Page 5 of 37 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 435
  1. #49

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Right back at you, Jim. Quality discussion on Lamar can be hard to come by with all the trolling on both sides. The ourlads data was something I discovered recently. Frankly, I was surprised that it was that low. The wobbles, general inconsistencies, and watching him throw deep made me question his arm strength, and that reading gave me some confirmation for what I was seeing. But that number is pretty low. I think, right now, it’s fringy but adequate in the system he is running. If the mechanics clean up and he improves, and it shows I misjudged his arm strength, then he’ll have more room for error as he continues to grow and use the whole field. He still has to continue to grow and use the whole field though. In my opinion, those are two big obstacles to overcome that cap his upside. If I’m right about his arm, the floor is a system qb who has enough to play in a highly specialized offense. That will leave us with several ups and downs as defenses scheme to take away. If I’m right about his arm AND he improves throwing to all parts of the field, the mid case scenario is a slightly below average passer who can thrive as a runner provided he stays at the point of diminished returns. If I’m wrong about his arm, then his floor stays the same, but his upside is an above average passer who can be deadly with the run. I don’t think he’ll ever be the thrower that Wilson or Watson are, he simply has way too much to improve upon and everything would have to go right. It’s possible, but I don’t think it’s likely. I don’t see the hall of fame upside that you do. I suppose it’s possible if everything goes right, but that could be said about almost any respectable pro prospect. I guess my expectations are just tempered. Too many question marks as a thrower.





  2. #50

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    I’d actually be pretty interested to see what the board consensus is when actually scouting Lamar and not just arguing or trolling each other. Is the perception of a cap on arm strength and functional throwing the football reason that truly divides both sides?





  3. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by Continuity Steve View Post
    Is the perception of a cap on arm strength and functional throwing the football reason that truly divides both sides?
    The "football" division is over accuracy.

    One group believes that Lamar's accuracy issues are intractable, as encapsulated by that bounced ball on a swing pass to a RB in the left flat. His best college completion% was 59, and QBs don't improve on that number when they get to the NFL – the defenders are just too good. That puts a hard cap on how accurate he will ever be in the league. It's all flutterballs and adventures in checkdowns from here on out.

    Another group believes that Lamar has great natural touch and placement, as evidenced by the long TD to Mandrews and intermediate passes to TEs on the right sideline while rolling out. His accuracy issues all stem from inconsistent mechanics from the waist down. He just needs some focused work on his feet and stepping into his throws, and his short & intermediate perentages will jump.

    I don't think there's any "general" division over Lamar's arm strength. You're honestly the first person I've seen raise a question.





  4. #52

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    I’m also lumping them together under the umbrella of functional throwing.





  5. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Bridgeville,DE
    Posts
    14,592

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I think your arithmetic is off.

    If I isolate just last year's rookies, then:


    There are 8 who attemped 30+ passes:

    BakerHof
    Darnold
    Rosen
    Allen
    Lamar
    Nick Mullens
    Jeff Driskel
    Kyle Allen

    In the last 15 years, 2/3 of such QB went up in comp% and 3/4 in rating.

    So I have to pick 2 of those to decline in passer rating? Well – hell, I'm 100% going to take Kyle Allen; and then I guess Jeff Driskel. If Galapagos wins back the starting job in SF, I'll switch to Mullen. Or both. I expect Josh Rosen to improve in passer rating.

    2.5 to 3 of them to decline in comp%? Allen again; and Mullens; and I guess Driskel.



    Of those 8 QBs, there are 4 or started 10 games or less: Lamar, Mullens, Driskel, and Kyle Allen. In the last 15 years, 85% & 75% improved in comp % & rating – I forget which pct goes with which stat, but either way it's one player or less. I'll go with Kyle Allen all day, to decline.

    No wait, that's wrong. It's four qualifiers for this year; but to get into the dataset, they'd need to start 10+ games next year. That may only be Lamar; or Lamar and Mullens. With just two guys, the stats don't "require" either one of them to decline in pctg or rating. I'd pick Mullen if I had to pick one.



    Wait. Mullen wasn't even a rookie last year! His rookie season was 2017. He was a second-year player last year.

    Fuck it, I'm lost. If it's only Lamar who qualifies for next year, than he just becomes part of the vast majority that improved.

    Um ...I’m just a dumb ass pipe welder /plumber but 66% is 2/3. I mean 66.6666% but who’s counting.

    Also. In your first Swordeque run on propaganda post you only used QBs in the first two rounds. So that only counts the 5 guys I said. So by your formula 2/3 or 66% of them will improve. So 2/3 or 66% or 5 is 3ish. So that leaves 2 to decline or stay Pat.
    Now if 75% inprove in rating then that’s 4 ( 3.75 exactly). So that’s 1 to regress.

    So which two will regress in comp% and which one will regress in rating?


    “You gonna do something .....or just stand there and bleed” Wyatt Earp





  6. #54

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post

    Of those 13:
    • Completion pctg: 11 went up, 2 went down, median +4.85
    • Passer rating: 10 went up, 3 went down, median +11

    Here's the medians of the magic 13, from their first to second seasons:

    Composite13 Comp Att YD TD INT Pct Y/Att Rating
    Median Year1 84 165 1001 5 6 50.9% 6.1 64.7
    Median Year2 291 467 2935 18 11 62.3% 6.3 83.2
    Lamar Year 1 99 170 1201 6 3 58.2% 7.1 84.5

    So the median passer threw 300 more passes, while still dramatically raising their completion% (+11.4) and passer rating (+18.5).
    Notice that Lamar's 2018 raw counting stats fit very nicely next to the median Year 1 stats; this isn't apples to oranges. But his efficiency numbers are much better.
    I don't understand why people are upset at attempts, when Jim isolated that variable by comparing Jackson to the average QB who started less than 10 games his rookie year. Also, why would attempts matter anyway? 170 attempts is more than enough of a sample size for him to be comparable to any first year QB. It's not like he threw 5 passes. If anything, the guys who threw more balls have more experience, and should have gotten better the more they attempted... right? Am I missing something?

    Great work Jim.
    "That's not Donovan McNabb."





  7. #55

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by Shrubbs View Post
    I don't understand why people are upset at attempts, when Jim isolated that variable by comparing Jackson to the average QB who started less than 10 games his rookie year. Also, why would attempts matter anyway? 170 attempts is more than enough of a sample size for him to be comparable to any first year QB. It's not like he threw 5 passes. If anything, the guys who threw more balls have more experience, and should have gotten better the more they attempted... right? Am I missing something?

    Great work Jim.
    Yeah this was some next level shit by Jim lol





  8. #56

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by Continuity Steve View Post
    I’m also lumping them together under the umbrella of functional throwing.
    I thought about this a little and wanted to expand. I'll use myself as an example. When I was younger, I was a baseball player. Not a very good one, but I could throw. That's really all I could do. It never translated to pitching or anything other than being able to long toss a ball over 320 ft with ease and throw pretty hard on a line when I didn't have anything else to think about. My hands are long but skinny, so grabbing a football was fairly awkward for me (and buying golf gloves is a royal pain). Give me an undersized ball and I could have probably made any throw asked of me, but a full sized ball meant that I had to make weird adjustments and had power leaks in my throwing motion. I'd bomb a deep ball pretty well, but then turn around on the same throw and throw a helicopter instead of a wounded duck that went maybe half as far as I wanted. I had a lot of accuracy issues and my passes came out fairly soft.

    Using my lingo, I would have had poor functional throwing ability and (relatively) good raw arm talent. However, a lot of things kept me from accessing it. I wasn't inherently inaccurate so much as the compensations I had to make to try to achieve my raw talent lead to power lapses and accuracy issues. So in my opinion, functional throwing includes strength and accuracy in a game situation, not just zip on throws.

    Applying this to my Lamar analysis, perhaps his, as of now, limited functional throwing ability and pressing to access his raw strength is leading to his mixture of accuracy lapses and weak, errant throws. If his raw strength is limited, he'd have to press that much harder. If not, then he he'd have to overcome whatever mechanical factors are causing those throws. In my case, no about of training could have overcome the fact that I couldn't reliably grip a football. In Lamar's case, is whatever his issue is something that can be overcome (mechanical) or will it always be something there (any number of factors). And if he can overcome his factors, how good is his arm truly and will it be enough to make every possible throw?

    My perception of his functional throwing ability concerns me, and I believe it severely caps his upside to somewhere between a slightly better version of a specialized system qb, to a little below average overall passer who can work out as long as we don't run him past the point of diminished returns. As you said, Jim, the next few months will probably tell us a lot.





  9. #57

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Off topic a little, but 105.7 just had Omar Kelly on from Miami Dolphins. He talked about how terrible Rosen looked and that he seemingly regressed. That hurts me as a fellow tribe member but at least we are seeing that Lamar is trending up.

    And Rosen is a guy who has been to QB schools. But he looks so damn robotics and he's from a wealthy family. Lamar has hunger of a lion in him.





  10. #58

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by RavenIsh View Post
    Off topic a little, but 105.7 just had Omar Kelly on from Miami Dolphins. He talked about how terrible Rosen looked and that he seemingly regressed. That hurts me as a fellow tribe member but at least we are seeing that Lamar is trending up.

    And Rosen is a guy who has been to QB schools. But he looks so damn robotics and he's from a wealthy family. Lamar has hunger of a lion in him.
    Sometimes people just can't cut it, for whatever reason. Rosen seems to not really want to work for it, and I guess that means the people who took him off the board completely for character were correct. It's a shame, because based on his skill set in college, I liked him as the safest QB in the draft who was most likely to reach an average or better ceiling.





  11. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by Continuity Steve View Post
    based on his skill set in college, I liked him as the safest QB in the draft who was most likely to reach an average or better ceiling.
    I think Waldman had the same rating on him.

    Another reason it's a shame, is because it "validates" the perception about kids with non-standard backgrounds. I hate to see that viewpoint get any reinforcement.





  12. #60

    Re: Lamar statistical comps

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    I think Waldman had the same rating on him.

    Another reason it's a shame, is because it "validates" the perception about kids with non-standard backgrounds. I hate to see that viewpoint get any reinforcement.
    Yeah but his spiral is tight. Guess he's better than Lamar. 🙄





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
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->