Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 92
  1. #73

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30



    Quote Originally Posted by bacchys View Post
    This is the first year that Atlanta hasn't had a very good running game to support Ryan. Their defense has been up-and-down between bad and average, though. A defense doesn't make a QB better, however, though it can certainly help him get more wins.
    Atlanta had the 23rd best rushing offense in the league last season (2011, where the Ravens were 10th), so again, don't trust your eyes.




  2. #74

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by phacts View Post
    This. This is what it's all about. Ryan looked scared as hell against Seattle, on the possession AFTER he threw the pick that got Seattle back into the game. Atlanta got the ball back, leading by one score, and needing a drive to re-take control of the game and swing momentum back into their favor. The camera zoomed in on Ryan's face before the first snap of the drive, and his eyes looked wide and frightened. Like a deer, staring into the oncoming headlights, blind and lost.

    The result? A three-and-out, which ultimately gave Seattle the ball back and kept them in the game. Shit, even if they pick up a few first downs and punt, it's better than a three-and-out. The way it played out was even worse - Ryan's passes died on him, I distinctly remember him short-hopping a throw on an 8-yard-out.

    In the stat book, it just shows up as an incompletion. On the field of play, where the legends of great players are written, it shows up as a man failing to rise to the occasion.
    He was so scared against Seattle he led the game winning drive. What a FRAUD.




  3. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,180

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by Paintballguy View Post
    What was the win probability for the Ravens in Denver before the TD to Jacoby Jones? At that point, every model would say Denver had a 95+% chance of winning. Stats aren't everything.

    Edit - It was 0.02 win probability for the Ravens before the Jacoby bomb.

    http://live.advancednflstats.com/ind...id1=2013011200
    That's a very poor understanding of statistics right there. A person has a 1 in 175,223,510 chance of winning the Mega Millions jackpot, but someone wins it every couple of weeks. Why? Because even very low likelihood events, repeated enough times, will result in instance of that event occuring.

    Thousands of football games have been played in NFL history, and in that time, teams in the position the Ravens were in in Denver, have lost 99% of the time. That Flacco made that play and we didn't is not an indictment of odds, but rather, the reason those odds gave us a chance instead of simply saying "Game over."

    If I predict that an event will occur 80 percent of the time on a Sunday, and it doesn't this Sunday, that doesn't mean I was wrong, it means it was one of the 20% of the times. (Assuming I have a reliable prediction model which frankly, I think Advanced NFL stats does.) Go back to other games and check their results.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  4. #76

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by bacchys View Post
    He is a good QB. I don't think he's as good as Flacco, but I think one can make a reasonable argument either way. Flacco may not put up the numbers in the regular season that Ryan has, but there are factors outside their personal abilities that affect those numbers.


    I think if Atlanta had chosen Flacco and we ended up with Ryan here in Baltimore we would not have had the same success we've had with Flacco.

    Personally, Flacco and Ryan are Tomato, TomAto to me.

    Both have warts, both are very good yet have some things to prove.

    I would have been happy with either. The only think thing I disagree with is that we wouldn't have had the same success with Ryan...I know that's your opinion but there is nothing substantial IMHO that would support that opinion. Maybe we do...maybe we don't. Nobody knows. I do think we'd have had a lot of success with Ryan...who knows how much though...it can't be substantiated.
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  5. #77

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantoom View Post
    HA! You're right. Leading your team to a game winning FG is completely different...

    Also, this:

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...gle_season.htm

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...gwd_career.htm

    But please, come up with some other reason why Matt Ryan isn't "clutch" and Joe is. Keep changing the definition until you are right.
    So we give Ryan credit for game winning drives in games where he threw 5 (FIVE!!!) and 3 picks? Seems kinda odd...




  6. #78

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Phantoom, you will never get it.

    Playing big in a regular season game is not the same as playing big in a championship game.

    Also, rookie Joe is not the same as fifth year Joe. Hence that is why people are trying to tell you that Flacco's stats are a bit skewed when it comes to playoff numbers - he played a lot of games as a young player when he was a lot less experienced, and not the same player he is now.

    Ryan sucked it up in his first three playoff seasons, maybe his numbers weren't showing how bad it was, but his mistakes came at the WORST times, and broke the Falcon's back.

    You couldn't find a better example of contrast in the two QB's in the respective championship games.

    Joe Flacco, in a collapsing pocket sees a wide open Ray Rice, but opts to throw for a wide open Jacoby Jones instead, even though the pass to Rice would have been "safer". It took balls, guts, and making the clutch throw with Von Miller in his face no less.

    Matt Ryan, in a clean pocket, panics and throws a pass on fourth down that is short of the yard marker to a well covered receiver and does not see a wide open Tony Gonzales who not only would have easily had the first down, he would have likely scored and won the game.

    Plays like this, which Joe has made in abundance in the playoffs and big games against quality opponents, are why most people would take Flacco over Ryan. I bet if you did a national poll, you'd now find most people wanting Flacco over Ryan.

    Stats don't make a QB elite. Coming up big makes you elite. Who would you rather have in a title game, Joe Montana, or Peyton Manning?




  7. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,917
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by callahan09 View Post
    I ran the first 9/10 of a mile in 3 minutes, 20 seconds! That's on pace to break the world record! (Nevermind that I fell over and gasped for air and took 5 minutes to finish the rest of the race)
    Now you're talkin' ... ... Bc




  8. #80
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,180

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by Paintballguy View Post
    I understand stats. My point was that according to the win prob, Denver was HEAVILY favored to win and they lost.
    First of all, you're comparing two different kinds of advanced statistics. Win Probability is a well understood concept and is frankly, inarguable. The idea that they indicated we had a low probability of success is inaccurate is a puzzling statement. The reason the F-Bomb was such an impressive play is because not only was it a physical feat, but it was a MASSIVE turning point in a game which we were clearly about to lose.

    Sabremetrics are less well understood in terms of application to football, but they are totally unrelated to WPA, so I'm confused as to why you brought WPA up. It's like we were all talking about our favorite MeatLoaf album and you posted about how terrible meatloaf tastes. The two ideas merely sound the same, they're completely unrelated.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  9. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pasadena
    Posts
    9,150
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    First of all, you're comparing two different kinds of advanced statistics. Win Probability is a well understood concept and is frankly, inarguable. The idea that they indicated we had a low probability of success is inaccurate is a puzzling statement. The reason the F-Bomb was such an impressive play is because not only was it a physical feat, but it was a MASSIVE turning point in a game which we were clearly about to lose.

    Sabremetrics are less well understood in terms of application to football, but they are totally unrelated to WPA, so I'm confused as to why you brought WPA up. It's like we were all talking about our favorite MeatLoaf album and you posted about how terrible meatloaf tastes. The two ideas merely sound the same, they're completely unrelated.
    Ok it may have came out wrong. My point is that sabermetrics are not the end all be all when it comes to evaluating players. It may be a big part, but it's not 100%.




  10. #82

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    Phantoom, you will never get it.

    Playing big in a regular season game is not the same as playing big in a championship game.

    Also, rookie Joe is not the same as fifth year Joe. Hence that is why people are trying to tell you that Flacco's stats are a bit skewed when it comes to playoff numbers - he played a lot of games as a young player when he was a lot less experienced, and not the same player he is now.

    Ryan sucked it up in his first three playoff seasons, maybe his numbers weren't showing how bad it was, but his mistakes came at the WORST times, and broke the Falcon's back.

    You couldn't find a better example of contrast in the two QB's in the respective championship games.

    Joe Flacco, in a collapsing pocket sees a wide open Ray Rice, but opts to throw for a wide open Jacoby Jones instead, even though the pass to Rice would have been "safer". It took balls, guts, and making the clutch throw with Von Miller in his face no less.

    Matt Ryan, in a clean pocket, panics and throws a pass on fourth down that is short of the yard marker to a well covered receiver and does not see a wide open Tony Gonzales who not only would have easily had the first down, he would have likely scored and won the game.

    Plays like this, which Joe has made in abundance in the playoffs and big games against quality opponents, are why most people would take Flacco over Ryan. I bet if you did a national poll, you'd now find most people wanting Flacco over Ryan.

    Stats don't make a QB elite. Coming up big makes you elite. Who would you rather have in a title game, Joe Montana, or Peyton Manning?
    I love this argument. I also love the cherry picking of two play. Allow me to cherry pick: If two plays go differently in the playoffs this year, then Joe goes 1-1, and Matt Ryan is heading to the super bowl. These plays don't even have to involve either QB, and yet they would change how "clutch" these QBs are.

    Also, I would take Montana, which means nothing because he is the best QB of all time. But let's compare contemporaries, shall we. Let's take Tom Brady, aka Mr. Clutch, and compare him to Peyton, aka, Mr. Choke. They have both played in over a seasons worth of playoff games (23 vs 24) so sample size is not an issue. Who do we think has a better QB rating in the playoffs? Oh, it's Mr. Choker himself! I guess "clutch" comes and goes as we please. It couldn't be that the Pats had a better defense and special teams all those years, could it? No! Clutch! Well surely Peyton threw more interceptions, right? Nope. Well I'm sure we will redefine clutch as "backbreaking" interceptions or something else that can't be quantified so you can continue to trust your gut over actual evidence. Or we will say that Tom lost this "clutch" gene (not that it is nonexistent).

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnBKistler View Post
    So we give Ryan credit for game winning drives in games where he threw 5 (FIVE!!!) and 3 picks? Seems kinda odd...
    [sarcasm]But real QBs only care about what happens in the last two minutes! Ryan is superclutch so who cares if he sucks for three quarters, those are just stats and all that matters IS THE LOOK IN HIS EYES AND W'S! Oh, and only the W's I decide are "big" matter. Anyone can win those regular season games in the last minute.[/sarcasm]

    I don't put any stock into GW drives. I was using it to disprove this idiocy of "clutch".

    Quote Originally Posted by Paintballguy View Post
    Ok it may have came out wrong. My point is that sabermetrics are not the end all be all when it comes to evaluating players. It may be a big part, but it's not 100%.

    I 100% agree with this. Again, just to be clear, I was never arguing that Ryan is better than Joe and that anyone who thinks otherwise is dumb. I was arguing that the thought that it is not a debate (and that Ryan is not a legit choice) is dumb.




  11. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,180

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by Paintballguy View Post
    Ok it may have came out wrong. My point is that sabermetrics are not the end all be all when it comes to evaluating players. It may be a big part, but it's not 100%.
    This is a point I agree 100% with. Clearly, from a sabremetric view point, Matt Ryan is not just better than Joe, he's quite a bit better.

    But football is two complex a game to quantify right now. Consider Ed Reed's game in Denver. From a sabremetric standpoint, he was a non entity. No picks, no passes broken up, no stops behind the line, 2 tackles and an assist.

    From a film viewing perspective however, Ed was critical in keeping Peyton in check. He erased a hemisphere of field on every single pass play. Peyton was so dead set on avoiding Reed that he simply gave up on passing anywhere within 15 yards of him. That's something that you can only measure by watching film and understanding what you're seeing.

    WRT to the Ryan Flacco debate, Ryan is clearly a more proficient QB when he is A. Protected, B. Not under emotional pressure, and C. In a dome. Those are ideal conditions for a QB however, and the playoffs don't often present QBs with such cushy circumstances. When Joe is backed into a corner against elite talent, he has shown the aptitude and consistent ability to make big plays. Matt simply has not yet.

    So yes, if I was playing football in a lab, I'd take Ryan. On turf, against angry men hell bent on breaking the QB in half, in the wind and snow....

    FLACCO EVERY FUCKING TIME.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  12. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pasadena
    Posts
    9,150
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    This is a point I agree 100% with. Clearly, from a sabremetric view point, Matt Ryan is not just better than Joe, he's quite a bit better.

    But football is two complex a game to quantify right now. Consider Ed Reed's game in Denver. From a sabremetric standpoint, he was a non entity. No picks, no passes broken up, no stops behind the line, 2 tackles and an assist.

    From a film viewing perspective however, Ed was critical in keeping Peyton in check. He erased a hemisphere of field on every single pass play. Peyton was so dead set on avoiding Reed that he simply gave up on passing anywhere within 15 yards of him. That's something that you can only measure by watching film and understanding what you're seeing.

    WRT to the Ryan Flacco debate, Ryan is clearly a more proficient QB when he is A. Protected, B. Not under emotional pressure, and C. In a dome. Those are ideal conditions for a QB however, and the playoffs don't often present QBs with such cushy circumstances. When Joe is backed into a corner against elite talent, he has shown the aptitude and consistent ability to make big plays. Matt simply has not yet.

    So yes, if I was playing football in a lab, I'd take Ryan. On turf, against angry men hell bent on breaking the QB in half, in the wind and snow....

    FLACCO EVERY FUCKING TIME.
    That's my point exactly. Also, you also have to consider the offense that Flacco has played in. He was asked to make more difficult throws than any other QB according to Greg Cosell.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland