(03-20-2018, 11:00 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This makes no sense. You seem to place high importance on where Dalton has ranked from year to year, placing him as an "average" starter due to those rankings. 

Have you ever wondered how Dalton could rank 20th, 13th, 15th, 13th, 25th etc in year to year rankings, yet be ranked 10th in career rankings?

The biggest reason for this is that Dalton has been consistent. His worst years haven't been as bad as those of guys like Cam, Flacco, Eli, Mariota, etc. Even when he was ranked 25th, his rating was 83.3 IIRC, which isn't all that bad in the grand scheme of things. Cam Newton's worst rating is a 75.8 I believe. He has a couple years like that under his belt. 

A lot of QBs flash, then fall off. Good QBs have terrible years. Dalton has been consistently "good enough" or whatever term or phrase you want to use. In the end, consistency is part of what makes Dalton good, or "above average". The career ranking reflects that.

(03-20-2018, 11:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  Let's just say you and other fanboys should be happy we are just focusing on passing stats, because you do not want to add what a QB can do with his feet to the equation.

(03-20-2018, 01:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Andy's career rating would have placed him 17th on the passer rating this year;

(03-21-2018, 09:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is getting silly..

You are ranking Dalton behind a bunch of guys who have had worse careers (lower QB rating) just because they had a good season in '17.  Stafford ranked #6 in passer rating in '17, but has a lower career passer rating that Dalton.  

Josh McCowan has been an NFL QB for 15 seasons and has only 3 seasons with a passer rating over 80.  Yet you are saying he is a top 10 QB compared to Dalton because he had a nice 2017 season. 

Mental gymastics and stat spinning at its finest.  Just another attempt to ignore that fact that QBs have up and down seasons.  You can't compare single seasons to career numbers.

(03-20-2018, 11:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No, I've never wondered that and have explained it ad nausium. He is an average NFL QB, he has been rated average throughout his career, he's just been average (use your word consistent) for a long time. Let's just say you and other fanboys should be happy we are just focusing on passing stats, because you do not want to add what a QB can do with his feet to the equation.

But I understand. This preseason I'll most likely rank Dalton mid-pack, as will most experts. There will be the usual suspects that chime in with "disrespect", "hater" ect... I know this because I saw the same movie last year. But who knows, 8th year could be the charm. 

Sorry that that makes "no sense" to you. 

(03-21-2018, 03:00 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. No need to get testy and start throwing the fanboy word around. I didn't call you a hater, now did I?

2. Consistent does not = average. I explained myself pretty well.

3. Add all the rushing stats you want. That will only push Dalton further up. Unless you don't think rush TDs are important for some reason.

4. I'll continue to rank Dalton somewhere between 10th and 14th and overall for his career, I'll continue to be accurate. Each year, some scrub like Josh McCown, Case Keenum, Josh Freeman or Colin Kaepernick will have a fluke year where his passer rating is higher than Dalton's. That doesn't mean these guys are better than Dalton.

Lets look at a different QB. Matt Stafford. He has an average year to year ranking of 15.5 (according to ESPN stats). Do you think it's fair to say that's where he deserves to be ranked? I don't. I think he's closer to 10th than 15th or 16th. Dalton has an average ranking of 15.4. 

Again, so many flashes in the pan every year rank higher than these guys. Last year it was Keenum and Josh McCown. In 2014, Fitzpatrick, Flacco, Cutler, Sanchez and Orton finished ahead of both Stafford and Dalton. Would you take any of those guys over Stafford or Dalton? What about 2013, when Foles, McCown and Kaepernick bumped Dalton and Stafford down to 15th and 19th respectively?

This is why rankings in career rating is a more accurate way to judge a QB among his peers than year to year rankings. Unless you'd prefer a guy like Fitzpatrick, Keenum, McCown, Orton or Sanchez just because they ranked higher for a particular season.

(03-21-2018, 12:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But I get it, you and others on the forum come into this season putting Andy top 10, I'll most likely but him midpack again. Then we'll see whose right and who is "getting silly"

(03-21-2018, 03:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What range do you define as "average"?

(03-21-2018, 03:24 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: I'd like to think I'm pretty rational on things, so here it goes:

1.  I think Dalton is a guy who falls in the 10-18 range.  He's right on the cusp of being a top 10 guy IF he has a good line and a good surrounding cast.  Without it, he's basically a good to average QB.

2.  I think the value of Dalton goes down each year as he gets older.  I a lot of these "rankings" tend to favor upside.  Dalton has very little upside, if any, from where he is at as a QB.  You pretty much know what you are getting with him.

3.  Knowing what you are getting also helps his value a little bit.  You won't get a bust if you trade for him, but you also aren't getting a top 5 talent.

That being said, you wouldn't get much for him now, simply because the QB market it set.  Most, if not all, of the teams in the league have either a set starter or have positioned themselves in the draft to add one.  If a team is looking at him in the offseason you would probably get a first rounder for him.  If a team is desperate because of injury, you could get more.

(03-21-2018, 03:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Middle 3rd. 

Nothing wrong with being there; you know exactly what you're going to get with Andy. 

(03-21-2018, 03:24 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: I'd like to think I'm pretty rational on things, so here it goes:

1.  I think Dalton is a guy who falls in the 10-18 range.  He's right on the cusp of being a top 10 guy IF he has a good line and a good surrounding cast.  Without it, he's basically a good to average QB.

2.  I think the value of Dalton goes down each year as he gets older.  I a lot of these "rankings" tend to favor upside.  Dalton has very little upside, if any, from where he is at as a QB.  You pretty much know what you are getting with him.

3.  Knowing what you are getting also helps his value a little bit.  You won't get a bust if you trade for him, but you also aren't getting a top 5 talent.

That being said, you wouldn't get much for him now, simply because the QB market it set.  Most, if not all, of the teams in the league have either a set starter or have positioned themselves in the draft to add one.  If a team is looking at him in the offseason you would probably get a first rounder for him.  If a team is desperate because of injury, you could get more.

(03-21-2018, 03:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It absolutely means they were better that year. Now if we want to handout a lifetime achievement award, feel free; but as I say they hand out the Lombardi on an annual basis. Funny how you say you'll continue to be accurate by ranking him 10-14 when he has only been in that range once in his 7 year career.  

Let's just wait until we rank them this preseason and see who is proven right again. 

(03-21-2018, 03:24 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: I'd like to think I'm pretty rational on things, so here it goes:

1.  I think Dalton is a guy who falls in the 10-18 range.  He's right on the cusp of being a top 10 guy IF he has a good line and a good surrounding cast.  Without it, he's basically a good to average QB.

2.  I think the value of Dalton goes down each year as he gets older.  I a lot of these "rankings" tend to favor upside.  Dalton has very little upside, if any, from where he is at as a QB.  You pretty much know what you are getting with him.

3.  Knowing what you are getting also helps his value a little bit.  You won't get a bust if you trade for him, but you also aren't getting a top 5 talent.

That being said, you wouldn't get much for him now, simply because the QB market it set.  Most, if not all, of the teams in the league have either a set starter or have positioned themselves in the draft to add one.  If a team is looking at him in the offseason you would probably get a first rounder for him.  If a team is desperate because of injury, you could get more.

(03-21-2018, 03:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So #11 is "average"?

(03-21-2018, 03:48 PM)Synric Wrote: If you use passer rating as the only measurement to rank QBs Aaron Rodgers would be #1 but he's not...That spot belongs to Tom Brady. 

I could even argue for Ben Roethlisberger being #2 with 3 super bowl apperances and 2 wins.

(03-21-2018, 03:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt post-season success should play a role in the rankings. 

(03-20-2018, 06:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You asked how anyone could consider him an average QB and I used his career average compared to this year's qualified QBs. I really do not care what analysis you chose to take seriously. You dismiss a comparison to one year stats but then brag about how you once calculated by game stats.

(03-20-2018, 06:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Andy Dalton has been Top 10 in passer rating once in his career, higher than 15th twice in his career, and in the 20s twice in his career. He is coming off of a year where he was ranked 18th. You look up average in the dictionary and there's a picture of Andy Dalton.

(03-20-2018, 06:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the trusty "Top 10 in career passer rating" it has been addressed. This is something folks use to try and make Andy seem better than what he really is.  

(03-20-2018, 06:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Try a quick exercise to illustrate my point: Add 5 points to Andy's career rating and see how far up that pushes him, then subtract 5 points and see how far that takes him down. Then you may understand how much closer to the bottom he is than the top.   

(03-20-2018, 06:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I continue to say: You and others can think Andy Dalton is or has been anything other than an average QB in the NFL if you want, just don't expect many rational analysts to agree with you.

(03-21-2018, 09:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't compare single seasons to career numbers.