Thread: Comparing Siemian's first year to other first years since 2007

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

ESPN or NFL.com had Denver's receiving corps ranked in the top 5 last year. I get your point, Norwood, Fowler, Sunshine, Green, and Booker weren't pro-bowl options. Darby had a few targets late in the season but it was a thimble in an ocean. But when you balance it out, most QBs would love to have elite options 1 and 2 at the expense of average to below average options 3-5. I just don't see this as a worthwhile caveat for last year, even if what you say is technically valid.

Well, what that did was to allow the defense to double DT and E. Many times, it seems,
I was wondering why they weren't getting open more. It's because single coverage on
the others was sufficient. Plus the fact they didn't have to put a safety in the box to
cover the "running game."

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

The run game, pass pro, and injury are all relevant factors. Let's hope we aren't making excuses this year, eh?

Excuses are attempts to explain reasons for failures. In Trevor's case we are pointing out
his successes despite those disadvantages. I view them as commendations.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

ESPN or NFL.com had Denver's receiving corps ranked in the top 5 last year. I get your point, Norwood, Fowler, Sunshine, Green, and Booker weren't pro-bowl options. Darby had a few targets late in the season but it was a thimble in an ocean. But when you balance it out, most QBs would love to have elite options 1 and 2 at the expense of average to below average options 3-5. I just don't see this as a worthwhile caveat for last year, even if what you say is technically valid.

Would most kill for the protection and running game from last year?

Broncos have replaced at minimum three of their starting o line and it looks like Paradis might be the only returning starter, due to how bad the line was last year.

I really think it's reaching to say that DT and Sanders are such wildcards to diminish TS being so high in all those categories compared to a decade of first year starters.

It's just too large a sample size along with the fact we know the offense wasn't good in '15, and the line and running game were horrible in '16.

It's just really hard to make the case that he landed in a great offense.

Not to stir the pot too much but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Most of those "first year starters" were rookies on shit teams, not guys who got to learn the playbook for a year, learn from a HOFer, and start for the defending champions. Those stats look fine but are a little misleading.

I'm not trying to throw shade on TS, but he was what, the 26th ranked QB in the league last year? It's always more than stats. TS beat up on and padded his stats on below .500 teams (his wins and about 1/2 our schedule) and got smoked by winning teams. I know what my eyes saw and for every Cincy game, there was a KC part 2.

Originally Posted by HORSEPOWER 56

Not to stir the pot too much but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Most of those "first year starters" were rookies on shit teams, not guys who got to learn the playbook for a year, learn from a HOFer, and start for the defending champions. Those stats look fine but are a little misleading.

I'm not trying to throw shade on TS, but he was what, the 26th ranked QB in the league last year? It's always more than stats. TS beat up on and padded his stats on below .500 teams (his wins and about 1/2 our schedule) and got smoked by winning teams. I know what my eyes saw and for every Cincy game, there was a KC part 2.

Really?

It's OK to compare him to 5, 6, 10+ year vets (how he compared last year to the league), but we are going to, without any analysis, throw out what he did by saying most of the other guys on that list played on worst teams? Had "easier" schedules. That seams very, very subjective.

Also, you say defending champions as if that means everything was easy. We were the defending champs almost entirely due to the defense. The offense was not good the year the team won the SB. Outside of Sanders and DT, there was no reliable slot or TE, CJ was hurt most of the year. The right and left tackles were amongst the worst in the league, as was the run game.

That just sound like an offensive juggernaut he fell into. Take someone like Dak, he fell into a primo cushion, with that offensive line and Elliot. Did Siemian have anything like that?

As to not being a rookie, granted, he got to take third team/scout reps for a year. That cannot be discounted, as that gives him a leg up, but really, how much of a let considering how few quality reps he was getting in practice and his only NFL snap in a regular season game was a kneel down.

I don't have time to look at all the first year players that didn't start their rookie year. The most famous one in recent year comes to mind without doing research, so here is how his first year starting (second year in NFL) compares to Siemian in the same situation.

Obviously, the next comment will be, "but, Brady played in a different era" but if we continue to contend that there is no player in the history of the NFL to compare Siemian to, then I don't know where to go from here other than, "but we could see with our yes that he wasn't very good," which is beyond subjective.

If someone comes up with a list of "acceptable" comparisons, such as any other QBs that first started in their second year, then I would be more than happy to do those statistical comparisons.

Brady vs. Siemian

Rating: Brady 86.5 > Siemian 84.6
Yards: Siemian 3401 > Brady 2843
Y/Attempt: Siemian 6.8 > Brady 6.4
Y/Game: Siemian 242.9 > 189.5
TDs: Both with 18 (Brady with 2 more INTs)
INT%: Siemian 2.1% > Brady 2.9%
Wins: = Brady 11 > Siemian 8
4th QTR Comebacks 4th: Brady 4 > Siemian 3
300 Yrd Games: Siemian 3 > Brady 1
Completion %: Brady 63.9% > 59.5%

Code:

Player    Year    GS    Cmp    Att    Cmp%    Yds    TD    TD%    Int    Int%    Lng    Y/A    AY/A    Y/C    Y/G    Rate    Sk    Yds    NY/A    ANY/A    Sk%    4QC    GWD    AV
Brady    2001    14    264    413    63.9    2843    18    4.4    12    2.9    91    6.9    6.4    10.8    189.5    86.5    41    216    5.79    5.39    9    4    5    12
Siemian    2016    14    289    486    59.5    3401    18    3.7    10    2.1    76    7    6.8    11.8    242.9    84.6    31    187    6.22    6.04    6    3    2    9

T, are you related to Siemian? I'm willing to give him a chance to overcome the dinks and dunks from last year, but I doubt even his mom is as big a fan as you.

I tried posting similar stats several times last year to try and get people to at least get past their preconceived notions about his draft status, but people didn't give a crap about it and found anyway they could to minimize the meaningfulness of such stats.

People would much rather just assume that TS is Kyle Orton or Alex Smith than believe that there is any possibility at all that he could potentially grow past his meager beginnings.

Rather than take it as it was meant (that it's too early to write the book on TS's career) they just liked to assume I was saying that TS was the next Tom Brady or something...which I never obviously said.

Originally Posted by Freyaka

I tried posting similar stats several times last year to try and get people to at least get past their preconceived notions about his draft status, but people didn't give a crap about it and found anyway they could to minimize the meaningfulness of such stats.

People would much rather just assume that TS is Kyle Orton or Alex Smith than believe that there is any possibility at all that he could potentially grow past his meager beginnings.

Rather than take it as it was meant (that it's too early to write the book on TS's career) they just liked to assume I was saying that TS was the next Tom Brady or something...which I never obviously said.

It's funny people keep bringing up Kyle Orton. Many hated him from the moment he stepped
off the plane from Chicago. There wasn't anything he could do to appease them. The thing
about it is that Orton played very well until he incurred his high ankle sprains, and at one
time he was playing on two at the same time.

Trevor Siemian went through something similar in certain ways. Nobody particularly hated
him that I know of, but he was lowly regarded as a 7th round draft choice. He was just a few
picks away from being "Mr. Irrelevant." He was destined to be a camp body.

In the meantime, something happened. He could make decisions. He could read defenses.
He even had a strong arm and some accuracy. He was good enough to win the job as the
starting QB for the Denver Broncos. But that wasn't good enough to influence many fans. He
was still that 7th round draft choice who was keeping the position warm until a real
quarterback came along.

Funny thing, though. He was winning games, and this statistics rivaled first year QBs who
had been chosen in the first and second rounds. But . . . that 7th round thing. Then he hurt
his foot. Then he injured his shoulder -- far worse than anyone initially thought. His throwing
range, accuracy, and mobility suffered. Well, we knew it! The seventh-rounder sucked.

And here he is today, once again winning the starting job, and now he can keep the position
warm until a real quarterback comes along . . .

Originally Posted by spikerman

T, are you related to Siemian? I'm willing to give him a chance to overcome the dinks and dunks from last year, but I doubt even his mom is as big a fan as you.

Flag on the play, personal foul!!!!

lol, no, just really do think Broncos fans are really spoiled. Ironically, Mike Rice/Andrew Mason yesterday asked fans to call in and explain why they were so critical of Siemian (not sure that's the exact phrase they used) and one of the fans even used the explanation that the Broncos have a history of great QBs so we expect more from our QBs and Andrew Mason's response, was "well, now you know how the other half live" and then went on to explain how he grew up in the TB area and then they discussed in general how Broncos fans perceptions have been warped by Elway and the one in a million free agent signing of Manning, due to the very unique circumstances.

To be fair, some of those names ahead of him on some of those lists also wound up being shitty QBs. Nick Foles, RG3, Austin Davis, Derek Anderson, Colt McCoy, Mike Glennon all pop out to me. So if other QBs can be high on those lists and wind up sucking, so could TS.

Look, we're all rooting for the guy to succeed but geez dude. Are you his agent or something?

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

To be fair, some of those names ahead of him on some of those lists also wound up being shitty QBs. Nick Foles, RG3, Austin Davis, Derek Anderson, Colt McCoy, Mike Glennon all pop out to me. So if other QBs can be high on those lists and wind up sucking, so could TS.

Look, we're all rooting for the guy to succeed but geez dude. Are you his agent or something?

And there were a lot of names below him on those lists that have had very good years.

Again, I'm countering the "Rily Dixon Syndrome" (trademarked, I get credit when used) where in gameday threads and on Twitter, we see the constant "another ____ shank" as we watch the ball sail 40+ yards with zero return.

The critics are throwing out very subjective terms like: not good, sub par, mediocre, etc. when describing his first season. There is zero objective measure, and really very few subjective ones, where you can see his performance as a first year starter and call that a mediocre or sub par season. It was a VERY good season for a first year starter.

Now, that doesn't mean he will go on to a great career, but the narrative that he can't do any better than that, or that it was a bad first season, is just categorically false.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

To be fair, some of those names ahead of him on some of those lists also wound up being shitty QBs. Nick Foles, RG3, Austin Davis, Derek Anderson, Colt McCoy, Mike Glennon all pop out to me. So if other QBs can be high on those lists and wind up sucking, so could TS.

Look, we're all rooting for the guy to succeed but geez dude. Are you his agent or something?

That's kind of the point though Wave. It's too early to write the book on him. He could still end up a crappy QB, but he could end up much better than expected. Everyone assumes they know exactly how far he can climb and no further, but he's comparable to both good and bad QB's. He literally looked like a first year starter last year and that isn't a bad thing necessarily.

I've seen so many (not as much here as on the official forums) that are just dead set against him. Basically calling him a game manager, saying we know what we have with him and it's not good enough...

I think the point of posts like this is to get people to realize we don't know what we have yet, maybe we have a vague idea, but he's capable of more (and less) than current expectations and we have to wait and see over time if he improves.


Basically, a call to be patient and see what happens.

If Siemian is a 1st round pick and Lynch is a 7th round pick, as they should have been, the world is a normal place. These scouts need to step up their game.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

If Siemian is a 1st round pick and Lynch is a 7th round pick, as they should have been, the world is a normal place. These scouts need to step up their game.

I think TS was originally projected to be a third round pick, his ACL injury derailed that. Had he not been injured and we drafted TS in the third, not a soul would be ripping on him right now, we'd all be excited about his prospects.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

If Siemian is a 1st round pick and Lynch is a 7th round pick, as they should have been, the world is a normal place. These scouts need to step up their game.

No QB with Lynch's physical toolset would ever go in the 7th round. He has all the tools to be a great QB. Scouts will take the chance every single time that they can grab a raw specimen and coach up the rest.