.

 

B. The total of a players career- BM may be dominating this year, but for me this estimation comes on his previous play and activities. Like it or not, he needs to demonstrate objective signs of dominating play in a number of clear ways, from a number of outside sources (if he got elected to a Pro Bowl this would and should change the light within which he is viewed) and over a period of time.

 

Right now, BM is a guy who did a significant holdout his rookie year (either rightly or wrongly he did holdout), has had late night/early morning trouble with the law (which may have been boys will be boys or signs of an issue), is part of the sexboat vikes and has not impressed on the field prior to this year.

 

Perhaps BM is dominating this year, and perhaps we all should be forgiving fans and ignore the past and assume he has performed a number of rational acts that were mistrued time and again. However, I am among those fans who are simply skeptical of a claim he is dominating given his past play and events. I can easily be swayed (though some fans seem to never forgive) with stats which indicate he is dominating. I'm just stupid and have not yet even remotely seem these indications.

 

Thus in this context-

 

1. I see few if any signs of BM being dominating this year and his teams O has certainly not been anywhere near dominating. As far as the QB switch making a difference in BMs play it is clear that the QB switch has conincided with a huge turn around in W/L for this team. Maybe it makes no difference for BM's play but this would seem to indicate that the team's W/L results are somehow separate from the quality of his play.

 

As far as the QB switch impacting the LTs play there would seem on the face of it to be a big difference in what is required for a QB like Culpepper who is renowned for his escapability and the requirement for an OL player to hold his blocks and be aware of the QB's movements or a QB like Johnson who is not nearly as mobile and is a vet and who gets rid of the ball quicker to a good read or by throwing it away because he cannot escape a sack attempt with his legs.

 

It may be that the switch has had no effect on BM but on the face of it unless you want to maintain Johnson and Culpepper play the same game it would seem it would and there is no explanation I have seen to justify this view.

 

2. My memory of the dispute when McKinnie held out was that it was not over the amount of his contract which is slotted but actually was over the method and timing of payment which can vary a bit from team to team. In addition, this dispute which is not atypical in the NFL turned into a holdout because both the Vikes and McKinnie got feisty and nasty.

 

In general, my attitude is that it takes two to tango in this type of dispute and neither BM nor the Vikes can be totally exonerated in this holdout.

 

3. Never forget the money if you care about building a good NFL team and want to understand how a good team is built. Forget the money if one is into this merely for star worship or a superficial look. However, the NFL used to be a sport that happened to also be a business and now it is a business that happens to also be a sport. If you care about the reality of the game never forget the money.

 

As far as excusing MW I certainly don't make that argument at all. Because I do not forget the money rather than excusing his play his career, i would advocate the Bills cut him as soon as it fits our cap needs this off-season.

 

There are still 6 games left and who knows at TBD what the relationships really are inside, but barring some miraculous turnaround in the teams OL play in 6 games and his pivotal role in this turnaround I certainly feel the end of the MW era as a Bill is here this off-season and he will be a bust as a pick.

 

Firtunately, for TD I think when one weighs his deeply flawed 2002 draft against some high quality work in the 2001 and 2003 drafts and some good potential in the 04 and 05 drafts which are still too early to judge, overall he has done a good job as a draft leader. Hiw work is not outstanding, but their are some definite highlights that are good and appear above the norm for GMs in the draft aspect of the game.

[Kelly the Dog]

Nice reference.  Williams has actually given up LESS sacks this year than Pace or Ogden.  Why hasn't this guy been moved to LT!  I'm rooting for him to get snaps in the rest of the games this year so his stat sheet reads 14 games played.  IRON MIKE, that has a nice ring to it.

 

How do you interpret those stats?  This is exciting, I had no idea he ranked so highly.  I think he gets a bad rap.  Did you know Rob Johnson has a passer rating almost identical to Donovan McNabb and Steve McNair?  If he were black and his name were McJohnson, I bet things would be different.  Know what I mean?

512960[/snapback]

Actualy, I believe you first brought up "McKinnie having a dominant statistical year" was it not? It's just one factor, among many in which to view them. I have no reason to think that McKinnie didn't give up that number of sacks when sporadically watching him over the last few seasons. My view of the two, I stated earlier in the thread. I wanted to draft McKinnie. I think Williams outplayed McKinnie in years 1 and 3, and McKinnie outplayed Williams in years 2 and 4. Right now, it looks like McKinnie will have the better career, perhaps by far. But that may change. I'm not saying it will, or it looks like it will, but those two, IMO, have both looked quite average to me and flipflopped a few times.

[BADOLBILZ]

Actualy, I believe you first brought up "McKinnie having a dominant statistical year" was it not? 

512975[/snapback]

 

The Vikes have McKinnie responsible for 1 of the teams incredible 45 sacks allowed. He's also committed no penalties on the season. So for what it's worth his 2005 stat line is 1 sack allowed, no penalties, 10 full games played.

 

But Stats Inc. has their own method for sack figures, that's how they come up with a way to distribute .25 sacks around when a lineman can't be held specifically accountable. As we know, not all sacks are the fault of a lineman. Sometimes the defense sends one more than the line can block, or sometimes a back or TE is supposed to pick up a rusher on a 3 step throw, etc.. Sometimes a QB runs around and defeats his own protection, not something you see with Drew Bledsoe, but very common with Daunte Culpepper.

 

Bottom line, that stuff matters only to people like FFS who haven't even seen the guy play, but WANT him to somehow, someway, PLEASE be a turd.

[Fezmid]

  Bottom line, that stuff matters only to people like FFS who haven't even seen the guy play, but WANT him to somehow, someway, PLEASE be a turd. 

I've seen him play, talked to Vikings fans in the office who have seen every snap, and I can say that FFS isn't the only one saying he's a "turd."

CW

[PromoTheRobot]

Knowing the posters at Two Bills Drive, I'm quite sure everyone would have been most patient with McKinnie, gladly giving him 4+ plus years to develop into a good O-lineman, because in the end, we all knew he would be better than Mike Williams.

 

In other news, giant purple pigs will fly over Ralph Wilson Stadium.

 

PTR

[Kelly the Dog]

The Vikes have McKinnie responsible for 1 of the teams incredible 45 sacks allowed.  He's also committed no penalties on the season.  So for what it's worth his 2005 stat line is 1 sack allowed, no penalties, 10 full games played.

 

  But Stats Inc. has their own method for sack figures, that's how they come up with a way to distribute .25 sacks around when a lineman can't be held specifically accountable.  As we know, not all sacks are the fault of a lineman.  Sometimes the defense sends one more than the line can block, or sometimes a back or TE is supposed to pick up a rusher on a 3 step throw, etc..  Sometimes a QB runs around and defeats his own protection, not something you see with Drew Bledsoe, but very common with Daunte Culpepper. 

 

  Bottom line, that stuff matters only to people like FFS who haven't even seen the guy play, but WANT him to somehow, someway, PLEASE be a turd. 

513169[/snapback]

The Bills had Fletcher having Tedy Bruschi numbers in tackles a few games, too. He had like 174 tackles one game if I remember according to the team's stats. I think Brady Smith (IIRC) had two sacks against BM in the MNF game, and Simeon Rice had a sack against him in the first game. This is just off the top of my head watching. I don't recall the plays exactly but I have seen snippets of most of the games and like to watch him, but I think there were three right there. I think I saw one a week or two ago, also.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I've seen him play, talked to Vikings fans in the office who have seen every snap, and I can say that FFS isn't the only one saying he's a "turd."

CW

513213[/snapback]

 

The thing which seems odd to me is that folks seem to want to reduce this to only two choices. Either McKinnie is a dominant player or he is a turd.

 

Neither seems true to me.

 

McKinnie in his four years has not been the kind of player that you want for the money that he makes.

 

The problem for the Vikes is that they seem to have much bigger problems to deal with than McKinnie. The fact this is true despite BM's bad start as a player, his inconsistent performance on the field and his recent run-ins with the law speaks volumes about how bad the situation is on their team.

 

On the positive side, BM is no where near being a bust however as his current year is his best year and I have heard nothing about how his slotted salary is divided up so that it forces the Vikes into an immediate decision.

 

MW however is pretty close to being a bust though as his current year has not been his best year and his contract is configured in a way that it is likely to force the Bills to pay him even more or cut him.