PDA

View Full Version : Sell me on a Bronco QB.



Pages : [1] 2 3

Poet
08-05-2017, 05:06 PM
Sell me on him/them.

Simple Jaded
08-05-2017, 06:10 PM
Lynch
- Huge, can see entire field.
- Bigtime Arm, jugs machine.
- Mobile for any QB, especially one 6-7.
- NFL Arm talent.
- Aggressive.
- Clutch under pressure in college.
- Huge hands, and you know what that means? That's right, he can palm a basketball.
- Good leader, commands the huddle, bit of a goob tho. Like Von Miller goob.
- Fair accuracy at this point, needs work on ball placement.
- Plays with passion.
- Stach.

Siemian
- Very good height, 6-3.
- Very good arm strength.
- Wicked smart, got into Northwestern.
- Better touch than Lynch.
- Accuracy.
- Underrated athlete, can buy time but too frail to play hero ball.
- NFL Arm talent.
- Good leader, commands huddle.
- Clutch under pressure in college.
- Plays injured.
- Flat-liner.
- Birks and Socks. Bit of a goob.
- Capricorn.

Chad Kelly
- Very good height/weight, solid speed.
- Very Mobile, buys time and moves the sticks.
- Cannon.
- Legit accuracy.
- Plays with passion.
- Good leader.
- Gunslinger.
- Football smart.
- NFL Arm Talent.
- Plays with HATE!
- Irish.

Sloter
- Great size/speed. 6-5 and claims 4.5 wheels when not running 40 in someone else's shoes on gym floor.
- Huge arm.
- Great touch.
- NFL Arm talent.
- Very mobile, buys time/moves sticks.
- Very intelligent.
- Resilient.
- Sleeper.
- Played in WCO/Pro Style offense.
- Huge potential.
- Local college kid.
- Likes soda.

MOtorboat
08-05-2017, 06:23 PM
I think Siemian, in general, will make good decisions and not make the wrong throws. I think he'll be a decent compliment to the strong defense, he'll just have to punch in some more chances and convert some more third downs.

Hawgdriver
08-05-2017, 06:34 PM
The only thing that excites me about Siemian is that in time he might have that Manning trait of gathering encyclopedic knowledge of NFL defenses and be able to act on it in real time.

NightTerror218
08-05-2017, 06:36 PM
I think Siemian, in general, will make good decisions and not make the wrong throws. I think he'll be a decent compliment to the strong defense, he'll just have to punch in some more chances and convert some more third downs.

Siemian makes less poor decision. Takes less chancesm likes check downs. Horrible inaccurate when rattled. See SD home game.

Lynch at tomes takes big chances or 2nd guesses self. Basically no experience. Problems with progressions and reading defenses. But will more live game reps help.

Simple Jaded
08-05-2017, 06:43 PM
I think we see a more aggressive Siemian with a more aggressive McCoy.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-05-2017, 06:47 PM
I think we see a more aggressive Siemian with a more aggressive McCoy.
That may be true.

FanInAZ
08-05-2017, 06:55 PM
Sell me on him/them.

Price List:
Siemian: $1,000
Lynch: $800
Kelly: $400
Sloter $200

20% discount if you order in the next hour.

Simple Jaded
08-05-2017, 07:19 PM
That may be true.

He needs a better OL though.

Tned
08-05-2017, 07:20 PM
Not going to spend any time looking up stats and posting them. I did quite a bit of that last year and people were so entrenched in their three camps (pro-Lynch, Pro-Siemian and ABS - Anyone But Siemian) that it was a wasted effort, so I won't waste my time again. Besides, it doesn't really matter, since what they are doing now and in preseason games is what matters most this year.

That said, in honor of the OPs wishes, I will give some thoughts.

I think Jaded did a pretty good job of listing strengths/weaknesses of each player. Obviously, we've only seen significant snaps from one of them in the NFL, which is why much of what he lists is related to their college careers and/or physical traits.

I think with Kelly we probably have the best QB of the lot. If you wiped out all history of the four QBs. Knew nothing about their careers, off field problems, etc. and simply put the top scout from all 32 teams into a room and had them watch film of the four QBs, with NO other facts or history to go on, only one of the QBs would be identified as a first round selection, and it would likely be nearly universal from the 32 scouts. So, Kelly has all of the physical skills to be an elite QB, he just might not have the brains/temperament to even be a backup. He's the very epitome of the high risk/high reward player, but by picking him last in the NFL, there isn't much risk, so let's say the epitome of a boom or bust QB.

With Lynch, he's got all of the physical skills that could make him a very good QB, maybe even elite, but due to the school he started at, his football IQ and "NFL readiness" is about as low as it gets for a drafted QB. So, that tells you just how good his physical tools are. There is a reason quite a few scouts/GMs questioned about Lynch in the pre-draft analysis, referred to him as a 2-3 year project. Even if he doesn't win the starting job this year, it in NO way means he won't be a quality, or even elite, starter in the league eventually. He just has to learn some of the fundamentals that he didn't learn in college.

In Siemian, we have a QB that followed Peyton Manning and a Super Bowl win and that means that Broncos fans that always have unrealistic QB expectations were at a whole new level of distorted reality when evaluating Siemian's performance as a first year starter.

It's akin to the quip I made yesterday about how unhinged fans were screaming in the game day threads "another ******* shank by Dixon" while time and again the "shank" sailed 40+ yards and he went on to one of the best rookie punting seasons in recent memory and finished in the top 10 in net punting and just a hair outside the top 10 in punts inside the 20. Meaning, that in the heat of the moment, as we are wrapped up in the game and how this team we invest so much emotionally does, we lose sight of actual facts and reality. Kind of like a non pre-meditated murder can be classified temporary insanity. In the moment, sometimes facts and reality get distorted.

So, back to Siemian. It's extremely hard to evaluate Siemian's performance for a few reasons. First, by all accounts he got very, very few reps other than on the scout team his rookie year. On the bright side, he got to study Manning, and I think we saw signs of that not only on the field, but in handling the media, BUT, it doesn't change the fact that his rookie year he wasn't being groomed as the backup, not to mention being the starter.

Add to that, the Broncos had the worst RT in the league and second worst LT in the league, and a bad offensive line overall, which not surprisingly also resulted in one of the worst running games in the league. What's worse than that? A HC/OC who's ENTIRE offensive scheme is predicated on having a dominant running game that sets up play action passing. Siemian routinely only had 2.0 - 2.5 seconds to release the ball before being sacked (often with much of that time with his pack to the line executing a play action), but had a head coach that failed to design and call plays designed to get the ball out quickly, and instead stuck with slow developing play action and similar slow developing play calls.

So, with all those "facts" that need to be considered, what did we see from the first year starter? We saw a mixed bag. In his first couple games, he wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible. He showed an extremely fast release and good accuracy, but made a few mistakes in each game (fortunately, some dropped INTs on those mistakes). I believe it was the first game of the year, that the SNF crew showed the timing of his release and said it was one of the fastest they had timed, ever. Not the fastest, but in the realm of the fastest they had timed.

Prior to his injury, he was extremely accurate. Again, routinely commented on by the broadcast crews, and evidenced when watching. This accuracy dropped off dramatically after the injury and he was never as accurate the rest of the season as he was the first four games before the injury. He didn't throw deep often in the first three games, but by all accounts that had a lot to do with how the teams (especially Colts/Panthers) were playing defense. As fans, we like to see the deep shots, but if they are playing deep safeties, cover two, etc., it doesn't mean it's the right thing for the QB to do. Without us sitting in the film room and knowing how he was graded, we just don't know how many deep shots he could, or should, have taken.

It's also impossible to know how many of the third down throws made short of the sticks was play calling (my suspicion), or the need to get the ball out before a sack, or his lack of confidence in throwing deeper balls. Again, not being in the film room and not knowing what play was called or what defense was on, we can only speculate.

We saw plenty of evidence of toughness, where he threw long completions moments before, or as, he was being hit in the chest by a rusher that blew by a tackle as if they were on a coffee break, so he showed lots of toughness.

If you look at the first starting season of all QBs drafted since 2000 that started at least 8 games in their first starting season (either rookie or second year), he stacks up very well statistically, and did better than many top tier QBs currently playing in the league and better than many top 15 drafted QBs. Some say, that doesn't matter, he still sucked, but that's a simplistic and emotional response, not an objective one. Especially when the comparisons were almost always made to 5+ year veterans, not other first year starters. It's emotion knee jerk reactions, not objective analysis.

When evaluating a first year starter, you MUST:


Look at how he stacked up against other first year starters.
Consider the conditions played under, such as quality of line, running game, receiving corp, etc.
Consider whether the coach put him in a position to succeed (for instance, Andy Reid overhauled his offensive scheme/play calling last year to help his veteran QB get the ball out quick to compensate for bad line, Kubiak refused to do the same for his first year starter)
Is he making the same mistakes over and over, or is he showing signs of improvement


Those are just some of the things us fans can see and evaluate, and in all of those respects, Siemian did very well overall, but extremely well when viewed as a first year starter (obviously, point one only applies to first year starters).

Now, what we don't have enough information to evaluate are things such as how many sacks were the QBs fault, because he failed to recognize a blitz and adjust coverage or play. Failed to go deep when it was there, or threw short of the sticks when he could have thrown longer. We simply don't know how he graded out, because we don't know the plays and other factors that goes into a real evaluation of the QB.

Now, so where does that leave us with Siemian. What we saw pre-injury was a first year starter with a VERY fast release, making few mistakes and extremely accurate. Who when he finally went up against a defense that was allowing deep shots, he took them against Cincy and completed them.

Then he got hurt. From that point forward, he was up and down the rest of the season. Again, when comparing him to other first year starters, most drafted FAR,FAR,FAR higher than him and many that are now considered top tier, he stacks up extremely well and better than many of the top tier guys. But, it was a regression from pre injury and just because he was as good or better than most first year starters of the last two decades, DOES NOT in and of itself mean he will be a good to great NFL starter.

If we got nothing more than Siemian gave last year, he has shown that if he's given just a bit more protection, a running game that isn't horrid and some decent play calling, that at minimum he can "manage" the game well enough to score enough points to win more than the Broncos lose, when backed up by the Broncos great defense.

Now, none of that answers the million dollar question.

In his second year of starting (third year overall), with better tools around him and the injury behind him, can he play better than he did last year? That's obviously the question that the coaches are considering as they decide which QB gives the team the best chance of winning.

Tned
08-05-2017, 07:22 PM
I think we see a more aggressive Siemian with a more aggressive McCoy.

Agreed. I think many of us underestimate the anchor that was Kubiak that was dragging Siemian and the whole offense down. It gives me no pleasure in saying that, because I loved Kubiak as a player, loved him as the OC, and was excited, but also concerned, when he was hired as OC. My concern was that he was a one trick pony that couldn't or wouldn't adjust if he didn't have a running game, and that's what we saw.

Tned
08-05-2017, 07:25 PM
I quoted my December post the other day in the training camp thread about where I saw the QB battle in early December. I'll repost it here, because as I said in that thread, I think we are sitting right now exactly where we were sitting in early December in terms of who will be the starter this year.


As we sit here today, if I was putting percentages on it:

50% Siemian 2017 starter
35% Lynch 2017 starter
15% 2017 starter not on Broncos roster today

Timmy!
08-06-2017, 12:04 AM
Elway is the goat.

#iwin

Tned
08-06-2017, 01:11 AM
Here's an interesting one.

How do you account for the huge discrepancy? One way to look at it is that when blitzed, there is a mismatch/open man and Siemian's high football IQ and quick release made teams pay. However, when there wasn't a blitz there would be tighter coverage and the Broncos line wasn't capable of providing pockets long enough for routes to develop and receivers to come open.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_blitz.JPG

Tned
08-06-2017, 01:44 AM
A few more stats:

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_third_down.JPG

The primary purpose of this PFF chart is to show how much worse a QB performs when under pressure (Tannehill had the largest drop off in NFL when under pressure, Wentz the second worse in terms of drop in rating under pressure, etc.). While it's sorted by the difference in rating under pressure and not, it also provides a nice snapshot of how each QB did relative to the field with a clean pocket and under pressure. We see that Siemian was certainly not the highest rated passer, but he was on par (or better) than many veterans and high pick players (Manning, Wentz, Winston, Palmer, etc.)

https://media.profootballfocus.com/2017/05/Scott-1.png (https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/fantasy-football-metrics-that-matter-ryan-tannehill-struggles-under-pressure)

You can click the image below to go to Football outsiders and see the full list, including those above 12 in DYAR. This shows that he was 20-22 in the major rankings that Outsiders do. It's worth noting some of the big name vets/MVPs/high draft picks just above him or below him on the list.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_DVOA.JPG (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2016)

Poet
08-06-2017, 02:00 AM
Agreed. I think many of us underestimate the anchor that was Kubiak that was dragging Siemian and the whole offense down. It gives me no pleasure in saying that, because I loved Kubiak as a player, loved him as the OC, and was excited, but also concerned, when he was hired as OC. My concern was that he was a one trick pony that couldn't or wouldn't adjust if he didn't have a running game, and that's what we saw.

Oh, most of us knew how horrid Kubiak was. I think you were gone at the time, but there were multiple conversations where people who weren't high on TS did give him that acknowledgment - GK was the enemy of the offense last year...just not the main villain.

Tned
08-06-2017, 02:50 AM
Oh, most of us knew how horrid Kubiak was. I think you were gone at the time, but there were multiple conversations where people who weren't high on TS did give him that acknowledgment - GK was the enemy of the offense last year...just not the main villain.

Who was the main villain?

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 02:52 AM
Here's an interesting one.

How do you account for the huge discrepancy? One way to look at it is that when blitzed, there is a mismatch/open man and Siemian's high football IQ and quick release made teams pay. However, when there wasn't a blitz there would be tighter coverage and the Broncos line wasn't capable of providing pockets long enough for routes to develop and receivers to come open.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_blitz.JPG
PFF, BF people. That's your favorite.

Btw, what this does address is that teams didn't need to blitz.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 02:59 AM
Who was the main villain?

Don't feed the troll.

MOtorboat
08-06-2017, 03:07 AM
Because I was told earlier this week that it was unfair to compare Siemian to anything but quarterbacks in their first full year of starting, I did that with the Football Outsiders numbers for all of the quarterbacks on the +200 attempts chart from 2016.

The first chart is ranked by DYAR, which is essentially FO's WAR:


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%


Second is DVOA, which is essentially effectiveness of each play adjusted for down, distance, opponent and a whole lot of other variables.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


Third is VOA, DVOA without some variables, most notably, the strength of the opponent.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


EYDS, which is DVOA melded into a yard per play stat.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


I don't think this is condemnation of Siemian. I don't think it's a crowning of Siemian, either. It is what it is. There is potential for him to be a decent quarterback, but I don't think he played well last year. He's not trash, he's not Tebow or Akili Smith. He's certainly a pleasant surprise as a seventh round pick, and I certainly hope he will be good as he is the person that I believe will be announced out of the tunnel on opening night and, as long as he's healthy, all 16 games this season. I don't think Lynch is ready (just a gut feeling, I haven't watched any of training camp), Sloter is training camp fodder and Kelly is going to be on IR, or the third quarterback.

Tned
08-06-2017, 03:15 AM
PFF, BF people. That's your favorite.

Btw, what this does address is that teams didn't need to blitz.

Siemian was the 12th most blitzed QB last year. They might not have "needed to blitz" but clearly they did a lot.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 03:20 AM
Geek fight!

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 03:21 AM
Siemian was the 12th most blitzed QB last year. They might not have "needed to blitz" but clearly they did a lot.

Meh, I get blitzed more.

Tned
08-06-2017, 03:25 AM
Meh, I get blitzed more.

Translation: you discounted a stat with an assumption, when another stat provec your assumption wrong, you deflected with a quip.

Tned
08-06-2017, 03:31 AM
Because I was told earlier this week that it was unfair to compare Siemian to anything but quarterbacks in their first full year of starting, I did that with the Football Outsiders numbers for all of the quarterbacks on the +200 attempts chart from 2016.

The first chart is ranked by DYAR, which is essentially FO's WAR:


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%


Second is DVOA, which is essentially effectiveness of each play adjusted for down, distance, opponent and a whole lot of other variables.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


Third is VOA, DVOA without some variables, most notably, the strength of the opponent.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


EYDS, which is DVOA melded into a yard per play stat.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


I don't think this is condemnation of Siemian. I don't think it's a crowning of Siemian, either. It is what it is. There is potential for him to be a decent quarterback, but I don't think he played well last year. He's not trash, he's not Tebow or Akili Smith. He's certainly a pleasant surprise as a seventh round pick, and I certainly hope he will be good as he is the person that I believe will be announced out of the tunnel on opening night and, as long as he's healthy, all 16 games this season. I don't think Lynch is ready (just a gut feeling, I haven't watched any of training camp), Sloter is training camp fodder and Kelly is going to be on IR, or the third quarterback.

Puts him middle of the pack, with most of those above and below him QBs drafted far earlier, many who also started as rookies, not second year players.

As you said, doesn't condemn or crown, but at least shows he wasn't awful as a first year starter (as many contend) compared to other first year starters, but instead middle of the pack

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:39 AM
Translation: you discounted a stat with an assumption, when another stat provec your assumption wrong, you deflected with a quip.

Nope, Siemian got blitzed, never said he didn't. I said that teams didn't have to blitz, and they didn't, not with that OL. Waste of energy. I discounted your "provec" (whatever the **** that means) stat because my joke was more relevant.

Btw, I didn't discount your original stat, I agreed with it. I high fived the post, Siemian good when blitzed, never said otherwise.

Now I understand why you can't interpret the same sources correctly.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:18 AM
Who was the main villain?

The line.

Cugel
08-06-2017, 10:57 AM
Sweet Jumpin' Jeebus TNED! And people accuse me of lengthy posts! Talk about the Encyclopedia Britannica there!

Breaking one small paragraph off from that indigestible mass:


I think with Kelly we probably have the best QB of the lot. If you wiped out all history of the four QBs. Knew nothing about their careers, off field problems, etc. and simply put the top scout from all 32 teams into a room and had them watch film of the four QBs, with NO other facts or history to go on, only one of the QBs would be identified as a first round selection, and it would likely be nearly universal from the 32 scouts. So, Kelly has all of the physical skills to be an elite QB, he just might not have the brains/temperament to even be a backup. He's the very epitome of the high risk/high reward player, but by picking him last in the NFL, there isn't much risk, so let's say the epitome of a boom or bust QB.

Kelly will get his chance next season to start unless either Trevor or Paxton convinces John Elway that he's on his way to becoming the next Derek Carr, i.e. a top 10 QB. Right now they're both light years away.

Elway knows full well that what happened in 2015 was a one in a lifetime fluke. The '85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs, 2015 Broncos - none ever repeated winning with just defense and virtually no offense. The Bears for instance had a very good defense for years, but no joy because they'd get in the playoffs and they had Jim McMahon, and the Giants had Phil Simms and the 49ers had Joe Montana.

So, if the Broncos are to get past Brady and the Patriots or Roethlisberger and the Steelers, they need a top 10 QB. It's too much to expect that guy to be a Hall of Fame QB like Roethlisberger, Manning or Brady. But, they have to be 2nd tier. You're not going to find an Aaron Rogers or Drew Brees, or probably Phillip Rivers, but hopefully something like Russell Wilson, Joe Flacco, Derek Carr, Eli Manning - all guys who either have won SBs or could.

You can name your own list. But, for the Broncos to have a realistic chance, their QB just can't be TOO far behind Tom Brady. That's the dilemma that has thwarted the Chiefs for years - lots of talent on both sides of the ball now, but when they have Roethlisberger, and you have Alex Smith, you don't have much chance.

Put a decent QB on that Chiefs roster and maybe they beat the Steelers and go to Foxborough for the AFC Championship Game. Maybe (in their dreams) it's the Chiefs winning their first Super Bowl since they beat the Vikings. So, they draft Pat Mahomes.

Elway sees all this of course, and he's not going to be satisfied having the 3rd worst or worst QB in the division. So, the bar is set very high indeed. And either or both Siemian and Paxton winding up as the next Kyle Orton is just not good enough. If that's all they can do, then Elway will go back to the first round of the draft in 2018 and draft another franchise QB. Then they trade Siemian and start Paxton until either the rookie or Chad Kelly is ready to start. Then he backs up till the end of his contract, at which point they let him walk (4 years, no 5th year option in this scenario).

Tned
08-06-2017, 12:00 PM
Nope, Siemian got blitzed, never said he didn't. I said that teams didn't have to blitz, and they didn't, not with that OL. Waste of energy. I discounted your "provec" (whatever the **** that means) stat because my joke was more relevant.

Btw, I didn't discount your original stat, I agreed with it. I high fived the post, Siemian good when blitzed, never said otherwise.

Now I understand why you can't interpret the same sources correctly.

You are making a contention that teams didn't blitz the Broncos, but only 11 QBs were blitzed at a higher percentage than Siemian. What you just said isn't accurate.

Tned
08-06-2017, 12:01 PM
The line.

It's hard to discount them as the main villain, especially the tackles, but it will be interesting (and I hope we don't see it) to see how Stephenson and Sambrailo perform with a new scheme.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 12:19 PM
Geek fight!

Yeah and you stepped in and got smooshed.

NightTerror218
08-06-2017, 12:32 PM
Biggest think for any ypung QB is to overcome sophmore slump. Good QBs even struggle in year too. Others overcpme and some fail. This is what siemian is up against as well.

Tned
08-06-2017, 01:29 PM
Biggest think for any ypung QB is to overcome sophmore slump. Good QBs even struggle in year too. Others overcpme and some fail. This is what siemian is up against as well.

Agreed.

slim
08-06-2017, 01:35 PM
Because I was told earlier this week that it was unfair to compare Siemian to anything but quarterbacks in their first full year of starting, I did that with the Football Outsiders numbers for all of the quarterbacks on the +200 attempts chart from 2016.

The first chart is ranked by DYAR, which is essentially FO's WAR:


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%


Second is DVOA, which is essentially effectiveness of each play adjusted for down, distance, opponent and a whole lot of other variables.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


Third is VOA, DVOA without some variables, most notably, the strength of the opponent.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


EYDS, which is DVOA melded into a yard per play stat.


Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA QBR Rk Pass Yards EYds TD FK FL INT C%
K.Cousins WAS 1,023 7 1,125 5 16.9% 6 19.7% 70.1 6 570 3,979 4,329 29 2 3 11 69.8%
D.Prescott DAL 1,302 4 1,220 5 31.6% 3 28.9% 81.5 3 483 3,527 4,229 23 2 4 4 68.1%
A.Rodgers GB 708 12 746 10 8.5% 14 9.6% 66.9 8* 569 3,775 3,859 28 6 3 13 64.5%
E.Manning NYG 632 9 610 11 6.0% 17 5.4% 0.0 0 585 3,573 3,840 24 6 2 17 52.9%
A.Luck IND 257 19 366 17 -5.1% 19 -2.6% 65.0 11 662 4,089 3,793 23 5 5 17 55.0%
P.Rivers SD 891 6 931 6 17.4% 9 18.7% 0.0 0 490 3,203 3,724 22 4 2 9 62.4%
M.Ryan ATL 1,012 7 875 7 25.3% 4 20.3% 74.1 3 451 3,330 3,609 16 3 1 11 61.3%
A.Dalton CIN 575 12 485 12 5.6% 13 3.0% 45.6 26 540 3,224 3,550 20 1 2 13 58.3%
J.Winston TB 467 16 495 15 2.1% 16 2.9% 58.6 21 560 3,828 3,480 22 2 1 15 58.9%
R.Wilson SEA 872 8 741 12 19.7% 6 15.0% 69.6 8 432 2,935 3,467 26 3 3 9 64.6%
C.Kaepernick SF 791 8 650 13 16.6% 7 11.7% 68.6 7 456 2,969 3,358 21 1 3 7 58.4%
C.Newton CAR 404 15 428 13 0.8% 16 1.5% 55.0 18 551 3,810 3,287 21 3 2 17 60.3%
D.Brees SD 344 21 430 18 -1.3% 25 1.2% 0.0 0 548 3,104 3,279 17 2 0 15 61.1%
C.Wentz PHI -36 27 12 26 -12.0% 27 -10.8% 52.8 26 641 3,580 3,254 16 5 2 14 62.7%
T.Brady NE 491 13 494 12 5.4% 12 5.5% 0.0 0 456 2,625 3,059 18 9 3 11 64.1%
S.Bradford STL -178 39 -5 34 -15.6% 34 -11.3% 41.5 30 622 3,262 3,006 18 5 2 13 60.4%
D.Carr OAK -150 37 -355 41 -14.9% 34 -20.1% 38.4 34 622 3,071 2,969 21 5 4 12 58.9%
B.Rothlsbrgr PIT 908 11 843 10 31.7% 3 28.7% 0.0 0 326 2,393 2,942 17 0 2 10 67.2%
T.Siemian DEN 137 22 214 21 -7.1% 21 -4.8% 55.8 21 516 3,182 2,891 18 1 2 9 59.6%
C.Palmer CIN 393 17 206 18 2.6% 16 -4.0% 0.0 0 453 2,682 2,845 18 0 2 18 62.5%
T.Taylor BUF 536 14 486 16 9.8% 8 7.9% 67.8 7 417 2,810 2,790 20 5 1 6 63.7%
R.Tannehill MIA 39 25 86 24 -9.9% 25 -8.5% 52.3 19 517 3,069 2,694 12 2 3 13 58.5%
J.Flacco BAL 232 19 133 25 -3.0% 22 -6.5% 43.2 29 461 2,729 2,606 14 5 2 11 60.4%
B.Hoyer CLE 166 25 255 21 -5.3% 26 -2.2% 43.1 31 465 3,170 2,513 12 2 1 12 55.7%
A.Smith SF -147 38 -140 38 -16.0% 35 -15.8% 0.0 0 477 2,694 2,233 16 5 2 16 59.0%
B.Osweiler HOU -558 33 -502 33 -26.8% 33 -25.3% 55.3 22 535 2,739 2,105 15 3 1 15 59.5%
M.Mariota TEN -53 30 123 23 -13.2% 28 -6.4% 61.0 16 407 2,551 2,017 19 3 6 10 62.5%
R.Fitzpatrick CIN -315 37 -457 41 -22.9% 35 -28.1% 38.1 33 408 1,707 1,736 8 4 4 8 59.7%
C.Keenum LARM -183 31 -174 31 -19.5% 31 -19.1% 43.4 32 345 2,054 1,507 9 2 1 11 60.9%
B.Bortles JAC -955 44 -935 44 -40.7% 43 -40.0% 21.9 43 530 2,554 1,310 11 5 0 16 59.1%
C.Kessler CLE 50 24 80 25 -7.6% 22 -5.4% 49.6 28 218 1,225 1,196 6 3 1 2 66.0%
M.Stafford DET -653 45 -497 43 -36.6% 41 -30.6% 30.0 37 394 2,091 1,178 13 3 1 20 54.5%
M.Barkley CHI 4 26 127 23 -10.9% 26 -2.2% 39.2 33 222 1,568 1,150 8 0 2 13 59.7%
J.Goff LARM -881 34 -819 34 -74.8% 34 -70.3% 22.2 34 230 876 -85 5 3 2 7 54.9%


I don't think this is condemnation of Siemian. I don't think it's a crowning of Siemian, either. It is what it is. There is potential for him to be a decent quarterback, but I don't think he played well last year. He's not trash, he's not Tebow or Akili Smith. He's certainly a pleasant surprise as a seventh round pick, and I certainly hope he will be good as he is the person that I believe will be announced out of the tunnel on opening night and, as long as he's healthy, all 16 games this season. I don't think Lynch is ready (just a gut feeling, I haven't watched any of training camp), Sloter is training camp fodder and Kelly is going to be on IR, or the third quarterback.

It tells me he is Brian Hoyer, which I already knew because I have seen him play.

Tned
08-06-2017, 01:38 PM
It tells me he is Brian Hoyer, which I already knew because I have seen him play.

Or Flacco, Stafford, Carr, Palmer or Luck.

slim
08-06-2017, 01:38 PM
Or Flacco, Stafford, Carr, Palmer or Luck.

LOL, no.

Tned
08-06-2017, 01:42 PM
LOL, no.

LOL, if you are going to base it on what MO posted, then yes. Statistically, he was in par or better than those QBs in their first year starting.

Tned
08-06-2017, 02:24 PM
Nope, Siemian got blitzed, never said he didn't. I said that teams didn't have to blitz, and they didn't, not with that OL. Waste of energy. I discounted your "provec" (whatever the **** that means) stat because my joke was more relevant.

Btw, I didn't discount your original stat, I agreed with it. I high fived the post, Siemian good when blitzed, never said otherwise.

Now I understand why you can't interpret the same sources correctly.

As always, simply lashing out and mocking does not a substantiated point make.

I was replying on my phone, sorry for the typo, but hey, at least it gave you a chance to avoid a meaningful discussion and just take a caustic shot at someone. :tsk: :tsk:

As to your contention that teams didn't have to and didn't blitz due to the bad OL, here's some stats to counter your "pulled from Jaded's ass" opinion.

The rank I saw last night, put out by ESPN that I can't find now, showed I believe (going by memory now) that around 28% of Siemian's drop backs resulted in blitzes. There were only 11 QBs that were blitzed at a higher rate according to that chart.

Below, is the stat that Siemian took the fewest sacks in the NFL when blitzed, and shows that he was blitzed 167 times or roughly 12 times a game (which I guess in Jaded's world is almost never). Siemian averaged about 36 pass attempts a game, so that would represent being blitzed on about 1/3 of his pass attempts. I'm not sure what the difference is between the ESPN numbers and this calculation, but bottom line is that both stats show he was blitzed a lot.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_blitz_sacks.JPG

topscribe
08-06-2017, 03:26 PM
As always, simply lashing out and mocking does not a substantiated point make.

The rank I saw last night, put out by ESPN that I can't find now, showed I believe (going by memory now) that around 28% of Siemian's drop backs resulted in blitzes. There were only 11 QBs that were blitzed at a higher rate according to that chart.

Below, is the stat that Siemian took the fewest sacks in the NFL when blitzed, and shows that he was blitzed 167 times or roughly 12 times a game (which I guess in Jaded's world is almost never). Siemian averaged about 36 pass attempts a game, so that would represent being blitzed on about 1/3 of his pass attempts. I'm not sure what the difference is between the ESPN numbers and this calculation, but bottom line is that both stats show he was blitzed a lot.


A high five for the info, despite your being drawn into a pissing contest.

I might infer that Siemian was only the 12th most blitzed QB might be that the word got out pretty quickly that for a rookie he was pretty good against the blitz? Just a thought . . .

Canmore
08-06-2017, 03:27 PM
I think this is the epitome of the meaning of insanity.

(Thought I quoted Tned on starting Ty or Stephenson at right tackle.)

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:28 PM
Last year, the Broncos threw about 25 passes over 20 yards or so. I am not as sold on TS being that great against the blitz because one of the ways to beat the blitz is to attack with short passing. I'm not saying he didn't do well there. I just don't think it's as good as it looks first glance.

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:30 PM
LOL, if you are going to base it on what MO posted, then yes. Statistically, he was in par or better than those QBs in their first year starting.

A lot of those guys were pure rookies, though. Palmer sat for a year, and that comparison is a fair one. They both had bad lines, nice WR's, although Palmer had a better running game.

They both played in strong defensive divisions. Palmer had the Ravens and the Steelers, and the Raiders and the Chiefs are tough on D. Neither Palmer or TS had the best offensive coaching, either.

slim
08-06-2017, 03:31 PM
LOL, if you are going to base it on what MO posted, then yes. Statistically, he was in par or better than those QBs in their first year starting.

I'm not basing anything off of what MO posted.

I have seen all of those QBs play and TS is not in their class.

He is Brian Hoyer. That's who he is.

topscribe
08-06-2017, 03:31 PM
Last year, the Broncos threw about 25 passes over 20 yards or so. I am not as sold on TS being that great against the blitz because one of the ways to beat the blitz is to attack with short passing. I'm not saying he didn't do well there. I just don't think it's as good as it looks first glance.
Well, if TS threw 25% of his passes over 20 yards and he was sacked only four times, wouldn't that speak well of him?



A lot of those guys were pure rookies, though. Palmer sat for a year, and that comparison is a fair one. They both had bad lines, nice WR's, although Palmer had a better running game.

They both played in strong defensive divisions. Palmer had the Ravens and the Steelers, and the Raiders and the Chiefs are tough on D. Neither Palmer or TS had the best offensive coaching, either.

Don't kid yourself, my friend. TS was a pure rookie, despite his lingering on the bench all the previous year and its preseason. My daddy used to say that you don't learn bartending by sitting on the other side of the bar. TS had absolutely no experience on the field.

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:31 PM
I think this is the epitome of the meaning of insanity.

I don't agree - this has been a really good thread. Some strong information is out there and has been presented. Tned's idea to start this thread was a solid one.

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:32 PM
Well, if TS threw 25% of his passes over 20 yards and he was sacked only four times, wouldn't that speak well of him?

I don't know. I think I failed to articulate my point, but I see what you're saying.

Canmore
08-06-2017, 03:34 PM
I don't agree - this has been a really good thread. Some strong information is out there and has been presented. Tned's idea to start this thread was a solid one.

See my edit. Thought I quoted Tned. Obviously didn't.

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:37 PM
Don't kid yourself, my friend. TS was a pure rookie, despite his lingering on the bench all the previous year and its preseason. My daddy used to say that you don't learn bartending by sitting on the other side of the bar. TS had absolutely no experience on the field.

We disagree on him being a rookie. He got to spend time with veterans in the QB meetings, practiced with the PS, etc. Your father's wisdom makes a lot of sense - I would think that you could gain experience watching bartenders work while training under them. There's no wrong or right, and I understand why you feel the way that you do - It's just as valid as my opinion. :salute:

slim
08-06-2017, 03:39 PM
My daddy used to slap me on the back of the head and say "get me a beer, boy".

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:39 PM
My daddy used to slap me on the back of the head and say "get me a beer, boy".

My daddy sicked scorpions on me. But we've been over this!

topscribe
08-06-2017, 03:39 PM
My daddy used to slap me on the back of the head and say "get me a beer, boy".
lol

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:43 PM
lol

It's funny until you realize he trained them to attack in waves!

Tned
08-06-2017, 03:44 PM
Last year, the Broncos threw about 25 passes over 20 yards or so. I am not as sold on TS being that great against the blitz because one of the ways to beat the blitz is to attack with short passing. I'm not saying he didn't do well there. I just don't think it's as good as it looks first glance.

Should he have beat the blitz by holding the ball for 3 seconds or more, while waiting for twenty plus yard routes to develop?

Doesn't that fly in the face of the Villian we recently discussed?

If blitzed, the goal is to make an adjustment and take advantage of the mismatch resulting from sending an extra rusher and either quickly hit a receiver or throw the ball away.

So, as it relates to handling the blitz, what part doesn't look as good as "at first glance." I'm not following your line of thinking.

Poet
08-06-2017, 03:48 PM
Should he have beat the blitz by holding the ball for 3 seconds or more, while waiting for twenty plus yard routes to develop?

Doesn't that fly in the face of the Villian we recently discussed?

If blitzed, the goal is to make an adjustment and take advantage of the mismatch resulting from sending an extra rusher and either quickly hit a receiver or throw the ball away.

So, as it relates to handling the blitz, what part doesn't look as good as "at first glance." I'm not following your line of thinking.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if the system is predicated on almost no long passes, he should have success against the blitz. And lord knows that the Villain was...villainous.

I guess the simplest way to say it would be something like 'if he wasn't successful against the blitz, he would have had very little overall success at all, because the system was set up for that to be the case.

And that's why in the last quarter of the season, teams stopped blitzing us, and played mostly coverage.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 03:51 PM
You are making a contention that teams didn't blitz the Broncos, but only 11 QBs were blitzed at a higher percentage than Siemian. What you just said isn't accurate.

No, I'm saying teams didn't have to blitz, meaning, they can get pressure without blitzing because the OL is/was pure wet shit. You blitz/Siemian does well, you rush three/you still pound a mud hole in Siemian and still play a more sound defense.

Your original stat said nothing about how often he was blitzed and neither did I.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 03:58 PM
As always, simply lashing out and mocking does not a substantiated point make.

I was replying on my phone, sorry for the typo, but hey, at least it gave you a chance to avoid a meaningful discussion and just take a caustic shot at someone. :tsk: :tsk:

As to your contention that teams didn't have to and didn't blitz due to the bad OL, here's some stats to counter your "pulled from Jaded's ass" opinion.

The rank I saw last night, put out by ESPN that I can't find now, showed I believe (going by memory now) that around 28% of Siemian's drop backs resulted in blitzes. There were only 11 QBs that were blitzed at a higher rate according to that chart.

Below, is the stat that Siemian took the fewest sacks in the NFL when blitzed, and shows that he was blitzed 167 times or roughly 12 times a game (which I guess in Jaded's world is almost never). Siemian averaged about 36 pass attempts a game, so that would represent being blitzed on about 1/3 of his pass attempts. I'm not sure what the difference is between the ESPN numbers and this calculation, but bottom line is that both stats show he was blitzed a lot.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_blitz_sacks.JPG

JFC, you dense mother******, I agreed with your point that he's damn good when blitzed. My "pulled out of Jaded's ass"point pertains to WHEN HE'S NOT BLITZED. They get better results WHEN THEY DONT BLITZ.

Your original post contained information about when he wasn't blitzed, focus on that.

Tned
08-06-2017, 03:59 PM
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if the system is predicated on almost no long passes, he should have success against the blitz. And lord knows that the Villain was...villainous.

I guess the simplest way to say it would be something like 'if he wasn't successful against the blitz, he would have had very little overall success at all, because the system was set up for that to be the case.

And that's why in the last quarter of the season, teams stopped blitzing us, and played mostly coverage.

Conversely, if the system was predicated on short, but slow developing play action (not ideal to beat blitz) passing behind a villainous line, then isn't it hard to hold the lack of 20+ yard passes against him?

See where i'm going? We can't have it both ways. Except for truly extraordinary QBs like Elway (who was benched multiple times his first year of starting), QBs have to work with what they are given in terms of scheme, play calling and protection.

Poet
08-06-2017, 04:03 PM
Conversely, if the system was predicated on short, but slow developing play action (not ideal to beat blitz) passing behind a villainous line, then isn't it hard to hold the lack of 20+ yard passes against him?

See where i'm going? We can't have it both ways. Except for truly extraordinary QBs like Elway (who was benched multiple times his first year of starting), QBs have to work with what they are given in terms of scheme, play calling and protection.

No, I think it's more complex than just one or the other. Because when TS did throw deep, especially on out routes, he didn't really do all that great. We would count the overthrows on deep balls, and the underthrows, in the gameday thread. He didn't seem to be that great working the middle of the field, but that does come with time. A bad line doesn't absolve him of the throws he botched when he did get some time. And he wasn't under duress every last play.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:05 PM
.

Your original stat said nothing about how often he was blitzed and neither did I.

Lol, you first quipped "meh, I get blitzed more."

Then later, doubled down.


Nope, Siemian got blitzed, never said he didn't. I said that teams didn't have to blitz, and they didn't, not with that OL. Waste of energy. I discounted your "provec" (whatever the **** that means) stat because my joke was more relevant.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:05 PM
Here's an interesting one.

How do you account for the huge discrepancy? One way to look at it is that when blitzed, there is a mismatch/open man and Siemian's high football IQ and quick release made teams pay. However, when there wasn't a blitz there would be tighter coverage and the Broncos line wasn't capable of providing pockets long enough for routes to develop and receivers to come open.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/trevor_blitz.JPG
'Yards per attempt/no blitz"

Please tell me you can see that, left side of Siemian, right by the football.

Focus on that, Corky!

I high fived this post, ffs.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:07 PM
Lol, you first quipped "meh, I get blitzed more."

Then later, doubled down.

I quipped because you're off in the complete opposite direction. You're wrong! Go back to the beginning and let me know when you've caught up.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:09 PM
No, I think it's more complex than just one or the other. Because when TS did throw deep, especially on out routes, he didn't really do all that great. We would count the overthrows on deep balls, and the underthrows, in the gameday thread. He didn't seem to be that great working the middle of the field, but that does come with time. A bad line doesn't absolve him of the throws he botched when he did get some time. And he wasn't under duress every last play.

The only throw he was routinely inaccurate on, was the out routes to the right and he routinely missed those badly. You seen to equate those with long throws, but they aren't. They are typically short to intermediate throws.

Regardless, he sucked on out routes to the right.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:11 PM
I quipped because you're off in the complete opposite direction. You're wrong! Go back to the beginning and let me know when you've caught up.

If you want to join the discussion, and not be a drive by troll, great and I look forward to the discussion. I'm not holding my breath.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:13 PM
Focus on that, Corky!

.

A decade later, and just as rude and caustic.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:14 PM
If you don't have to blitz to get pressure/sacks (and they didn't) that does not mean that you never blitz, that means you can do whatever the **** your little heart desires. I guess I'm assumed you knew that, what, with all that reading you do.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:16 PM
A decade later, and just as rude and caustic.

Look who's talking, the guy that admits he had to leave his own MB because he wanted people to actually enjoy it.

You're the one started this pissing contest, because a decade later, still arrogant and condescending.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:22 PM
If you don't have to blitz to get pressure/sacks (and they didn't) that does not mean that you never blitz, that means you can do whatever the **** your little heart desires. I guess I'm assumed you knew that, what, with all that reading you do.

You "can take a shit in town hall" but I'm assuming you don't. What they "can" do doesn't matter, it's what they did do that matters. The Broncos were blitzed more than 20 other teams, almost all of whom had better offensive lines.

I really don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:27 PM
Look who's talking, the guy that admits he had to leave his own MB because he wanted people to actually enjoy it.

You're the one started this pissing contest, because a decade later, still arrogant and condescending.

If you can't understand simple stats like percentages blitzed, you surely can't understand more nuanced concepts like why I took a break or complicated topics like light switches or tieng your shoes and the like.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-06-2017, 04:28 PM
I think one of my kids just farted in the truck. Isn't there an unwritten rule not to hotbox your family, or anyone for that matter?

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:29 PM
You "can take a shit in curry hall" but I'm assuming you don't. What they "can" do doesn't matter, it's what they did do that matters. The Broncos were blitzed more than 20 other teams, almost all of whom had better offensive lines.

I really don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend.
Me comprehend?

It's my point we're arguing about, because of some stat you read on your smart somewhere but vaguely remember and has nothing to do with my point whatsoever, you're the one that can't comprehend.

Your original post said nothing about how often he was blitzed, neither did I. I'm talking about the point I MADE, you're talking the point you THINK I made but didn't. Teams had the luxury of doing whatever the **** they wanted.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:34 PM
Me comprehend?

It's my point we're arguing about, because of some stat you read on your smart somewhere but vaguely remember and has nothing to do with my point whatsoever, you're the one that can't comprehend.

Your original post said nothing about how often he was blitzed, neither did I. I'm talking about the point I MADE, you're talking the point you THINK I made but didn't. Teams had the luxury of doing whatever the **** they wanted.

Yet they blitzed. Jeez dude, get a grip.

Any chance we can get back to a discussion and not just you being a troll?

If you have a point, make it, rather than idiotic quips like "meh, I was blitzed more."

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:37 PM
If you can't understand simple stats like percentages blitzed, you surely can't understand more nuanced concepts like why I took a break or complicated topics like light switches or tieng your shoes and the like.
*Tying

You worry about the stats, and keep 'em coming cause I'm doing just fine.

I like to tie my shoes just tight enough that I can still slip them on without having to tie them every time I put them on/take them off. How's that for nuanced?

What little I know about your break is everything you told me, didn't feel like I need to know what you weren't telling us.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:42 PM
*Tying

You worry about the stats, and keep 'em coming cause I'm doing just fine.

I like to tie my shoes just tight enough that I can still slip them on without having to tie them every time I put them on/take them off. How's that for nuanced?

On a phone while watching Unabomber mini series while dealing with a troll.

I don't care about typos, but I understand that small thinking trolls like to attack spelling/grammar errors to feel like big men. Whatever makes you feel good, buddy.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:44 PM
Yet they blitzed. Jeez dude, get a grip.

Any chance we can get back to a discussion and not just you being a troll?

If you have a point, make it, rather than idiotic quips like "meh, I was blitzed more."

It feels like my point is too nuanced for you, I gotta honest.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:45 PM
What little I know about your break is everything you told me, didn't feel like I need to know what you weren't telling us.

Since you keep going there, then simply put I don't take shit from condescending _____ like you, and when I respond in kind, it puts mods in a tough place, because in the "owner."

So why don't you drop it and stop bringing it up in football threads?

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:46 PM
On a phone while watching Unabomber mini series while dealing with a troll.

I don't care about typos, but I understand that small thinking trolls like to attack spelling/grammar errors to feel like big men. Whatever makes you feel good, buddy.

A troll that actually agreed with the post you're making a pissing contest over.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:47 PM
It feels like my point is too nuanced for you, I gotta honest.

If I a was a dick/troll, I would point out your typo.

Can we get back to the OPs topic now?

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:51 PM
Since you keep going there, then simply put I don't take shit from condescending _____ like you, and when I respond in kind, it puts mods in a tough place, because in the "owner."

So why don't you drop it and stop bringing it up in football threads?

I'm the condescending ____?

I was agreeing with you, I high fived that post.

Btw, i brought it once, you talk about more than I do.

Mods, feel free to allow Tned to let his demons run, I like it better this way. Say what you wanna say.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:52 PM
If I a was a dick/troll, I would point out your typo.

Can we get back to the OPs topic now?

Do you understand the topic?

Btw, what was the typo? I gotta stay on point so my point doesn't get lost in the pissing contest.

Tned
08-06-2017, 04:54 PM
Do you understand the topic?

:coffee:

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:56 PM
:coffee:

No you didn't!

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 04:59 PM
Seriously, what was the typo?

ShaneFalco
08-06-2017, 05:01 PM
Siemian is the GOAT

Tned
08-06-2017, 05:03 PM
Seriously, what was the typo?

Bolded.


It feels like my point is too nuanced for you, I gotta honest.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 05:15 PM
Bolded.

The "be" is inferred.

Tned
08-06-2017, 05:24 PM
The "be" is inferred.

That explains the confusion on a lot of your posts I suppose. There must be a lot we are supposed to infer, and if we did, it would make sense. "To honest", I didn't realize we were supposed to infer so much.

I could care less about the typo, and I knew what you meant, I was just showing that I could be a dick and point out typos as well. The only time I point out other people's typos is when they have done so to be a dick to someone or if they are one of the forum grammar nazis, which every forum seems to have.

As I've said multiple times now, I would welcome getting back to King's topic.

Tned
08-06-2017, 06:05 PM
King,

Getting back on your topic.

I think one of the things we've laid out is that Siemian matches up pretty well statistically with other first year starters. By no means did he have the best first year ever, but he's middle of the pack of the group that MO provided (only current starting QBs - a few arguably aren't starters anymore). So, of all the current QBs, he's middle of the back compared to their first year starting. It of course didn't include all of the first and second rounders that washed out after a year or so of starting over the last decade or two, which is fine.

It's safe to say that just because his first years stats were better than Carr, Mariotta, Stafford and others, and on par with Flacco, Palmer, Luck and others, doesn't mean he will be as good as the ones he's on par with and better than those his first year was better than. Instead, it just shows that he didn't have a horrible performance as a first year starter, especially when you take into account factors us fans witnessed week in and week out (poor line, Kubiak play calling, no reliable TE/slot, etc.).

Where does that leave us with Siemian? He's not as awful as the pro-Lynch/anti-Siemian crowd would claim, but he's also not shown enough for us to know what type of QB he can be long term.

In Lynch, we know he was extremely bad in this first two starts. So bad that even with Siemian having to take pain killing injections to make it through the games and clearly having lost velocity and accuracy, that the coaches couldn't stick with Lynch, because he was too far from being ready. An injured and under-performing Siemian was still a better option to the coaches than a healthy Lynch. Not unsurprising, considering the college system Lynch came from.

So, in the end, we know that Siemian can probably be a bottom half, game manager type starting QB in this league and there are plenty of teams that would be happy to even have that in the QB spot (I don't count the Broncos as one of those teams other than as a stop gap). What we don't know is if he can be a top 15 or better QB in this league. Based on camp reports, it's looking increasingly likely that we are going to get a chance to see more of what Siemian can and can't do, but Lynch might very well turn it on under the lights of real(ish) games.

In Lynch, we don't know anything more than we saw from his first two games. The camp reports we are getting, while indicating improvement on some of his fundamentals, still indicate a QB that isn't comfortable and is making a lot of mistakes and poor reads. The good news is that he will have two, and possibly three, games to turn that around and make a run at the starting job. Obviously his cannon arm and greater size (although reports of tipped balls are concerning) and mobility would be a big advantage, if all else was equal between the two QBs.

So, I would submit that it's less important that we sell you on either QB and instead wait and see if either of them can sell the coaches and us by their performance in the preseason games.

Poet
08-06-2017, 06:16 PM
The only throw he was routinely inaccurate on, was the out routes to the right and he routinely missed those badly. You seen to equate those with long throws, but they aren't. They are typically short to intermediate throws.

Regardless, he sucked on out routes to the right.

He was poor on outs, too. And there are some deep outs, etc. IIRC, he was just bad on outs.

He was really, really, really bad on deep passing. https://brickwallblitz.wordpress.com/2017/03/26/the-2016-17-deep-ball-project-part-33/

FWIW, for overall production, he wasn't that great, either. https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-nfl-quarterbacks-this-season

I saw a lot of issues with the cast that he had, I did. But I also saw a lot of issues in his play that I think people excused because he was easy to root for. Young kid, really nice guy, sharp, worked hard, wanted to do everything he could, replacing a legend, etc. But I think those attributes kind of blinded people to his flaws. He cannot make up the difference for a deficient team.

When I see this level of performance, and it's coming from a seventh rounder, it's hard for me to think that it's not just as much him as it is anything else.

Poet
08-06-2017, 06:34 PM
King,

Getting back on your topic.

I think one of the things we've laid out is that Siemian matches up pretty well statistically with other first year starters. By no means did he have the best first year ever, but he's middle of the pack of the group that MO provided (only current starting QBs - a few arguably aren't starters anymore). So, of all the current QBs, he's middle of the back compared to their first year starting. It of course didn't include all of the first and second rounders that washed out after a year or so of starting over the last decade or two, which is fine.

It's safe to say that just because his first years stats were better than Carr, Mariotta, Stafford and others, and on par with Flacco, Palmer, Luck and others, doesn't mean he will be as good as the ones he's on par with and better than those his first year was better than. Instead, it just shows that he didn't have a horrible performance as a first year starter, especially when you take into account factors us fans witnessed week in and week out (poor line, Kubiak play calling, no reliable TE/slot, etc.).

Where does that leave us with Siemian? He's not as awful as the pro-Lynch/anti-Siemian crowd would claim, but he's also not shown enough for us to know what type of QB he can be long term.

In Lynch, we know he was extremely bad in this first two starts. So bad that even with Siemian having to take pain killing injections to make it through the games and clearly having lost velocity and accuracy, that the coaches couldn't stick with Lynch, because he was too far from being ready. An injured and under-performing Siemian was still a better option to the coaches than a healthy Lynch. Not unsurprising, considering the college system Lynch came from.

So, in the end, we know that Siemian can probably be a bottom half, game manager type starting QB in this league and there are plenty of teams that would be happy to even have that in the QB spot (I don't count the Broncos as one of those teams other than as a stop gap). What we don't know is if he can be a top 15 or better QB in this league. Based on camp reports, it's looking increasingly likely that we are going to get a chance to see more of what Siemian can and can't do, but Lynch might very well turn it on under the lights of real(ish) games.

In Lynch, we don't know anything more than we saw from his first two games. The camp reports we are getting, while indicating improvement on some of his fundamentals, still indicate a QB that isn't comfortable and is making a lot of mistakes and poor reads. The good news is that he will have two, and possibly three, games to turn that around and make a run at the starting job. Obviously his cannon arm and greater size (although reports of tipped balls are concerning) and mobility would be a big advantage, if all else was equal between the two QBs.

So, I would submit that it's less important that we sell you on either QB and instead wait and see if either of them can sell the coaches and us by their performance in the preseason games.

I think that he did match up okay, but I want to see him match up vs their sophomore years. I don't think we can agree on the 'was he a rookie thing' at all. I'm not sure that he was actually better, either. Because a lot of those guys were asked to do more form an offensive standpoint than he. Then again, they probably had better playcalling, too.

I take issue with saying that Lynch was bad. On a ratio, he was on par with TS. And, if we are to accept the logic of TS being a rookie, then PL was more impressive because he was a verified rookie, he was a rawer prospect coming out of college, and he had less prep time. So, if TS was playing on an acceptable level, I'm not sure how PL wasn't?

I'm also not sure he's making that many mistakes, because his pick total and TD total is similar to TS. That's my issue - we can say that PL is behind TS, but his production thus far hasn't been. We can say that TS is ahead of him, but for every session TS has had that was good, PL was been on par with him. And my fear is that we have just delayed trying to develop PL. Because I'll be honest, I don't believe in TS. I think he can be just good enough to keep starting, when PL would be marginally worse. And if PL is just marginally worse overall, then I can't see the logic saying that PL should be on the bench, it delays his development for a small short term gain that might be negligible anyway.

Tned
08-06-2017, 06:38 PM
He was poor on outs, too. And there are some deep outs, etc. IIRC, he was just bad on outs.

He was really, really, really bad on deep passing. https://brickwallblitz.wordpress.com/2017/03/26/the-2016-17-deep-ball-project-part-33/

FWIW, for overall production, he wasn't that great, either. https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-nfl-quarterbacks-this-season

I saw a lot of issues with the cast that he had, I did. But I also saw a lot of issues in his play that I think people excused because he was easy to root for. Young kid, really nice guy, sharp, worked hard, wanted to do everything he could, replacing a legend, etc. But I think those attributes kind of blinded people to his flaws. He cannot make up the difference for a deficient team.

When I see this level of performance, and it's coming from a seventh rounder, it's hard for me to think that it's not just as much him as it is anything else.

Yet that performance was much better than many first, second and third rounders. I do caution some of you guys always going back to the "he was a seventh rounder" well. Rod Smith was undrafted. Brady was a 6th rounder. Harris undrafted. List goes on. His seventh round status meant that statistically, he was a HUGE long shot to ever start in the NFL (other than maybe a spot injury start), but now that we are past that, we should just focus on his production.

I didn't say he was accurate on anything other than the outs to the right, just that those are the once he was constantly awful on. He was inconsistent on deep throws, just not awful to the same level as the outs to the right where he often missed by many yards on a 10-15 yard throw.

If you look at that page you pasted, yes he was bottom of the league on 20+ throws, which I don't think comes as a surprise. What was surprising to me from that page was how many "good QBs" were on par or worse:

For instance, in the 16+ range, he was the 12th most accurate QB and there was a 10% difference between his completion percent and accuracy percent (which means he was the victim of dropped balls and the like). It's not the largest gap, but it's larger than many.

On 20+ his accuracy dropped off and he fell to 25th, but it put him on part or better than many good QBs like Winston (considered up and comer by most), Flacco, Dalton, Cousins, Mariotta (again, supposed up and comer in his second year).

I think your stat page just reinforces what I've been saying for quite some time. Siemian was far from awful and instead performed quite nicely for a first year starter and while there isn't enough evidence that he will be "great" there is plenty of areas that he excelled in that shows promise that he can at minimum be a quality starter in this league.

Tned
08-06-2017, 06:47 PM
I think that he did match up okay, but I want to see him match up vs their sophomore years. I don't think we can agree on the 'was he a rookie thing' at all. I'm not sure that he was actually better, either. Because a lot of those guys were asked to do more form an offensive standpoint than he. Then again, they probably had better playcalling, too.

I've never used the term rookie with Siemian (or don't believe I ever have), so that issue is with others, obviously. At the same time, there is no substitute for playing in games, which is the very argument that yourself and others make when it comes to one of the reasons to start Lynch -- get him experience and see what he can do.

You also can't discount the fact that with Manning and the heir apparent Osweiler on the field, Siemian got little other than scout team reps and no game time. So, you also cannot seriously make a case for comparing his first year starting to the sophmore years of other players. That's ludicrous.

I think where we can meet in the middle is that true rookie starters have to be given the edge when compared to similar performance by a player starting in his second year (like Siemian), but also that it's absolutely ridiculous to compare the performance of a second year starter like Winston, Mariotta or anyone else's second year of starting to Siemian's first and claim that it's apples to apples.


I take issue with saying that Lynch was bad. On a ratio, he was on par with TS. And, if we are to accept the logic of TS being a rookie, then PL was more impressive because he was a verified rookie, he was a rawer prospect coming out of college, and he had less prep time. So, if TS was playing on an acceptable level, I'm not sure how PL wasn't?


You may take issue, but anyone (obviously including the coaches) that watched them saw that. He's most ardent supporters in the media jumped off his bandwagon. His most ardent supporters on here, jumped off his bandwagon after the second start (in terms of him being a better option last year) and instead just relegated themselves to consider slicing their wrists or gauging out their eyes.

You have no place to go with this. Your contention is without merit. You don't often here me say something in those terms, but that's how ludicrous your contention on this is.


I'm also not sure he's making that many mistakes, because his pick total and TD total is similar to TS. That's my issue - we can say that PL is behind TS, but his production thus far hasn't been. We can say that TS is ahead of him, but for every session TS has had that was good, PL was been on par with him. And my fear is that we have just delayed trying to develop PL. Because I'll be honest, I don't believe in TS. I think he can be just good enough to keep starting, when PL would be marginally worse. And if PL is just marginally worse overall, then I can't see the logic saying that PL should be on the bench, it delays his development for a small short term gain that might be negligible anyway.


You can only say that if you make the case that the entire pool of media covering the Broncos is somehow colluding to feed us false propaganda. Read the reports from any number of outlets and beat reporters.

Anyway, it's all moot and maybe the media is somehow in Siemian's corner and lying about what they see, but in the end it's all going to come down to how the QBs perform on Thursday and the one or two preseason games to follow (if they are close, it probably goes to the third game).

Tned
08-06-2017, 06:50 PM
King, let's take a shot at some middle ground. Can you agree with this assertion I've made several times:

Based on what we saw last year, Siemian is probably capable of being a bottom half starting QB in the NFL, and we haven't seen enough evidence to see if he can be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league?

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:01 PM
Yet that performance was much better than many first, second and third rounders. I do caution some of you guys always going back to the "he was a seventh rounder" well. Rod Smith was undrafted. Brady was a 6th rounder. Harris undrafted. List goes on. His seventh round status meant that statistically, he was a HUGE long shot to ever start in the NFL (other than maybe a spot injury start), but now that we are past that, we should just focus on his production.

I didn't say he was accurate on anything other than the outs to the right, just that those are the once he was constantly awful on. He was inconsistent on deep throws, just not awful to the same level as the outs to the right where he often missed by many yards on a 10-15 yard throw.

If you look at that page you pasted, yes he was bottom of the league on 20+ throws, which I don't think comes as a surprise. What was surprising to me from that page was how many "good QBs" were on par or worse:

For instance, in the 16+ range, he was the 12th most accurate QB and there was a 10% difference between his completion percent and accuracy percent (which means he was the victim of dropped balls and the like). It's not the largest gap, but it's larger than many.

On 20+ his accuracy dropped off and he fell to 25th, but it put him on part or better than many good QBs like Winston (considered up and comer by most), Flacco, Dalton, Cousins, Mariotta (again, supposed up and comer in his second year).

I think your stat page just reinforces what I've been saying for quite some time. Siemian was far from awful and instead performed quite nicely for a first year starter and while there isn't enough evidence that he will be "great" there is plenty of areas that he excelled in that shows promise that he can at minimum be a quality starter in this league.



Was his performance actually better than a lot of first rounders? Or was it better than a lot of first rounders that panned out? In regards to the notion that he's a seventh rounder and they barely pan out, I get it. There are guys who make into the HoF as seventh rounders or less. But I tend to focus on the odds of it. And it is hard for me to just focus on his production when I'm looking at a guy who has seventh round talent. How does a guy with marginal ability ever get to the point where he can carry a bad team? How does he overcome bad weather? Or injuries to himself and others? How much of a burden can we actually put on him? Last year people got upset when the defense had some sputters; I felt bad for the defense because the offense was never going to step it up. And when I see a bad offense, I like to look at the line, the coach, and the QB. Well, our coach was bad. We had a fledgling QB. The line was bad. We got a new coach. We upgraded the line's talent, at the least. And right now the incumbent starter has marginally separated himself from the first rounder. So I look for improvement...

I'm saying that he's bad at throwing the ball deep. And the stats back that up - the fact that we barely threw the ball deep at all also doesn't make me think that the team had confidence in him or the line. TS has not improved much in camp on deep throws or the outroutes. Those really hurt us last year. And it's not the end of the world, but it is bad. He has some strengths, like the intermediate routes...

He was fine on the 16+ plus throws and he was just bad on the throws 20+ throws. And while he might be on par with some good QB's, they have other attributes that make up for their respective issues with the deep ball. And I can tell you from personal experience being on par with Dalton and Cousins on deep ball passing usually isn't good. So, what happens if TS isn't able to help the offense in the passing game with big plays? I think we're all expecting the defense to fall back this year. We're in the toughest division in football. I don't think we can afford to have an offense that isn't solid.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:03 PM
King, let's take a shot at some middle ground. Can you agree with this assertion I've made several times:

Based on what we saw last year, Siemian is probably capable of being a bottom half starting QB in the NFL, and we haven't seen enough evidence to see if he can be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league?

Yes on the first. Unsure on the second.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:08 PM
Yes on the first. Unsure on the second.

Ok, unsure on the second means you feel we have seen iron clad, unequivocal evidence that he IS capable of being a top 15 QB or iron clad evidence that he can't.

Are you really going to claim either and be unwilling to agree that we haven't seen enough to know for sure?

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:11 PM
Ok, unsure on the second means you feel we have seen iron clad, unequivocal evidence that he IS capable of being a top 15 QB or iron clad evidence that he can't.

Are you really going to claim either and be unwilling to agree that we haven't seen enough to know for sure?

We have seen guys with similar talent be a top half QB. TS compares to Jeff Garcia, for instance. However, I never saw anything last year where TS flashed using his ability to be that productive. TS reminds me of Jon Kitna.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:13 PM
We have seen guys with similar talent be a top half QB. TS compares to Jeff Garcia, for instance. However, I never saw anything last year where TS flashed using his ability to be that productive. TS reminds me of Jon Kitna.

So, you saw incontrovertible evidence that he can't be a top 15 QB?

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:16 PM
So, you saw incontrovertible evidence that he can't be a top 15 QB?

No. But I didnt' see anything that suggest he could be, either. Some C students end up getting A's in a class, others get F's. Some people stay at the C level for whatever class it is. And this is the fundamental issue: it's hard to sell me on TS because of that.

But this thread has been incredible.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:20 PM
No. But I didnt' see anything that suggest he could be, either. Some C students end up getting A's in a class, others get F's. Some people stay at the C level for whatever class it is. And this is the fundamental issue: it's hard to sell me on TS because of that.

But this thread has been incredible.

So, let me try again, because I didn't say there was evidence that be could be top 15. I said:


Based on what we saw last year, Siemian is probably capable of being a bottom half starting QB in the NFL, and we haven't seen enough evidence to see if he can be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league?

Freyaka
08-06-2017, 07:25 PM
So, let me try again, because I didn't say there was evidence that be could be top 15. I said:


Based on what we saw last year, Siemian is probably capable of being a bottom half starting QB in the NFL, and we haven't seen enough evidence to see if he can be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league?


:D .

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:26 PM
So, let me try again, because I didn't say there was evidence that be could be top 15. I said:


Based on what we saw last year, Siemian is probably capable of being a bottom half starting QB in the NFL, and we haven't seen enough evidence to see if he can be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league?


We have not seen enough evidence to definitively say he cannot be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:30 PM
We have not seen enough evidence to definitively say he cannot be a top 15 (or better) QB in this league.

Your word parsing aside, that's all I've been saying regarding Siemian. He's shown enough to indicate be can be a starter in the NFL, but not enough to show be can be a good to great one.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 07:34 PM
Does a PFF or FO have a breakdown of how efficient a QB is at each route? I'm assuming that in depth analysis is for members only.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:35 PM
Your word parsing aside, that's all I've been saying regarding Siemian. He's shown enough to indicate be can be a starter in the NFL, but not enough to show be can be a good to great one.

I gave what would likely be the most accurate statement we can give - because we have to go off of what we saw, and what we saw was a guy with a lot of flaws in his game. Assume you're putting it in the best light, I'm putting it in the worst light, and call it somewhere in the middle. What would make anyone want to bet on him being that type of guy? Nothing about how well he did under the circumstances, etc. What about him?

I really think he's Jon Kitna.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:36 PM
Does a PFF or FO have a breakdown of how efficient a QB is at each route? I'm assuming that in depth analysis is for members only.

Not just members, but the $200 a year membership if they have it at that level.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 07:38 PM
There's no argument in the sports world worth $200.oo.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:39 PM
I gave what would likely be the most accurate statement we can give - because we have to go off of what we saw, and what we saw was a guy with a lot of flaws in his game. Assume you're putting it in the best light, I'm putting it in the worst light, and call it somewhere in the middle. What would make anyone want to bet on him being that type of guy? Nothing about how well he did under the circumstances, etc. What about him?

I really think he's Jon Kitna.

Nope, not putting it in the best light at all, that would be akin to what you have done with Lynch's starts :)

I'm simply staging the obvious, which is we don't know one way or the other. Just like we have no evidence one way or the other if Lynch can be a top 15 QB.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:40 PM
Not just members, but the $200 a year membership if they have it at that level.

Holy shit.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:41 PM
Nope, not putting it in the best light at all, that would be akin to what you have done with Lynch's starts :)

I'm simply staging the obvious, which is we don't know one way or the other. Just like we have no evidence one way or the other if Lynch can be a top 15 QB.

You have been very kind to TS. And to be honest, just posting the ratio's and noting that PL was on par with that, in a worse statement, is just being factually sound.

We don't know one way or another, but we have indications. Do we know? No.

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:46 PM
Holy shit.

I think they have one that's $200 a month and that level starts might only be in that package. The $200 a year is aimed at fantasy, especially big money DFS players. $200 a month aimed at media.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:47 PM
I think they have one that's $200 a month and that level starts might only be in that package. The $200 a year is aimed at fantasy, especially big money DFS players. $200 a month aimed at media.

That's just burning money!

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:48 PM
You have been very kind to TS. And to be honest, just posting the ratio's and noting that PL was on par with that, in a worse statement, is just being factually sound.

We don't know one way or another, but we have indications. Do we know? No.

I've not been kind, I've been realistic about what to expect from a first year starter. Big difference.

Ok, what are the indications that lynch will be a top fifteen QB?

Tned
08-06-2017, 07:50 PM
That's just burning money!

Yep, which is why I haven't looked in detail at what each contains. I only know because a few times I clicked a "for full ____ stats click here"and it was a promo page for one of those packages.

Poet
08-06-2017, 07:51 PM
I've not been kind, I've been realistic about what to expect from a first year starter. Big difference.

Ok, what are the indications that lynch will be a top fifteen QB?

If you truly do not think you have been kind to TS, I will take you at your word.

His talent is almost second to none. He's been making huge strides in his development. If you believe in clutch play, he showed signs of that in college according to some, although I think he played poorly in a big bowl game. He's a hard worker. Last year, when he was able to play without much prep time and as a raw true rookie, he played on par with other rookie QB's.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 07:55 PM
Kinda makes sense, you'd need a minimum of 22 scouts (1 for each position) to get the grades out on 32 teams in a matter of hours and be taken seriously. Sounds expensive.

Simple Jaded
08-06-2017, 07:59 PM
Lynch played poorly in the bowl game because his HC/OC had already checked out to VT.

Tned
08-06-2017, 08:06 PM
If you truly do not think you have been kind to TS, I will take you at your word.

His talent is almost second to none. He's been making huge strides in his development. If you believe in clutch play, he showed signs of that in college according to some, although I think he played poorly in a big bowl game. He's a hard worker. Last year, when he was able to play without much prep time and as a raw true rookie, he played on par with other rookie QB's.

Not much evidence there, just hope about what his physical skills might turn into.

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:08 PM
Not much evidence there, just hope about what his physical skills might turn into.

Which is why if PL is close to TS come season opener he should be starting. JMO.

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:08 PM
Lynch played poorly in the bowl game because his HC/OC had already checked out to VT.

They treated Lynch like a hype man.

ShaneFalco
08-06-2017, 09:18 PM
Siemian wipes his balls on this thread

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:19 PM
Siemian wipes his balls on this thread

Incredible!!!!!

Tned
08-06-2017, 09:20 PM
Which is why if PL is close to TS come season opener he should be starting. JMO.

I realize it's your opinion, but there is zero basis for it. The only basis is that Lynch is a first rounder and Siemian a seventh, both of which are out the window. Lynch was a first rounder because it was a weak QB classes and there is a dearth of QB talent. He was, and apparently still is, a high risk/high reward project. If you look at the drafted QBs over the last couple decades, his chance of being a top 15 QB is likely single digit percentage, if not low single digits. There were QBs far more NFL radio that were drafted in the first and second round that failed to become NFL starters, forget top 15.

You have nothing other than hope that his physical tools will translate into an NFL starter, elite or otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, if the coaching staff are seeing "special" but inconsistent during practices and such, then a case could be made, but all we have to go by is the media reports, and that's not what we are hearing. We are hearing big arm that makes a "wow" throw here and there, but has become increasingly inconsistent as TC has gone along.

I'll admit to being continuously puzzled by not only your contention that Lynch played as well as Siemian (a contention I don't think backed up by any analysts or anything other than a 'few" fans that I know of) and being so sure that Lynch will be special that you make the case for playing him if he hasn't won the job and shown the coaches he gives the team the best chance to win this year.

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:22 PM
I realize it's your opinion, but there is zero basis for it. The only basis is that Lynch is a first rounder and Siemian a seventh, both of which are out the window. Lynch was a first rounder because it was a weak QB classes and there is a dearth of QB talent. He was, and apparently still is, a high risk/high reward project. If you look at the drafted QBs over the last couple decades, his chance of being a top 15 QB is likely single digit percentage, if not low single digits. There were QBs far more NFL radio that were drafted in the first and second round that failed to become NFL starters, forget top 15.

You have nothing other than hope that his physical tools will translate into an NFL starter, elite or otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, if the coaching staff are seeing "special" but inconsistent during practices and such, then a case could be made, but all we have to go by is the media reports, and that's not what we are hearing. We are hearing big arm that makes a "wow" throw here and there, but has become increasingly inconsistent as TC has gone along.

I'll admit to being continuously puzzled by not only your contention that Lynch played as well as Siemian (a contention I don't think backed up by any analysts or anything other than a 'few" fans that I know of) and being so sure that Lynch will be special that you make the case for playing him if he hasn't won the job and shown the coaches he gives the team the best chance to win this year.

Tned, Elway echoed that same sentiment.

ShaneFalco
08-06-2017, 09:29 PM
http://giant.gfycat.com/SneakyRareFlyingfish.gif

SWAG

Tned
08-06-2017, 09:32 PM
Tned, Elway echoed that same sentiment.

That he would sit the QB that gives them the best chance of winning today, for a QB that is more physically gifted and that he "hopes" will become a great QB, even if he can't win the starting job?

Either I've missed some of Elway's comments or we interpret them differently.

Tned
08-06-2017, 09:34 PM
http://giant.gfycat.com/SneakyRareFlyingfish.gif

SWAG

As I said, put top scout of each team in a room, show them film of all four Broncos QBs with NO history on them, no information about their draft status, etc. and I bet it's nearly unanimous that they say Kelly is the best NFL prospect.

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:37 PM
He really screwed up to be taken where he was...

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:39 PM
That he would sit the QB that gives them the best chance of winning today, for a QB that is more physically gifted and that he "hopes" will become a great QB, even if he can't win the starting job?

Either I've missed some of Elway's comments or we interpret them differently.


https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/8/2/16087362/vance-joseph-john-elway-broncos-qb-battle

Finally, Elway ended with this to Prisco:

"Hopefully, one of them stands out when we go forward. You have to try and project who has the highest ceiling. If it doesn't show it itself (a clear winner), those factors all go into the decision."

From VJ:
Here are quotes from Denver Broncos head coach Vance Joseph and president of football operations/general manager John Elway. They were given to Pete Prisco with CBSSports, and they’re on the quarterback battle between Paxton Lynch and Trevor Siemian.

“I don't want to manage the game. I want to score points.” - Vance Joseph
"I don't want to manage the game," Joseph told Prisco. "I want to score points. I don't want to go into games where the defense has to get a shutout. I want to go into games where we're scoring points and playing good defense. I don't like that manage-the-game stuff with the quarterbacks."

In another quote to Prisco, Joseph added, “I want to have an explosive offense.


See, I don't think it's about hoping. Not at all. It's about winning the job. If a guy is doing better, slightly, than another guy, but the second guy has much more potential, you go with the second guy. To me, it's common sense from a strategic standpoint because the risk reward calculus screams "go with the second guy." If you were at a 55% odds to win a hand of poker for 10 grand, but you could go down to 52% to win 20 grand, you do the latter. The pot odds dictate it. This is no different, in my opinion.

Tned
08-06-2017, 09:39 PM
He really screwed up to be taken where he was...

Yep and injuries to boot. That's why he's the longest of longshots, but he's certainly a high upside. That and how great would be the story if the Broncos had two seventh rounders turn into good or great starters. The legend of Elway would grow.

Poet
08-06-2017, 09:42 PM
Yep and injuries to boot. That's why he's the longest of longshots, but he's certainly a high upside. That and how great would be the story if the Broncos had two seventh rounders turn into good or great starters. The legend of Elway would grow.

Trading a seventh round pick to a NFC team for a couple first rounders would feel awfully good.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:02 PM
https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/8/2/16087362/vance-joseph-john-elway-broncos-qb-battle

Finally, Elway ended with this to Prisco:

"Hopefully, one of them stands out when we go forward. You have to try and project who has the highest ceiling. If it doesn't show it itself (a clear winner), those factors all go into the decision."

From VJ:
Here are quotes from Denver Broncos head coach Vance Joseph and president of football operations/general manager John Elway. They were given to Pete Prisco with CBSSports, and they’re on the quarterback battle between Paxton Lynch and Trevor Siemian.

“I don't want to manage the game. I want to score points.” - Vance Joseph
"I don't want to manage the game," Joseph told Prisco. "I want to score points. I don't want to go into games where the defense has to get a shutout. I want to go into games where we're scoring points and playing good defense. I don't like that manage-the-game stuff with the quarterbacks."

In another quote to Prisco, Joseph added, “I want to have an explosive offense.

On the Joseph stuff, you are projecting, because in your mind Siemian is only capable of being a game manager and Lynch can be explosive, but that's projection of your view of the two QBs. If you actually look at the quote and the other paraphrased reporting by Prisco, it's pretty clear that Joseph wasn't indicating one QB was a game manager and one wasn't (even in your quote he says, "that manage the game stuff with quarterbacks"). In the context of Prisco's article it was clear that what Joseph was saying was that he wanted an aggressive offensive philosophy, not one that is content to sit back and let the defense win the game.

With Elway's comments, you first assume he and the coaches still think Lynch has the higher ceiling. Remember, when they drafted Lynch, Siemian was barely in the picture as a potential starter. So, we really don't know what they think in terms of either ceiling. Whether Siemian's is higher than they thought 16 months ago, or if Lynch's is lower than they thought 16 months ago. That's a very short quote and we don't have the question asked or the full response, only the part of the answer that Prisco used. That said, I also ASSume that he would consider Lynch to be the higher ceiling QB, but again, that's just blind speculation on my part as well.

Now, in Prisco's quote, Elway says that hopefully one of the QBs stand out and that you have to try and project who has the highest ceiling. Is that projection from practice and what the coaches are seeing? What they did in college? From that little snippet, again, we can only assume. Clearly, Prisco presents it as "a tie goes to Lynch", but even if you take that at face value, then the quote is still if neither QB wins the job.

I still contend that Elway will go with the QB that gives him the best chance to win now (this year, with this defense) and for now on might be the same QB or another QB. He's not going to sacrifice the defense and lose the locker room by putting in a guy that didn't win the job.

Hopefully, Lynch lights it up in preseason and wins the job and we'll never know what Elway would do in that situation.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:03 PM
Trading a seventh round pick to a NFC team for a couple first rounders would feel awfully good.

Yep, as would having an elite QB again, whether it's a first rounder seventh rounder or undrafted. That would be the most satisfying thing.

We both know that if they have a QB capable of returning a couple first rounders, they aren't going to trade them (no more McDaniels here), unless they have two of them and possibly not even then.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:09 PM
On the Joseph stuff, you are projecting, because in your mind Siemian is only capable of being a game manager and Lynch can be explosive, but that's projection of your view of the two QBs. If you actually look at the quote and the other paraphrased reporting by Prisco, it's pretty clear that Joseph wasn't indicating one QB was a game manager and one wasn't (even in your quote he says, "that manage the game stuff with quarterbacks"). In the context of Prisco's article it was clear that what Joseph was saying was that he wanted an aggressive offensive philosophy, not one that is content to sit back and let the defense win the game.

With Elway's comments, you first assume he and the coaches still think Lynch has the higher ceiling. Remember, when they drafted Lynch, Siemian was barely in the picture as a potential starter. So, we really don't know what they think in terms of either ceiling. Whether Siemian's is higher than they thought 16 months ago, or if Lynch's is lower than they thought 16 months ago. That's a very short quote and we don't have the question asked or the full response, only the part of the answer that Prisco used. That said, I also ASSume that he would consider Lynch to be the higher ceiling QB, but again, that's just blind speculation on my part as well.

Now, in Prisco's quote, Elway says that hopefully one of the QBs stand out and that you have to try and project who has the highest ceiling. Is that projection from practice and what the coaches are seeing? What they did in college? From that little snippet, again, we can only assume. Clearly, Prisco presents it as "a tie goes to Lynch", but even if you take that at face value, then the quote is still if neither QB wins the job.

I still contend that Elway will go with the QB that gives him the best chance to win now (this year, with this defense) and for now on might be the same QB or another QB. He's not going to sacrifice the defense and lose the locker room by putting in a guy that didn't win the job.

Hopefully, Lynch lights it up in preseason and wins the job and we'll never know what Elway would do in that situation.

This response is shocking.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:16 PM
This response is shocking.

It shouldn't be, but it is, because you are projecting your view of the QBs into their quotes. The fact you think the Vance Joseph is so unsophisticated and unprofessional as to project his favorite by saying he doesn't like game managers as an indication that his preference is Lynch, is shocking.

Can't you see how crazy that is when you look at it that way? Joseph was clearly talking about the offense philosophy and scheme not about whether or not one of his QBs is a game manager.

It's shocking to think that's what you think he meant.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:18 PM
With Elway's comments, you first assume he and the coaches still think Lynch has the higher ceiling. Remember, when they drafted Lynch, Siemian was barely in the picture as a potential starter.

This point should be made more often, it provides perspective.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:21 PM
It shouldn't be, but it is, because you are projecting your view of the QBs into their quotes. The fact you think the Vance Joseph is so unsophisticated and unprofessional as to project his favorite by saying he doesn't like game managers as an indication that his preference is Lynch, is shocking.

Can't you see how crazy that is when you look at it that way? Joseph was clearly talking about the offense philosophy and scheme not about whether or not one of his QBs is a game manager.

It's shocking to think that's what you think he meant.

It's not a projection - I don't think anyone actually thinks there's a doubt as to whom has more ability or a higher ceiling. However, you're now strawmaning me with the second sentence. I don't think he's unsophisticated. I don't think he's unprofessional. I think the man is wonderful. But I also think if we're being honest, we know which QB has the skillset to do more than be a game manager.

At this point, you are being stubborn. You told me there was no basis at all to think that the tiebreaker should be talent. I gave you the Elway quote, which supports my stance in a vacuum, which you took issue with, as well as it being applied to this situation, because everyone knows which guy has the higher ceiling. You yourself have said you would want, ideally, for PL to win because he can do more. We all know which guy can do more, potentially.

You're simply digging in your heels at this point. My point has been proven.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:22 PM
This point should be made more often, it provides perspective.

No, it doesn't. Because the ceiling a guy has is fixed. It could go down because of injuries, but what he can do is fixed. You might be able to work on mechanics so a guy can throw the ball further, but there's still a cap on how far he can throw a ball, or how accurate he can be. That's why coaching is so important - it allows you to maximize or get as close to that cap as possible, and some guys have higher caps.

You know better.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:26 PM
Something a lot of us forget is that humans are hard to measure. You have so many things that just don't fit neatly on a ruler. Force of will, grit, underdevelopment, human contacts, media, scouting circuits, coaching contacts, eyeballs and heuristics...it's not a perfect science. A guy like Pax...that height, athleticism, and arm--easy measurables. What is between the ears is the variable. Trev likely doesn't have it, but it's hard to accurately measure. Why is Russell Wilkins a top 10 NFL QB? It not because of his wheels. Same with Brees. Point is, Siemian showed a glimmer of ability, got injured, might actually be a viable dude. He's going to have to be super hungry if he's going to be a stud in this league and honestly I don't think he will be because it's a titanic feat. I don't think either of these dudes is the answer and don't think it's reasonable to have great hopes this year unless this patchwork line miraculously gels and starts making pancakes for Sunday breakfast. But you never know for sure and hope either Siemian has some intense grit or Pax shows his real game with the lights on.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:26 PM
No, it doesn't. Because the ceiling a guy has is fixed.

No. Ceilings are what lead to chips on shoulders and HOF careers.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:28 PM
No, it doesn't. Because the ceiling a guy has is fixed. It could go down because of injuries, but what he can do is fixed. You might be able to work on mechanics so a guy can throw the ball further, but there's still a cap on how far he can throw a ball, or how accurate he can be. That's why coaching is so important - it allows you to maximize or get as close to that cap as possible, and some guys have higher caps.

You know better.

Brady 6th round

How about some undrafted
Rod Smith
Chris Harris Jr
Wes Welker
Antonio Gates
Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Priest Holmes

And, there was another guy at a party with Warner over the weekend, who was it, oh yea, T something or other. Some so/so running back.

Sharpe/Nalen, a couple sucky late rounders.

Yep, ceilings are set at the draft and never change.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:29 PM
No. Ceilings are what lead to chips on shoulders and HOF careers.

I'm flabbergasted right now. I assume he's just arguing to argue and can't believe a lot of what he types. Devil's advocate positions and all.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:31 PM
I'm flabbergasted right now. I assume he's just arguing to argue and can't believe a lot of what he types. Devil's advocate positions and all.

A scout's report has real merit, no doubt, but it's not nearly as empirical and evidentiary as Kinger represents.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:32 PM
It's not a projection - I don't think anyone actually thinks there's a doubt as to whom has more ability or a higher ceiling. However, you're now strawmaning me with the second sentence. I don't think he's unsophisticated. I don't think he's unprofessional. I think the man is wonderful. But I also think if we're being honest, we know which QB has the skillset to do more than be a game manager.

At this point, you are being stubborn. You told me there was no basis at all to think that the tiebreaker should be talent. I gave you the Elway quote, which supports my stance in a vacuum, which you took issue with, as well as it being applied to this situation, because everyone knows which guy has the higher ceiling. You yourself have said you would want, ideally, for PL to win because he can do more. We all know which guy can do more, potentially.

You're simply digging in your heels at this point. My point has been proven.

You absolutely are projecting. Because you've made up your mind that Siemian is a low ceiling game manager, you take that quote to mean that Joseph favors Lynch, who isn't a game manager. You clearly have not been reading quotes or watching Joseph pressers since he was hired. He's clearly speaking about his philosophy. He addressed all of this when he was hired, when he was talking about McCoy and the type of offense he would run. How he wants an aggressive philosophy and play calling to put points on the board and not just sit back, manage the game and let the defense win.

So, you either missed all of that, or I got nothing.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:33 PM
Brady 6th round

How about some undrafted
Rod Smith
Chris Harris Jr
Wes Welker
Antonio Gates
Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Priest Holmes

And, there was another guy at a party with Warner over the weekend, who was it, oh yea, T something or other. Some so/so running back.

Sharpe/Nalen, a couple sucky late rounders.

Yep, ceilings are set at the draft and never change.

You're presupposing the scouting was accurate in regards identifying a person's floor and ceiling. I would be doing the same thing for PL and TS. However, my basis for assumption is that PL has shown his worthy measurables and TS has shown his limitations in physical prowess. We can literally go back to the first page on this thread where these ideas were not at issue.

Also, I take issue with being accused of just playing devil's advocate. It presupposes that you're right, and that I'm just wasting time, being stubborn, etc.

In regards to ceiling, you can disagree with my definition. It just so happens to be the working definition used by scouts, front office men and women, GM's, analysts, etc. Furthermore, if you take issue with my definition, and there's no cause to, you can't find anyone sans maybe yourself who might think that TS have the higher ceiling than PL. What you accuse me of you're probably guilty of. My point has been proven. Demonstratively.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:34 PM
No. Ceilings are what lead to chips on shoulders and HOF careers.

PFM had a high ceiling. John Elway had the highest ceiling. Troy Aikman had a high ceiling. Bradshaw, Marino, Young, etc. etc. etc. Most HoFers and all-pros have a high degree of talent, or ceiling.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:35 PM
A scout's report has real merit, no doubt, but it's not nearly as empirical and evidentiary as Kinger represents.

So scouting reports ad nausem, combine measurables/tests, and the eyeball are what they go by. I don't have to have those things be 100% accurate.

Tned
08-06-2017, 10:38 PM
You're presupposing the scouting was accurate in regards identifying a person's floor and ceiling. I would be doing the same thing for PL and TS. However, my basis for assumption is that PL has shown his worthy measurables and TS has shown his limitations in physical prowess. We can literally go back to the first page on this thread where these ideas were not at issue.

Also, I take issue with being accused of just playing devil's advocate. It presupposes that you're right, and that I'm just wasting time, being stubborn, etc.

In regards to ceiling, you can disagree with my definition. It just so happens to be the working definition used by scouts, front office men and women, GM's, analysts, etc. Furthermore, if you take issue with my definition, and there's no cause to, you can't find anyone sans maybe yourself who might think that TS have the higher ceiling than PL. What you accuse me of you're probably guilty of. My point has been proven. Demonstratively.

:faint:

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:38 PM
PFM had a high ceiling. John Elway had the highest ceiling. Troy Aikman had a high ceiling. Bradshaw, Marino, Young, etc. etc. etc. Most HoFers and all-pros have a high degree of talent, or ceiling.

What was Aaron Rodger's ceiling at Butte CC? How about that QB guy that put on a gold jacket this weekend? There are counterexamples. Why are they counterexamples? Because they got in the system late and the observation number was low enough not to trigger the hype machine. Like our guy. It's still at the point where there is latent value that isn't captured by an efficient market theory draft process.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:39 PM
So scouting reports ad nausem, combine measurables/tests, and the eyeball are what they go by. I don't have to have those things be 100% accurate.

Good thing you aren't a GM or you would draft based on consensus mocks and have a nice index fund team.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:42 PM
What was Aaron Rodger's ceiling at Butte CC? How about that QB guy that put on a gold jacket this weekend? There are counterexamples. Why are they counterexamples? Because they got in the system late and the observation number was low enough not to trigger the hype machine. Like our guy. It's still at the point where there is latent value that isn't captured by an efficient market theory draft process.

His ceiling at draft time was established fairly well. He's not doing anything that we didn't think he could do, he's just perfected his play. He was a first rounder. That guy, Terrell Davis, had the same amount of ability and talent his first day of camp as he did at the end of the second SB. They failed to identify it. However, when both of them did get time on the field, we quickly saw how great they were. I don't have to have scouts be perfect for my definition to work.

So if my definition works, and it does, great. Where's his latent talent? Because he sure as hell didn't show that much of it to anyone last year, sans of a couple of fans here. And he's not shown any in camp thus far.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:44 PM
His ceiling at draft time was established fairly well.

Ah, so it matters how much exposure a prospect has. We agree.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:44 PM
Good thing you aren't a GM or you would draft based on consensus mocks and have a nice index fund team.

Wrong. I wouldn't be drafting solely off of those. I wouldn't just go 'this guy has the best forty time, so he's the best (WR, CB, etc). However, if a guy has some of the leagues best arm strength, mobility for his position, height, strength, speed, you know, all of the things that made Lynch a viable first round draft pick, I would take those attributes seriously. And numerous teams did take those attributes seriously. Etc.

So, no bullshit, yes or no, do you, Hawg, or you, Tned, think that TS has the higher ceiling than PL?

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:45 PM
Ah, so it matters how much exposure a prospect has. We agree.

The irony is that you were agreeing with me the entire time. You argue with me just to argue with me. You don't actually respond to my points, it frustrates me to no end.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:46 PM
Wrong. I wouldn't be drafting solely off of those. I wouldn't just go 'this guy has the best forty time, so he's the best (WR, CB, etc). However, if a guy has some of the leagues best arm strength, mobility for his position, height, strength, speed, you know, all of the things that made Lynch a viable first round draft pick, I would take those attributes seriously. And numerous teams did take those attributes seriously. Etc.

So, no bullshit, yes or no, do you, Hawg, or you, Tned, think that TS has the higher ceiling than PL?

I absolutely think he has a higher ceiling because QB is primarily a mental position and Paxton hasn't demonstrated that aptitude yet. If he did after these two years we wouldn't be circle jerking each other.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:47 PM
I absolutely think he has a higher ceiling because QB is primarily a mental position and Paxton hasn't demonstrated that aptitude yet. If he did after these two years we wouldn't be circle jerking each other.

Okay. That's the wrong answer, but okay.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:47 PM
The irony is that you were agreeing with me the entire time. You argue with me just to argue with me. You don't actually respond to my points, it frustrates me to no end.

Eh, let's just let it play out and enjoy the show. We are here for the vicarious thrills anyway.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:48 PM
Eh, let's just let it play out and enjoy the show. We are here for the vicarious thrills anyway.

You don't get to be specious and then post that, you bloody monster.

Hawgdriver
08-06-2017, 10:55 PM
Okay. That's the wrong answer, but okay.

So let's see that answer key you got, big fella.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:56 PM
To Hawg:

TS is probably ahead of Cam Newton in the understanding of the game. No one is taking TS over Cam Newton. TS is probably ahead of Patrick Mahomes just out of experience, that 'swap' wouldn't happen, either. Nor would the Bears do Trubisky for TS. Some QB's might have a good understanding of the game, but play with reckless abandon. Anyone think the Lions would trade Stafford for TS? TS might have Dak beat.

So the response to those rebuttals would be something like "well, at that point those guys are either pure talents that they want to develop, or if you can show that you can get those results done, you go with it."

But again, considering that there's not much separation right now, and there wasn't last year in regards to ratios, with PL being on par with TS, yeah, still doesn't work for this scenario.

In short, Hawg's definition is really bad. Tned's definition appears to be more accurate, but he's not applying the facts of this situation to that definition.

Poet
08-06-2017, 10:57 PM
So let's see that answer key you got, big fella.

It's tatted on my ass.

Poet
08-06-2017, 11:07 PM
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-safe-picks-10-high-floor-low-ceiling-draft-options

Conversations in draft meetings are constantly concerned with the value of a prospect in a best-case scenario of development and production — their ceiling — against the value of prospect in a worst-case scenario of their production and development — their floor. It might be wise at times to just try and draft the players with highest potentials and ceilings trying to maximize the draft capital invested. However, sometimes a team needs to pick a guy they think will be a safer pick, a player with the higher floor that will give the team a better chance of a decent return on the draft capital invested. Here are 10 prospects in the 2017 draft class with high floors but maybe lower ceilings than other top prospects, with some added information from each player’s PFF Draft Pass scouting report.


This is the standard definition of floor or ceiling. This is what I'm talking about.

Tned
08-06-2017, 11:38 PM
So, no bullshit, yes or no, do you, Hawg, or you, Tned, think that TS has the higher ceiling than PL?
I addressed this a few posts ago, but will do so again. But, you in return need to answer a direct question without all the qualifications.

Your question: Do you think the Vance Joseph quote you posted was him indicating that he wants Lynch to win the job, because Siemian is a game manager and he doesn't like QBs that are game managers?

As to your question to me. As I indicated earlier, based on what I know, which is very little as I have not seen 15 months worth of practices, my assumption is that Lynch has a higher ceiling. However, I also think he is much more likely to be a bust. He was always the very definition of a high risk/high reward project and his time with the Broncos hasn't changed that. It's still more likely he will fail than succeed, based both on what he has shown and the high failure rate of first and second round QBs.

So, while I think Lynch has a higher ceiling based on physical attributes (unfortunately tempered by the school he played at and stunted football fundamentals and knowledge), I think the odds are higher that Siemian will be a starter for years to come (possibly not with Broncos) vs lynch being one.

That said, I'm on record for hoping Siemian plays good and that Lynch plays better and wins the job.

Tned
08-06-2017, 11:40 PM
But again, considering that there's not much separation right now, and there wasn't last year in regards to ratios, with PL being on par with TS, yeah, still doesn't work for this scenario.

.

You do realize that just because you keep repeating this false fact doesn't make it true?

Tned
08-06-2017, 11:42 PM
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-safe-picks-10-high-floor-low-ceiling-draft-options

Conversations in draft meetings are constantly concerned with the value of a prospect in a best-case scenario of development and production — their ceiling — against the value of prospect in a worst-case scenario of their production and development — their floor. It might be wise at times to just try and draft the players with highest potentials and ceilings trying to maximize the draft capital invested. However, sometimes a team needs to pick a guy they think will be a safer pick, a player with the higher floor that will give the team a better chance of a decent return on the draft capital invested. Here are 10 prospects in the 2017 draft class with high floors but maybe lower ceilings than other top prospects, with some added information from each player’s PFF Draft Pass scouting report.


This is the standard definition of floor or ceiling. This is what I'm talking about.

We got that. The part you ignore is that sometimes they get the floor and ceiling wrong and a player does more, or less than projected.

Poet
08-06-2017, 11:46 PM
You do realize that just because you keep repeating this false fact doesn't make it true?

Numerous reports have said this. Numerous reports said that TS is far ahead, others say that PL is just behind. Going off of the reports I've read, and what I made from them, I think TS is ahead. But not by as much as others think. It's an opinion, no more or less valid than someone who holds that TS is far ahead.

Poet
08-06-2017, 11:51 PM
We got that. The part you ignore is that sometimes they get the floor and ceiling wrong and a player does more, or less than projected.

I'm not ignoring a gosh darned thing. I know that players can play above what's projected. But I also know that they're not going to go beyond their ceiling. I think experts had Elway as the strongest arm ever. I think that still holds. He could never throw the ball any further after he maxed out his ability with practice, mechanics etc. From a physical standpoint, from the standpoint of the word being used, in the NFL context, the same way that Elway uses the word, Paxton Lynch has more more physical ability, so his best case scenario, you know, the word I've been talking about, his ceiling his higher than TS'.

If you have an issue with it, take it up with the NFL world. And of course some less talented guys are going to outperform huge talented guys. Chad Pennington had a better career than Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell. But their potential, overall, was greater. So, how does TS have a higher ceiling? Within the accepted use of the word ceiling, in this context, I'd love to hear it. They'e not projecting who might have the better career, they're projecting talent. TS might have a career superior to Dak, but there's a reason why Dak got drafted where he did. And I'm not even sure that Dak is better. But it goes with odds. And sometimes you'll have a team take a guy who has a high floor and can be an instant starter over a guy with a huge ceiling but is raw, or even a guy with a high ceiling but the team's in win now mode.

Context matters.

Poet
08-06-2017, 11:53 PM
I addressed this a few posts ago, but will do so again. But, you in return need to answer a direct question without all the qualifications.

Your question: Do you think the Vance Joseph quote you posted was him indicating that he wants Lynch to win the job, because Siemian is a game manager and he doesn't like QBs that are game managers?

As to your question to me. As I indicated earlier, based on what I know, which is very little as I have not seen 15 months worth of practices, my assumption is that Lynch has a higher ceiling. However, I also think he is much more likely to be a bust. He was always the very definition of a high risk/high reward project and his time with the Broncos hasn't changed that. It's still more likely he will fail than succeed, based both on what he has shown and the high failure rate of first and second round QBs.

So, while I think Lynch has a higher ceiling based on physical attributes (unfortunately tempered by the school he played at and stunted football fundamentals and knowledge), I think the odds are higher that Siemian will be a starter for years to come (possibly not with Broncos) vs lynch being one.

That said, I'm on record for hoping Siemian plays good and that Lynch plays better and wins the job.

I don't think VJ has a preference on who plays, but a preference on the style of offense.

We're not too far apart on your third paragraph.

Everyone would prefer Lynch to win the job. He has the higher ceiling.

Tned
08-06-2017, 11:53 PM
Numerous reports have said this. Numerous reports said that TS is far ahead, others say that PL is just behind. Going off of the reports I've read, and what I made from them, I think TS is ahead. But not by as much as others think. It's an opinion, no more or less valid than someone who holds that TS is far ahead.

I was referring to your contention that Lynch played on par with Siemian last year.




PAXTON LYNCH, QB, BRONCOS (MEMPHIS)

Snaps: 174
PFF overall grade: 40.2 (https://grades.profootballfocus.com/#/ratings/positions/show/QB)
Since midseason, Paxton Lynch received one more opportunity to get on the field, with an injury to Trevor Siemian giving him the start in Week 13 against Jacksonville. He was arguably worse than his previous start, completing only 12 passes for 104 yards (just 4.3 yards per attempt). Lynch may be the QB of the future in Denver, but everything he has shown so far says that future is a long way off.


https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-how-every-2016-first-round-pick-has-played-this-season

dogfish
08-07-2017, 12:00 AM
*looks around*

*slaps slim on the back of the head and tells him to get me a beer*

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:02 AM
I was referring to your contention that Lynch played on par with Siemian last year.


https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-how-every-2016-first-round-pick-has-played-this-season

Oh, but he did. Similar TD to INT ratio. Similar completion percentage. His production was bad. TS was ranked 27 out of 32. His production was bad. You might not like it, but it is what it is.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:03 AM
*looks around*

*slaps slim on the back of the head and tells him to get me a beer*

It only works if you're his dad, Doggington Fish!

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:05 AM
I don't think VJ has a preference on who plays, but a preference on the style of offense.


You seem to be parsing words here. I'm asking straight out whether you posted the Vance quote as an indication that Siemian is a game manager and Vance doesn't want a game manager at QB.


Everyone would prefer Lynch to win the job. He has the higher ceiling

Main difference is I don't think he should be handed the job if he doesn't lose the competition by too much. If he's the QB that gives the Broncos the best chance to win, he should be able to beat out a low ceiling, seventh round pick.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:12 AM
Oh, but he did. Similar TD to INT ratio. Similar completion percentage. His production was bad. TS was ranked 27 out of 32. His production was bad. You might not like it, but it is what it is.

Not only did we see him struggle more, but Lynch was worse in every critical average. Accuracy, yards per game, yards per play, average under pressure, average no pressure, average blitzed, passer rating, QBR, etc.

As I said, just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it a fact.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:14 AM
You seem to be parsing words here. I'm asking straight out whether you posted the Vance quote as an indication that Siemian is a game manager and Vance doesn't want a game manager at QB.



Main difference is I don't think he should be handed the job if he doesn't lose the competition by too much. If he's the QB that gives the Broncos the best chance to win, he should be able to beat out a low ceiling, seventh round pick.

Well, we can reasonably disagree with that the second.

I think everyone knows that TS is mostly a game manager. I think he was doing to TS what he did to DT earlier in the offseason. We know he doesn't want a game managing offense. He told us that.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:16 AM
Not only did we see him struggle more, but Lynch was worse in every critical average. Accuracy, yards per game, yards per play, average under pressure, average no pressure, average blitzed, passer rating, QBR, etc.

As I said, just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it a fact.

I said he was on par. He was on par for accuracy. He was worse on yards per game, but give him a break, he was a true rookie, a raw rookie, he had less prep time with the team, etc. Every thing we use to give TS a break was doubly true for PL.

If PL had the same amount of playing time as TS, they'd have near identical numbers. But the big numbers are yards, percentage, TDs, and INTs. What I'm saying is correct. I won't back down on it because there's no reason to back down on it. All things considered, PL probably outplayed TS.

dogfish
08-07-2017, 12:19 AM
It only works if you're his dad, Doggington Fish!

hell, it was worth a try. . . seemed like a smarter endeavor than trying to sell you two QBs i'm not sold on, with no ammo besides last year's stats and TC reports. . .


not trying to get in the way of you guys joel-ing each other, but IMO the evidence is really slim right now. . .

and i sit here thinking that i'm looking forward to thursday-- then i remember that they'll play like two drives each, and we'll spend the rest of the night watching sloter. . .

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:22 AM
hell, it was worth a try. . . seemed like a smarter endeavor than trying to sell you two QBs i'm not sold on, with no ammo besides last year's stats and TC reports. . .


not trying to get in the way of you guys joel-ing each other, but IMO the evidence is really slim right now. . .

and i sit here thinking that i'm looking forward to thursday-- then i remember that they'll play like two drives each, and we'll spend the rest of the night watching sloter. . .

We can pencil Sloter to be the real deal on Thursday!

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:23 AM
RT @cecillammey Paxton Lynch did have 6th-highest off-target percentage in Week 4 - 21.7 % of his passes considered over/underthrown #Broncos @1043TheFan

RT @cecillammey Highest off-target % in Wk5 Stanton, Manning, Rodgers, Whitehurst, Osweiler, then #Broncos Paxton Lynch at 20.6 percent @1043TheFan

By memory, I know in his last start he was the sixth least accurate passer.

Siemian was routinely in the top half, often top ten in passing accuracy.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:25 AM
Well, we can reasonably disagree with that the second.

I think everyone knows that TS is mostly a game manager. I think he was doing to TS what he did to DT earlier in the offseason. We know he doesn't want a game managing offense. He told us that.

You aren't in court. It's ok to just answer the question directly. I answered your question honestly, and you are resounding with carefully crafted double speak. Come on man.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:27 AM
Completion percentage, Tned. Completion percentage. You're not going to change that number. And if the overall numbers are similar, and Lynch did have it harder (which you won't acknowledge) who cares? It's par for the course. I recall being lectured (not sure if it was by you or not) for being frustrated with TS for being unable to score in the red zone for the first several weeks.

Take that same principle. Apply it here. Starting out, PL was a little behind the average of TS' season. That is more than close enough with those numbers to say "they were about the same." I know you really don't want it to be true, but it is.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:28 AM
I said he was on par. He was on par for accuracy. He was worse on yards per game, but give him a break, he was a true rookie, a raw rookie, he had less prep time with the team, etc. Every thing we use to give TS a break was doubly true for PL.

If PL had the same amount of playing time as TS, they'd have near identical numbers. But the big numbers are yards, percentage, TDs, and INTs. What I'm saying is correct. I won't back down on it because there's no reason to back down on it. All things considered, PL probably outplayed TS.

Do you know how many times you went off on people for justifying Siemian's bad play by saying he was a first year starter or bringing up the line, etc? Yet you do it here for Paxton.

Please provide some data to back up your claim that they were on par in terms of accuracy.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:29 AM
You aren't in court. It's ok to just answer the question directly. I answered your question honestly, and you are resounding with carefully crafted double speak. Come on man.

I don't think I gave you an unfair answer. VJ clearly doesn't want a game manager offense. TS has been nothing but a game manager for his short career. He won't wont TS as his QB if TS is going to be a game manager.

But that doesn't mean he won't take TS as a game manager if the other guys will give worse overall production. Now the cross-examination shall be followed up by a redirect.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:30 AM
Completion percentage, Tned. Completion percentage. You're not going to change that number.
.

Wow, just wow. Are you really going to equate completion percentage with accuracy?

:faint:

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:30 AM
Do you know how many times you went off on people for justifying Siemian's bad play by saying he was a first year starter or bringing up the line, etc? Yet you do it here for Paxton.

Please provide some data to back up your claim that they were on par in terms of accuracy.

I'm mostly doing it to show you how you have to use those same stances as well as the other factors for Lynch. Your logic dictates that you have to for consistency. My logic dictated that a second year starter should have been doing better. I've been consistent throughout.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:31 AM
Wow, just wow. Are you really going to equate completion percentage with accuracy?

:faint:

You think the Wr's were trying harder for PL?

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:36 AM
You think the Wr's were trying harder for PL?

No, I'm sure ESPN just fabricated the accuracy numbers because they have a crush on Siemian.

Goodnight. I have to be on call with UK in six hours, and when I put real effort into producing stats and the like and other that two quotes, all you have is quips like above and variations of "I'm right, your wrong", I would say the conversion had definitely run its course for the night if not for good.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:36 AM
https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-receiver-drops-percentage/2016/

The Broncos weren't dropping a lot of passes last year. TS wasn't exactly lighting it up with his accuracy - he was 25th in the league for completion percentage. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/passing.htm

So if there aren't a lot of drops, and he's not the bottom part of the league for completion percentage, how exactly is how accurate, and why should I think his percentage is all that superior to PL?

He was in the 20's for every major stat category. PL was on that same trajectory. This isn't in controversy. However, I don't know about you, but I have nothing more that I can add.

I do want to say that this thread was phenomenal as far as I'm concerned. I feel better about TS as a player.

Poet
08-07-2017, 12:41 AM
No, I'm sure ESPN just fabricated the accuracy numbers because they have a crush on Siemian.

Goodnight. I have to be on call with UK in six hours, and when I put real effort into producing stats and the like and other that two quotes, all you have is quips like above and variations of "I'm right, your wrong", I would say the conversion had definitely run its course for the night if not for good.

I don't understand how you can think I'm being unfair when I'm using the gold standard for accuracy. I produced numerous stats that showed you the rate of TS' production. You didn't want to engage with that. I never said I was right and you were wrong, I always gave you a legitimate argument - just because you didn't like it doesn't make it untrue. I don't know why you're so mad. But, if you don't think PL was on track to be 27th in overall production, I don't know what to tell you. And honestly, the fact that he would be in that area, with TS should encourage you because you think so highly of him. IF you extend that logic, it should show you there wasn't a lot of difference of them then, and there's not much difference now. Which is why my stance, and Elways stance, of if it is close you should go with the guy with the higher ceiling, which again I showed what the word meant, is the way to go.

It was a great thread.

Simple Jaded
08-07-2017, 02:41 AM
Lynch's issue in the Jagoff game was ball placement, I'm thinking due to his footwork breaking down. He made the right read/decision but the game was still going too fast for him. This is where Lammey loses credibility (again) with Lynch, ball placement was in every scouting report leading up to the draft, even the one he plagiarizes the most (Lance Zierlien). The fact that Lammey did a 180 on Lynch after that game (he'd never do that to his boo) is another in a growing list of reasons I think he's full of shit.

#fakeittilyoumakeit

Tned
08-07-2017, 06:34 AM
I don't understand how you can think I'm being unfair when I'm using the gold standard for accuracy. I produced numerous stats that showed you the rate of TS' production. You didn't want to engage with that. I never said I was right and you were wrong, I always gave you a legitimate argument - just because you didn't like it doesn't make it untrue. I don't know why you're so mad. But, if you don't think PL was on track to be 27th in overall production, I don't know what to tell you. And honestly, the fact that he would be in that area, with TS should encourage you because you think so highly of him. IF you extend that logic, it should show you there wasn't a lot of difference of them then, and there's not much difference now. Which is why my stance, and Elways stance, of if it is close you should go with the guy with the higher ceiling, which again I showed what the word meant, is the way to go.

It was a great thread.

I just find it ironic that you actually posted a link Saturday or Sunday that ranked players based on accuracy %, NOT completion %, and now you act like they are one and the same. That drops, pass defensed and other factors go into the accuracy rating that multiple sources calculate.

Anyway, agreed that this part of the discussion has come to a grinding halt. Good to know that the only stat/measure that matters is completion %, I'll remember for future discussions.

ShaneFalco
08-07-2017, 06:35 AM
i heard lynch looks like tebow.

Maybe elway should give the baseball player a call. at least we can win. Tebow Homecoming would be another 3 SBs at least.He would Retire Tom Brady Early.

Tned
08-07-2017, 06:54 AM
Lynch's issue in the Jagoff game was ball placement, I'm thinking due to his footwork breaking down. He made the right read/decision but the game was still going too fast for him. This is where Lammey loses credibility (again) with Lynch, ball placement was in every scouting report leading up to the draft, even the one he plagiarizes the most (Lance Zierlien). The fact that Lammey did a 180 on Lynch after that game (he'd never do that to his boo) is another in a growing list of reasons I think he's full of shit.

#fakeittilyoumakeit

He never really jumped off the wagon, it's more that he just admitted that Lynch wasn't a better option than Siemian after the Jaguars start, because he had regressed. Didn't he have something like a 40 passer rating in a quarter or half, but higher overall. He was just completely lost out there, and Lammey, and others, who had been saying they need to sit Siemian and put Lynch in finally stopped making those calls for Lynch (in 2016) after the very bad Jaguars performance.

Davii
08-07-2017, 08:15 AM
From a Kiszla article, this is basically what I think right now:

The truth, however, seems obvious to anybody with eyes. No matter who wins the starting job in Denver, the Broncos will compete against Oakland, San Diego and Kansas City with the fourth-best quarterback in the AFC West.

Freyaka
08-07-2017, 09:27 AM
Wrong. I wouldn't be drafting solely off of those. I wouldn't just go 'this guy has the best forty time, so he's the best (WR, CB, etc). However, if a guy has some of the leagues best arm strength, mobility for his position, height, strength, speed, you know, all of the things that made Lynch a viable first round draft pick, I would take those attributes seriously. And numerous teams did take those attributes seriously. Etc.

So, no bullshit, yes or no, do you, Hawg, or you, Tned, think that TS has the higher ceiling than PL?

Ceilings aren't set at the beginnings of careers...Assumptions are. You can't see how high a player's going to make it until he does.

TD by all accounts was nothing special in college, neither was Kurt Warner. But when they got to the NFL they fought their butts off to be the best and proved themselves.

That's not to say that TS is going to do that, but it's not to say he won't either. You don't know what the ceiling is for either QB, no one does because it hasn't been set yet. The only thing we have is assumptions.

Tned
08-07-2017, 10:04 AM
From a Kiszla article, this is basically what I think right now:

The truth, however, seems obvious to anybody with eyes. No matter who wins the starting job in Denver, the Broncos will compete against Oakland, San Diego and Kansas City with the fourth-best quarterback in the AFC West.

Best, best, best case scenario is that the Broncos have the third best QB and that seems like a longshot for 2017.

dogfish
08-07-2017, 10:46 AM
maybe we can break carr's leg again. . . :heh:

Davii
08-07-2017, 10:55 AM
maybe we can break carr's leg again. . . :heh:

We'd probably still have the 4th best QB in the division.

Buff
08-07-2017, 11:05 AM
I'm concerned.

BigDaddyBronco
08-07-2017, 11:18 AM
I'm concerned.

About what? Not having a franchise QB? Trevor is pretty much a backup QB, but Lynch is the one that concerns me. He physically has all the tools but hasn't won the job that they want to give with him. Maybe it will come, but he might not be the guy. It happens a lot in the NFL.

Question is, if this doesn't work and one of these guys can't be a decent QB, do they try again next year and draft someone else, or do they go after Kirk Cousins or someone like that?

slim
08-07-2017, 11:19 AM
I'm concerned.

We have Brian Hoyer and an unknown. It could be worse.

Didn't the Texans make the playoffs with Hoyer starting?

Buff
08-07-2017, 11:38 AM
About what? Not having a franchise QB? Trevor is pretty much a backup QB, but Lynch is the one that concerns me. He physically has all the tools but hasn't won the job that they want to give with him. Maybe it will come, but he might not be the guy. It happens a lot in the NFL.

Question is, if this doesn't work and one of these guys can't be a decent QB, do they try again next year and draft someone else, or do they go after Kirk Cousins or someone like that?

Yes - I'm afraid that maybe we saw TS's ceiling last year. He is what he is. And that Lynch is never going to be an NFL QB. It's a cerebral, thinking man's game and he's a big dumb immature oaf.

I was cautiously optimistic that one of them would make a big leap in the offseason but now that we're here it sounds like reality is starting to sink in that we're going to have a lot of 3 and outs.

I'm not ready to evaluate the 2018 QB landscape just yet - let's save that for Week 8.


We have Brian Hoyer and an unknown. It could be worse.

Didn't the Texans make the playoffs with Hoyer starting?

Not in the AFC West they didn't. I'm starting to think that it couldn't be much worse, unless we're the Jets.

BigDaddyBronco
08-07-2017, 11:46 AM
Yes - I'm afraid that maybe we saw TS's ceiling last year. He is what he is. And that Lynch is never going to be an NFL QB. It's a cerebral, thinking man's game and he's a big dumb immature oaf.

I was cautiously optimistic that one of them would make a big leap in the offseason but now that we're here it sounds like reality is starting to sink in that we're going to have a lot of 3 and outs.

I'm not ready to evaluate the 2018 QB landscape just yet - let's save that for Week 8.



Not in the AFC West they didn't. I'm starting to think that it couldn't be much worse, unless we're the Jets.

I'm slightly optimistic. If our OLine is much better than last year and we can keep Trevor from getting killed then there is no reason to think that he can't put better numbers up than last year. Additionally, we were terrible running the ball. That should get better with an improved OLine. So an improved offense, and maybe an improved defense if we can stop the run. Now if we can get something out of the special teams we should be decent. I don't see the Chiefs as being much improved, still good but beatable. That leaves the Raiders. Best QB in the AFC West, getting better, but their defense can be beat as well.

We should be better than last year in my opinion and we weren't that far off from making the playoffs. Super Bowl, no, playoff team, possibly.

Buff
08-07-2017, 11:48 AM
I'm slightly optimistic. If our OLine is much better than last year and we can keep Trevor from getting killed then there is no reason to think that he can't put better numbers up than last year. Additionally, we were terrible running the ball. That should get better with an improved OLine. So an improved offense, and maybe an improved defense if we can stop the run. Now if we can get something out of the special teams we should be decent. I don't see the Chiefs as being much improved, still good but beatable. That leaves the Raiders. Best QB in the AFC West, getting better, but their defense can be beat as well.

We should be better than last year in my opinion and we weren't that far off from making the playoffs. Super Bowl, no, playoff team, possibly.

Yeah - that was my appraisal coming into camp as well... Although I firmly believe the Chiefs are the best team in the division. I'm just dialing back my optimism a notch as it seems like all of the QB play has been pretty underwhelming thus far.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:03 PM
We'd probably still have the 4th best QB in the division.

Ouch!

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:27 PM
Yeah - that was my appraisal coming into camp as well... Although I firmly believe the Chiefs are the best team in the division. I'm just dialing back my optimism a notch as it seems like all of the QB play has been pretty underwhelming thus far.

If Lynch can't win the job, then the big question is whether or not Siemian will progress and play better and more consistent than last year. The camp reports don't sound like Siemian is significantly better than last year and you need him to play at a higher level.

Davii
08-07-2017, 12:34 PM
If Lynch can't win the job, then the big question is whether or not Siemian will progress and play better and more consistent than last year. The camp reports don't sound like Siemian is significantly better than last year and you need him to play at a higher level.

If Siemian is the guy I think our season depends on our OL and run game. If those two are improved I think Trevor will be better. Maybe not worlds better, but more efficient, and able to take advantage of the run game. If the run game struggles, I think TS will be the same guy he was last year.

NightTerror218
08-07-2017, 12:34 PM
If Lynch can't win the job, then the big question is whether or not Siemian will progress and play better and more consistent than last year. The camp reports don't sound like Siemian is significantly better than last year and you need him to play at a higher level.

Articles state that siemian has reached his ceiling so you know what you have there. But real game time will tell. So thursday is the start to competition.

Tned
08-07-2017, 12:41 PM
Articles state that siemian has reached his ceiling so you know what you have there. But real game time will tell. So thursday is the start to competition.

I'm not going to take those ceiling reports to the bank. Nobody knows what his ceiling is until he has more game experience, but more importantly, when we see what he can do with decent pass protection, a running game and better play calling.


If Siemian is the guy I think our season depends on our OL and run game. If those two are improved I think Trevor will be better. Maybe not worlds better, but more efficient, and able to take advantage of the run game. If the run game struggles, I think TS will be the same guy he was last year.

Agreed. What Siemian is not going to be able to do is do what Elway did or Big Ben does or other great QBs that can carry a team even if the weapons around him are sub standard. I think with a solid offensive scheme and with solid pass protection and running game, I think Siemian can do far better than most fans believe, but he's not going to be a QB that can make those plays when the pass protection breaks down the majority of the time and if the team can't run effectively. He's not that dynamic an athlete/QB from what we've seen.

BroncoJoe
08-07-2017, 01:55 PM
Reports coming out (again) today is Paxton struggled and Siemian looked good.

Davii
08-07-2017, 02:01 PM
Reports coming out (again) today is Paxton struggled and Siemian looked good.

All the tweets I read on DenverPost made it seem as though they played the same but PL might have had a bit of an edge today.

topscribe
08-07-2017, 02:13 PM
I'm not going to take those ceiling reports to the bank. Nobody knows what his ceiling is until he has more game experience, but more importantly, when we see what he can do with decent pass protection, a running game and better play calling.

I've never understood all that "ceiling" garbage, anyway. As you implied, if ceiling were to be judged from surface physical alone, neither Joe Montana nor Tom Brady would have had a chance to excel. Not to say Siemian is a peer to them, but how would we know without field performance?



Agreed. What Siemian is not going to be able to do is do what Elway did or Big Ben does or other great QBs that can carry a team even if the weapons around him are sub standard. I think with a solid offensive scheme and with solid pass protection and running game, I think Siemian can do far better than most fans believe, but he's not going to be a QB that can make those plays when the pass protection breaks down the majority of the time and if the team can't run effectively. He's not that dynamic an athlete/QB from what we've seen.

Actually, wasn't that largely what Siemian dealt with last year? He didn't have a running game to write home about, and the O-line composed a bunch of matadores. He did pretty well, IMO, especially before his injuries, and he did it in his first year on the field.

Tned
08-07-2017, 02:25 PM
I've never understood all that "ceiling" garbage, anyway. As you implied, if ceiling were to be judged from surface physical alone, neither Joe Montana nor Tom Brady would have had a chance to excel. Not to say Siemian is a peer to them, but how would we know without field performance?

Actually, wasn't that largely what Siemian dealt with last year? He didn't have a running game to write home about, and the O-line composed a bunch of matadores. He did pretty well, IMO, especially before his injuries, and he did it in his first year on the field.

Agreed on all counts.

Hawgdriver
08-07-2017, 02:25 PM
Articles state that siemian has reached his ceiling so you know what you have there.

Pax's airballs have been hitting the ceiling too.

Hawgdriver
08-07-2017, 02:26 PM
All the tweets I read on DenverPost made it seem as though they played the same but PL might have had a bit of an edge today.

Conflicting reports!

Freyaka
08-07-2017, 03:16 PM
Conflicting reports!

Have been all off season...it's frustrating. I'd like some unbiased reporting without all of the spin.

Joel
08-07-2017, 03:34 PM
ALL our QBs are FAR too early in their careers to have shown anything definitive, both because of small (or nonexistent) sample size and because they're still developing: That's the biggest reason Siemian and Lynch are both still up and down—and Kelly and Sloter are still completely unknown quantities. What they have and will show(n) is further compromised and obscured by a perpetually rebuilding line and learning a new coachs new offense. To top it all off, WE'RE STILL IN TRAINING CAMP, so lack even dubious preseason performance against camp fodder defenses from which we can draw any conclusions.

The only way anyone can be sold on any Broncos QB at this stage is to sell THEMSELVES based on subjectively prejudiced preconceptions in lieu of performance. Naetheless, many people are doing an exceptional job of precisely that. Note that I didn't say exceptional nor any other degree of "GOOD": Like rush hour traffic, bureaucratic inefficiency and Roger Goddell, it's something that just IS, but to an impressive degree of reality.

Tned
08-07-2017, 03:42 PM
Pax's airballs have been hitting the ceiling too.

Yea, so Dmac tweeted something about Paxton throwing the ball 8 yards over the head over the receiver in a 4th down and 4 drill (driving home I heard on 760 that there is a mark on the wall where the ball hit, apparently it had some steam on it). So, a Twit tweets, "maybe he was throwing the ball away" and Dmac responds, "On 4th down!!!"

Davii
08-07-2017, 03:48 PM
Yea, so Dmac tweeted something about Paxton throwing the ball 8 yards over the head over the receiver in a 4th down and 4 drill (driving home I heard on 760 that there is a mark on the wall where the ball hit, apparently it had some steam on it). So, a Twit tweets, "maybe he was throwing the ball away" and Dmac responds, "On 4th down!!!"

To be fair, Trevor Siemean DID throw the ball away on 4th down today...

Tned
08-07-2017, 03:51 PM
To be fair, Trevor Siemean DID throw the ball away on 4th down today...

Well, that's because he's a smart player... ;)

Tned
08-07-2017, 03:52 PM
Oh, and in my thing with Dmac earlier, the Twit actually Tweeted, maybe he was throwing it away to setup a FG and the response was about it being on 4th down.

topscribe
08-07-2017, 03:59 PM
To be fair, Trevor Siemean DID throw the ball away on 4th down today...


Oh, and in my thing with Dmac earlier, the Twit actually Tweeted, maybe he was throwing it away to setup a FG and the response was about it being on 4th down.

Those were my thoughts. It might have been an error on Trevor's part, but then he might have done it to keep from losing yardage. I would have to see the play before making a judgment.

Tned
08-07-2017, 04:05 PM
Those were my thoughts. It might have been an error on Trevor's part, but then he might have done it to keep from losing yardage. I would have to see the play before making a judgment.

Since it was a 4th down drill, the only reason either should throw it away, would be to avoid a sack and losing yardage (fumble isn't real possibility in non contact).

topscribe
08-07-2017, 04:07 PM
Since it was a 4th down drill, the only reason either should throw it away, would be to avoid a sack and losing yardage (fumble isn't real possibility in non contact).
Well, I don't know about your parenthetical phrase. Remember Cutler at San Diego? lol

Tned
08-07-2017, 04:15 PM
Well, I don't know about your parenthetical phrase. Remember Cutler at San Diego? lol

Come on, that was an incomplete pass. Just ask Hochuli, my hero!!

Tned
08-07-2017, 08:30 PM
I haven't stayed current on practice squad rules. Is Lynch eligible for the practice squad?

Davii
08-07-2017, 08:50 PM
I haven't stayed current on practice squad rules. Is Lynch eligible for the practice squad?

He'd get signed off the practice squad in a heartbeat.

dogfish
08-07-2017, 10:30 PM
von klingler, have you decided which quarterback to purchase?

topscribe
08-07-2017, 10:32 PM
He'd get signed off the practice squad in a heartbeat.
He wouldn't even get to the PS. A player has to clear waivers to get there . . .

Poet
08-07-2017, 10:38 PM
von klingler, have you decided which quarterback to purchase?

You hurt me when you call me that.

Turns out there's a buy one get one half off.

Freyaka
08-07-2017, 10:46 PM
Uh oh, condescending douche in...3...2...1...

Jaded I don't know what your beef with me is (or if there is beef) I'm not trying to come off that way but whatever...

Not sure what of that was "condescending" or "douchey". I just want to hear a consistent report (good or bad) and not hear 10 different things from 10 different media sources all putting their own spin on it. It's hard to know where we are really at as an offense because one person will say such and such player sucked and the next will say he had his best practice of the offseason.

Tned
08-07-2017, 10:48 PM
He'd get signed off the practice squad in a heartbeat.

Ya think? If he needs time to develop, maybe it's worth the risk.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
08-07-2017, 10:55 PM
von klingler, have you decided which quarterback to purchase?

Von klinger, I didn't know that name stuck :laugh:

Simple Jaded
08-07-2017, 11:05 PM
Jaded I don't know what your beef with me is (or if there is beef) I'm not trying to come off that way but whatever...

Not sure what of that was "condescending" or "douchey". I just want to hear a consistent report (good or bad) and not hear 10 different things from 10 different media sources all putting their own spin on it. It's hard to know where we are really at as an offense because one person will say such and such player sucked and the next will say he had his best practice of the offseason.

****, I apologize, Freyaka, that dig wasn't meant for you.

I dig you! I...am a douche.

Tned
08-07-2017, 11:24 PM
****, I apologize, Freyaka, that dig wasn't meant for you.

I dig you! I...am a douche.

Geez, Jaded, you can't just go around randomly slamming people and then give them, "oops, wasn't meant for you" when they say, "hey, man, what did I do to deserve the vicious attack."

Just my opinion, you know, we all have them like _______.

Tned
08-07-2017, 11:26 PM
Von klinger, I didn't know that name stuck :laugh:

Is it Von Klinger or Von Klink. I Knaw Nathing!!

Simple Jaded
08-07-2017, 11:52 PM
Geez, Jaded, you can't just go around randomly slamming people and then give them, "oops, wasn't meant for you" when they say, "hey, man, what did I do to deserve the vicious attack."

Just my opinion, you know, we all have them like _______.

I apologized, I felt bad and shame and so forth.

MOtorboat
08-08-2017, 12:15 AM
von klingler, have you decided which quarterback to purchase?


Von klinger, I didn't know that name stuck :laugh:


Is it Von Klinger or Von Klink. I Knaw Nathing!!

Not Klinger.

Klingler:
10754

Freyaka
08-08-2017, 12:28 AM
****, I apologize, Freyaka, that dig wasn't meant for you.

I dig you! I...am a douche.

We're all kinda douchy around here, except for King, he's a god among douche canoes.

Tned
08-08-2017, 12:31 AM
I apologized, I felt bad and shame and so forth.

They say the first step is admitting you have a problem. So I :salute: you on your road to recovery and becoming a kindler, gentler Jaded....

topscribe
08-08-2017, 01:47 AM
They say the first step is admitting you have a problem. So I :salute: you on your road to recovery and becoming a kindle, gentler Jaded....
He was only kidding . . .

Tned
08-08-2017, 08:14 AM
He was only kidding . . .

Now, this is the funniest thing I've read in a while. I got a chuckle out of this.

Valar Morghulis
08-08-2017, 12:34 PM
Not Klinger. Klingler: <img src="http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=10754"/>



10755

This is more like it

MOtorboat
08-08-2017, 12:37 PM
10755

This is more like it

Sigh.

slim
08-08-2017, 12:38 PM
10755

This is more like it

That is exactly how I picture King!

Davii
08-08-2017, 12:43 PM
That is exactly how I picture King!

King has a little more chest hair and a better smile.

slim
08-08-2017, 12:45 PM
King has a little more chest hair and a better smile.

Sexy!!

NightTerror218
08-08-2017, 01:39 PM
I prefer lynch but will take any QB who can move the ball and close out drives in red zone. I do not want to lead league in 3 and outs or worst red zone offense. We were ranked 29 or worse for those last season. Running gane should help but if siemian gwts rwd light his play needs to improve in redzone. He was ranked 27th last season with 43% completion with 20 yards and 39% within 10 yards. IMO red zone offense if key to QB. We can sustain drives all we want but need to close them out.

dogfish
08-08-2017, 01:39 PM
Not Klinger.

Klingler:



Sigh.

that's the fun part-- it can be any of those!

Poet
08-08-2017, 04:26 PM
I'm getting styled on!

dogfish
08-08-2017, 06:14 PM
I'm getting styled on!

lmao. . . it happens to the best of us at times. . .