(04-14-2017, 08:11 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Palmer was worth what he was traded for. Oakland's dysfunction doesn't = Palmer not being worth a 1st and 2nd at 31 years old with plenty of solid years left.

Sorry, I disagree. Maybe he was worth a 1 OR a 2, but not both.

(04-14-2017, 08:22 PM)Beaker Wrote: Sorry, I disagree. Maybe he was worth a 1 OR a 2, but not both.

You should apologize for being wrong, not disagreeing. 

If you look at what other QBs have gotten in trade, a 1 & 2 doesn't look like a lot. Compare it to the Jay Cutler trade for example. Also keep in mind that the Raider had a decent record that year, so the picks weren't at the top of the draft. People overestimate the value of draft picks. We wound up getting Dre Kirkpatrick and Gio Bernard. Decent players (nothing special) for a franchise QB? For a team that desperately needed one? 

I'd take that trade 10/10 times. The Raiders just had too much dysfunction elsewhere to take advantage.

(04-14-2017, 08:11 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Palmer was worth what he was traded for. Oakland's dysfunction doesn't = Palmer not being worth a 1st and 2nd at 31 years old with plenty of solid years left.

Agreed. I think he proved that in Arizona. Raiders just didn't have a team around him.

(04-14-2017, 08:08 PM)Beaker Wrote: We know what happened...oakland kept losing, palmer got traded again, and hue was fired.

Mckenzie hadn't, and still hasn't, completed his makeover of that roster. Palmer would've been throwing to cooper, Crabtree and others that weren't there when he was.

(04-14-2017, 08:11 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Palmer was worth what he was traded for. Oakland's dysfunction doesn't = Palmer not being worth a 1st and 2nd at 31 years old with plenty of solid years left.

This

(04-14-2017, 09:30 AM)Beaker Wrote: QBs are always over-valued in trades....Carson Palmer should have taught you that. It's not outside of the realm of possibility for some team to give up a 1 or 2 for AJM. I still think the Bengals should pitch him and our 1st round pick to the 49ers for the #2 pick and go get Solomon Thomas. We can always throw in a later round pick if we have to to make the deal.

I agree

(04-14-2017, 08:35 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Decent players (nothing special) 

This describes carson palmer perfectly. Not worth what was given up for him.

I'm convinced this is AJM, Webb, or his parents...Nobody could be this damn bias to a back up player. I'm sure he probably loves Tebow. 

(04-14-2017, 08:35 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: You should apologize for being wrong, not disagreeing. 

If you look at what other QBs have gotten in trade, a 1 & 2 doesn't look like a lot. Compare it to the Jay Cutler trade for example. Also keep in mind that the Raider had a decent record that year, so the picks weren't at the top of the draft. People overestimate the value of draft picks. We wound up getting Dre Kirkpatrick and Gio Bernard. Decent players (nothing special) for a franchise QB? For a team that desperately needed one? 

I'd take that trade 10/10 times. The Raiders just had too much dysfunction elsewhere to take advantage.

I agree that Palmer was worth what Oakland gave us. I think the proof is in the pudding considering what he did in Arizona. Just because he didn't do so well on a no so good team doesn't mean much. If you look at his career as a whole it's obvious to me that he's worth a few draft picks that might not even be that good.

By the way, I wish the Browns would swap us first round picks, so we would get the number 1 pick, and possibly a fourth for AJM. I'd be in heaven over a deal like this.

(04-15-2017, 02:37 AM)The Caped Crusader Wrote: By the way, I wish the Browns would swap us first round picks, so we would get the number 1 pick, and possibly a fourth for AJM. I'd be in heaven over a deal like this.

I would be happy with a 3rd rounder. If we got a 2nd for him I would be ecstatic.

(04-14-2017, 03:34 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Palmer has shown he was still capable of playing at a high level.  Who knows what would have happened in Oakland with him and hue.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep.....and his numbers weren't THAT terrible in Oakland where he was forcing things quite a bit to try to win on a terrible team.

(04-15-2017, 02:39 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: I would be happy with a 3rd rounder. If we got a 2nd for him I would be ecstatic.

Patience and if not this year we put a 2nd round tender on him next year and likely we get it.

My point is I know we all want another great pick in 2017 but lack of patience lowers the team's ability to bargain and get more. Giving him up for a 2nd (unless 1st pick of 2nd round) in my opinion is losing in the trade. Our guy behind AJM never played 1 NFL regular season snap so very risky to have unproven back up QB. For those saying we are in rebuild mode then why don't you also suggest selling off AD, AJ, Geno and Dunlap for picks?

(04-15-2017, 07:43 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yep.....and his numbers weren't THAT terrible in Oakland where he was forcing things quite a bit to try to win on a terrible team.

4000 yards, 22 TDs, 14 INTs in his only full season. 85.3 rating with no-name WRs.

If AJ McCarron is worth a (high) 2nd, Palmer was worth a (low) 1st and 2nd. They were/are in different stratospheres. 

Palmer and Dalton = proven franchise guys
McCarron = you hope that maybe he could become a viable starter, but there's only 5 games to go on...with mixed at best results

Big difference there.

(04-14-2017, 08:22 PM)Beaker Wrote: Sorry, I disagree. Maybe he was worth a 1 OR a 2, but not both.

Yeah...Oakland started the season really well that year with Jason Campbell as their QB then he got injured...and they panicked and gave up a 1st and 2nd for Palmer.

Of course, in hindsight...it's not like we got 2 Pro Bowl players with those picks.

(04-15-2017, 02:37 AM)The Caped Crusader Wrote: By the way, I wish the Browns would swap us first round picks, so we would get the number 1 pick, and possibly a fourth for AJM. I'd be in heaven over a deal like this.

To move from #9 pick to #1 pick would equate to a trade value of 1650 (3000 - 1350).  That would mean that AJ would have a trade value of the 5th or 6th (1700/1600 pnts) overall pick in this draft without even factoring in the extra 4th you mentioned. That would be an insane price for him. Cool if it happens, but wildly unlikely.

(04-14-2017, 03:43 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Brady started in 14 games in his first NFL playing time. Including playoffs, he started in 3 more games. So he started for 17 games and was sacked 46 times. His sack average was 2.7.

McCarron started in 4 games, however, came in after one series for the Steelers game. So can include that. So in 5 games he was sacked 15 times. His sack average was 3.

Now, there's something you're overlooking. The Patriots offensive line wasn't good. Even before Brady came in, in 2000 they gave up 48 sacks. In the 2 games that Bledsoe started, he was sacked 5 times. So the offensive line gave up 51 sacks that season as well. So between 2000 and 2001, the Patriots gave up 99 sacks in 2 seasons. I'm not throwing in 1999 because that would add ANOTHER 56 sacks. And 2002 they went down with 31, which isn't bad. But that offensive line struggled a lot and it gets overlooked.

In 2015, the Bengals gave up 20 sacks with Andy Dalton starting for 13 games (12 and one series technically since the Steelers game he got hurt). In 2014, they gave up 26 sacks including the playoffs. Andy Dalton only had 24 sacks that year. In 2013, the Bengals gave up 29 sacks, 32 if you include playoffs.

So you would have to go 3 years of Andy Dalton's sack average to get to the Patriots sack average for those 2 years.

Brady won IN SPITE of the offensive line. McCarron had more help around him that Brady did.

OK, cherrypicker......

I went directly to pro football reference, put Brady's stats and AJM's stats into a spreadsheet, Brady is listed above and AJM below.  I highlighted rate stats were AJM was better or equal to Brady in green.  This is a lot of green-



Including Tom Brady's 15th, 16th, 17th games of NFL experience after seeing defenses for a year and comparing that to AJM's handful of games is disingenuous.

You don't calculate sack "average" based on games, you calculate it based on dropbacks.

And you ignore the fact that perhaps Tom Brady was sacked because Tom Brady was inexperienced.  His sack % went from 9.0 to 4.9 in the second year.  Unless of course you think the Patriots offensive line just "got better."

You're comparing a NFL QB with 5 years of experience and an NFL QB with 1 full year+playoffs of experience to a QB with 4+ games of NFL experience.  And you only want to talk about the sacks.

And you can't even talk about sacks properly.

What do you have to say about all the rate stats in green?

Comparing QB's from the early 2000's to the mid 2010's...is apples to oranges as the league changed so much in regards to passing.

(04-15-2017, 06:57 PM)BigSeph Wrote: OK, cherrypicker......

I went directly to pro football reference, put Brady's stats and AJM's stats into a spreadsheet, Brady is listed above and AJM below.  I highlighted rate stats were AJM was better or equal to Brady in green.  This is a lot of green-



Including Tom Brady's 15th, 16th, 17th games of NFL experience after seeing defenses for a year and comparing that to AJM's handful of games is disingenuous.

You don't calculate sack "average" based on games, you calculate it based on dropbacks.

And you ignore the fact that perhaps Tom Brady was sacked because Tom Brady was inexperienced.  His sack % went from 9.0 to 4.9 in the second year.  Unless of course you think the Patriots offensive line just "got better."

You're comparing a NFL QB with 5 years of experience and an NFL QB with 1 full year+playoffs of experience to a QB with 4+ games of NFL experience.  And you only want to talk about the sacks.

And you can't even talk about sacks properly.

What do you have to say about all the rate stats in green?

The game has evolved in 14 years. But anyway.

Again, talked about how the offensive line got better. But they weren't good his first year nor the years prior.

Brady didn't have a reliable offense like the Bengals did. Brady had Troy Brown and Antowain Smith. Troy Brown only eclipsed 1000 yards receiving one time in his 15 year career. And it was in 2001.
Smith eclipsed 1000 rushing yards twice in his 9 year career.

Now, would you say the way the NFL is played now is different since 2001?

Also, who had the better offense? Would you rather have an offense with Antowain Smith, Troy Brown, David Patten, Terry Glenn, and Jermaine Wiggins?
Or would you rather have Jeremy Hill, AJ Green, Marvin Jones, Mohamed Sanu, and Tyler Eifert?

McCarron averaged less than 6 yards per pass attempt in his final 3 games.

The thing also is Brady struggled quite a bit early, but by his 3rd game he had already surpassed 300 pass yards. McCarron has only surpassed 200 passing yards twice in his five games. With the kind of offense we had.

Also, are we going to ignore that McCarron had less that 100 yards passing until 11 minutes left in the 4th quarter in the playoffs?

McCarron is nothing like Brady. It's hard to compare players from different eras. And yes. The early 2000's is a different era.

Tom Brady having a 86.5 QB rating in 2001 would rank him 6th. If that were 2015? That ranks him 25th. Right below Ryan Fitzpatrick.

I can also throw in another player. Matt Cassel.

His completion percentage was 63.4%. TD percentage was a 4.1. INT percentage was 2.1. Yards per attempt average was ALSO 7.2 like McCarron. AVA was 7.0. But his Y/C was at 11.3. Rating was 89.4. But he averaged 110 more YPG than McCarron did. Sack rate was also a 8.3.

So Cassel had more epxerience, so a bigger size sample, and had very identical  numbers that McCarron had. Some were better, some were worse. Except had more games, more wins, and more sample size.

(04-15-2017, 07:53 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: The game has evolved in 14 years. But anyway.

Again, talked about how the offensive line got better. But they weren't good his first year nor the years prior.

Brady didn't have a reliable offense like the Bengals did. Brady had Troy Brown and Antowain Smith. Troy Brown only eclipsed 1000 yards receiving one time in his 15 year career. And it was in 2001.
Smith eclipsed 1000 rushing yards twice in his 9 year career.

Now, would you say the way the NFL is played now is different since 2001?

Also, who had the better offense? Would you rather have an offense with Antowain Smith, Troy Brown, David Patten, Terry Glenn, and Jermaine Wiggins?
Or would you rather have Jeremy Hill, AJ Green, Marvin Jones, Mohamed Sanu, and Tyler Eifert?

McCarron averaged less than 6 yards per pass attempt in his final 3 games.

The thing also is Brady struggled quite a bit early, but by his 3rd game he had already surpassed 300 pass yards. McCarron has only surpassed 200 passing yards twice in his five games. With the kind of offense we had.

Also, are we going to ignore that McCarron had less that 100 yards passing until 11 minutes left in the 4th quarter in the playoffs?

McCarron is nothing like Brady. It's hard to compare players from different eras. And yes. The early 2000's is a different era.

Tom Brady having a 86.5 QB rating in 2001 would rank him 6th. If that were 2015? That ranks him 25th. Right below Ryan Fitzpatrick.

I can also throw in another player. Matt Cassel.

His completion percentage was 63.4%. TD percentage was a 4.1. INT percentage was 2.1. Yards per attempt average was ALSO 7.2 like McCarron. AVA was 7.0. But his Y/C was at 11.3. Rating was 89.4. But he averaged 110 more YPG than McCarron did. Sack rate was also a 8.3.

So Cassel had more epxerience, so a bigger size sample, and had very identical  numbers that McCarron had. Some were better, some were worse. Except had more games, more wins, and more sample size.

Yeah, excellent rebuttal to the rate stats - "the game was different" and "but Tom Brady's entire offense was crap."

Typical response on this board when it comes to AJM - aversion of facts and data, abundance of special pleading and post-hoc rationalizations.

I don't really care who you want to throw out there from recent draft classes, good luck finding one with that comp%, TD%, INT%, YPA and QB rating in their first season in the NFL.

I'm sure this is really frustrating for the AJM bashers, all these statistics in black and white. I guess that's why people resort to ignorant comments like "he can't beat zone" and "he gets sacked too much" and "he played like crap" and "he lost us the game" and "other QBs didn't have such a great super-awesome team like AJM had."

Matt Cassel sat on the bench behind Tom Brady for 3 whole years before he was pressed into duty. Do you really think AJM would play the same or worse than he did in 2015 if he were to take over at QB this year?

(04-15-2017, 08:31 PM)BigSeph Wrote: Yeah, excellent rebuttal to the rate stats - "the game was different" and "but Tom Brady's entire offense was crap."

Typical response on this board when it comes to AJM - aversion of facts and data, abundance of special pleading and post-hoc rationalizations.

I don't really care who you want to throw out there from recent draft classes, good luck finding one with that comp%, TD%, INT%, YPA and QB rating in their first season in the NFL.

I'm sure this is really frustrating for the AJM bashers, all these statistics in black and white.  I guess that's why people resort to ignorant comments like "he can't beat zone" and "he gets sacked too much" and "he played like crap" and "he lost us the game" and "other QBs didn't have such a great super-awesome team like AJM had."

Matt Cassel sat on the bench behind Tom Brady for 3 whole years before he was pressed into duty.  Do you really think AJM would play the same or worse than he did in 2015 if he were to take over at QB this year?

Except he's right... passing in the league was vastly different in 2001 than in 2015.


In 2015 there were 13 teams that threw for at least 4,000 yards.
In 2001? There was 1.

In 2015, there were 13 teams that threw for at least 30 TDs.
In 2001? There was 3.

In 2015 there were 15 teams with a QB Rating over 90.
In 2001? There was 4.

In 2015 there were 4 teams that threw at least 20 INT.
In 2001? There was 10.

- - - - - - - - - - -

We all know you have a constant hardon for McCarron, but the fact remains that he was surrounded by the best offensive weapons probably any Bengals team has ever had.

You say good luck finding those % numbers with someone else in their first season, I say McCarron wasn't in his first season and he was basically a game manager on a dumbed down offense on at the time, one of the most talented offenses in the NFL.



To answer your final question (as if your posts are actually anything more than constant love letters to McCarron) yes, he would do much worse than he did in 2015 if he took over this year. AJ Green is coming off an injury, Tyler Eifert had a disc removed, Gio is coming off a torn ACL, Hill still sucks, Whitworth and Zeitler are gone, Andre Smith sucks and is playing a position he's never played before, and Ogbuehi/Bodine/Fisher are starting on the three most important positions on the line.

If McCarron started for the 2017 Bengals, he would be hot garbage, and then eventually break when he held onto the ball for too long or got happy feet.


But of course I am wasting my words, because we all know you will just see "McCarron" and...