Lou anarumo

[casear2727]

(01-06-2024, 07:25 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You lost me here. 

It is never "fair" to extrapolate 5 games (29.4%) into a 17 game season for any player for any sport. Just look at the MLB COVID shortened season and how many guys did crazy fluke runs. Guys have good stretches and bad stretches all the time, and how does one determine if a player is healthy and just playing bad vs hurt? Is it just whenever they start playing well that they're suddenly healthy? It's also extra not fair to extrapolate a cherrypicked 29.4% of a season into a fully season for a player who has never made 17 healthy regular season starts in a season. I think Burrow's single season record right now is 14 in 2022.

Also it's amazing how quickly the narrative has been cemented that Boyd cost Burrow the W. Not the horrible redzone INT Burrow threw in the endzone for his 2nd INT, and ignore the fact that Boyd took a short pass 64 yards to put them on the 7 yard line to win it before Burrow took a sack to move them back to the 14 and then Burrow ran for 1 yard on 2nd and goal from the 14. Burrow won it and Boyd lost it, simple as that apparently. Boyd needed to catch it so he certainly had a hand in the loss, but just struck me as funny at how quickly it became he lost what Burrow had won.

We played 2 very good teams, 2 very decent teams and one bad team - my personal opinion scale says that is fair to extrapolate.  

I did not "cherry pick" anything.  I referenced the games Burrow appeared to be healthy and I said as much.

We had the ball TWICE more after Burrow's last interception, Boyd's drop was the last play by the offense with a minute left to play.  I did not say Boyd lost the game, but him catching the ball, that hit his hands, would have been a go ahead TD, excuse me for expecting a player being paid $10M to catch a 13 yard pass, especially in a clutch situation.  If we had ONE play to do over that game it would NOT be a previous interception. It would be to give Tyler another chance to catch the easy go ahead TD.

I think what I said may not be perfect but it is common sense, disagree all you want.  

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(01-06-2024, 07:59 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I did not "cherry pick" anything.  I referenced the games Burrow appeared to be healthy and I said as much.

Joe Burrow was a full participate all Week 4 of practice. He stunk therefore he's "not healthy". He was a full participant in all of Week 5 of practice. He played well therefore he's "healthy".

The inclusion of a week where he was full go for all the practices but didn't perform well would have changed your 17 game extrapolation from 41 TDs to 34 TDs and 5,032 yards to 4,661 yards.

That's why it was cherry picked, because there's no real definitive point where Joe Burrow wasn't and was healthy. Just when he wasn't and was playing well. Those two are not necessarily the same. 

The fact that 1 extra game being included can change the numbers THAT drastically is also why you can't take 29.4% of a season and just say that the rest of the season would have continued like that. Even more so considering the games you're cutting off and extrapolating over to finish the season are the 1st, 7th, 15th, 27th, 12th, 7th, 3rd, and 11th scoring defenses. That's just one game against a below average scoring defense, and 4 against the top-7. 

You're extrapolating over nearly as many top-7 scoring defense games as there are games in your sample size. Lol

[007BengalsFan]

(01-06-2024, 07:43 PM)PCB Bengal Fan Wrote: Does'nt change the fact that the Defense was terrible this year.

I have never said the defense was good this year.   The point I have made over and over again is the offense has been just as bad yet many people want to give the offense a pass and keep blaming the defense.  This is especially crazy when part of the defensive problems have been due to the poor offensive play.

[007BengalsFan]

(01-06-2024, 06:40 PM)casear2727 Wrote: We get it, you are a Burrow hater.  Maybe go be a Browns fan? 

You sound like one of those Andy Dalton supporters that told everybody to go root for another team if they said anything they didnt like about Dalton.  I can be a Bengals fan and talk about Burrow's shortfalls.   I do think Burrow is a good QB but he needs to play better and stay healthy.    ...and its not just Burrow I see issues with.  The Bengals have one of the top paid offensive lines in the NFL.  They need to play better.  The Bengals offense as a whole needs to play better.  They are one of the highest paid offenses in football.  They need to play like it.

(01-06-2024, 06:40 PM)casear2727 Wrote: The defense has 5 starters/rotating players on rookie deals.  You dont seem to understand how this impacts spending.  

You seem to be of the belief that people just don't understand spending when its quite simple.  The Bengals have so many defensive guys on rookie deals because the Bengals decided to not spend the money on veterans like Ogunjobi, Bates and Bell so you have to replace them with guys that are cheaper and not as capable.   That's fine if you dont want to pay veteran defensive players so you can save the money to spend more on offense but dont turn around then blame the defense when they dont have the same amount of talent they used to have.  If you are going to boost spending for the offense and have Burrow be the offense, the offense needs to be the side of the ball that carries the team.  Its funny to have the 6th highest paid offense in the NFL ranked #20 in scoring yet having people complain about how horrible the defense is when it is ranked #21.

[casear2727]

(01-06-2024, 10:25 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: I have never said the defense was good this year.   The point I have made over and over again is the offense has been just as bad yet many people want to give the offense a pass and keep blaming the defense.  This is especially crazy when part of the defensive problems have been due to the poor offensive play.

The offense is centered around Burrow.  It doesnt take a genius to figure this out.  Not one player dominates the defense like the QB does the offense. 

We have the HIGHEST paid dline in the NFL, we just extended BOTH LBs on their 2nd contracts.  Burrow being injured is THE reason why the offense was bad.  The defensive line was bad, the linebackers were bad, and the Dbacks were bad, however these are the same exact players the last 2 years with the exception of a couple of safeties.

Ogunjobi had a major injury and couldnt pass the physical how do you NOT know this?  Paying a safety 64M with this roster would be dumb especially with a 1st Rd draft choice backing him up.  Did you just start watching this year?

Your argument simply makes no sense.

[casear2727]

(01-06-2024, 08:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Joe Burrow was a full participate all Week 4 of practice. He stunk therefore he's "not healthy". He was a full participant in all of Week 5 of practice. He played well therefore he's "healthy".

The inclusion of a week where he was full go for all the practices but didn't perform well would have changed your 17 game extrapolation from 41 TDs to 34 TDs and 5,032 yards to 4,661 yards.

That's why it was cherry picked, because there's no real definitive point where Joe Burrow wasn't and was healthy. Just when he wasn't and was playing well. Those two are not necessarily the same. 

The fact that 1 extra game being included can change the numbers THAT drastically is also why you can't take 29.4% of a season and just say that the rest of the season would have continued like that. Even more so considering the games you're cutting off and extrapolating over to finish the season are the 1st, 7th, 15th, 27th, 12th, 7th, 3rd, and 11th scoring defenses. That's just one game against a below average scoring defense, and 4 against the top-7. 

You're extrapolating over nearly as many top-7 scoring defense games as there are games in your sample size. Lol

What a stupid to argument to even have.  Seriously stupid.  Add in the 6th game all you want, it still reveals how valuable Burrow is.  How do you NOT understand the point?  With all due respect, if you are a Burrow hater like the other guy then please just dont reply to my comments as I have zero respect for anyone that is that ignorant.   

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(01-06-2024, 11:32 PM)casear2727 Wrote: What a stupid to argument to even have.  Seriously stupid.  Add in the 6th game all you want, it still reveals how valuable Burrow is.  How do you NOT understand the point?  With all due respect, if you are a Burrow hater like the other guy then please just dont reply to my comments as I have zero respect for anyone that is that ignorant.   

I'm neither a Burrow "hater" as I called him the 2nd best QB in the league last year and heading into this year. I'm just pointing out that with all due respect (because putting that is that's apparently license to be completely disrespectful to other people it seems) the truly ignorant and stupid thing to say is that it is "very fair" to project an entire season's worth of stats based off a 5 game slice in the middle that starts whenever your eyes says it should and ends before a stretch against a ton of seriously good defenses... and then be an ass about it for no real reason. What's your problem?

[casear2727]

(01-06-2024, 11:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I'm neither a Burrow "hater" as I called him the 2nd best QB in the league last year and heading into this year. I'm just pointing out that with all due respect (because putting that is that's apparently license to be completely disrespectful to other people it seems) the truly ignorant and stupid thing to say is that it is "very fair" to project an entire season's worth of stats based off a 5 game slice in the middle that starts whenever your eyes says it should and ends before a stretch against a ton of seriously good defenses... and then be an ass about it for no real reason. What's your problem?

I specifically stated that is was MY personal opinion that it was fair to extrapolate based upon the teams within those 5 games, you mentioned an additional game.  Which is fine, the entire point is that Burrow is the KEY Piece of the offense.  He is THE most valuable piece of the offense.  It was a stupid argument by someone else to suggest that the offense should be fine without him being injured.  That is a dumb premise.  Burrow not playing healthy is 90% why the offense failed.  The other guy doesnt understand that not one player has the same impact on defense.  

You jumped in on one sentence and want to make a some argument regarding extrapolation, which really has very little to do with the actual point, as there are so many measures that detail Burrows importance.  I dont see a reason to debate the effectiveness of extrapolation yet you made a 5 paragraph argument which really adds nothing to the conversation.  

A fan is either intelligent and understands Burrow's huge impact on the offense, despite the scheme, play calls, and oline, or he is not.   In my humble opinion.

[Essex Johnson]

(01-06-2024, 07:25 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You lost me here. 

It is never "fair" to extrapolate 5 games (29.4%) into a 17 game season for any player for any sport. Just look at the MLB COVID shortened season and how many guys did crazy fluke runs. Guys have good stretches and bad stretches all the time, and how does one determine if a player is healthy and just playing bad vs hurt? Is it just whenever they start playing well that they're suddenly healthy? It's also extra not fair to extrapolate a cherrypicked 29.4% of a season into a fully season for a player who has never made 17 healthy regular season starts in a season. I think Burrow's single season record right now is 14 in 2022.

Also it's amazing how quickly the narrative has been cemented that Boyd cost Burrow the W. Not the horrible redzone INT Burrow threw in the endzone for his 2nd INT, and ignore the fact that Boyd took a short pass 64 yards to put them on the 7 yard line to win it before Burrow took a sack to move them back to the 14 and then Burrow ran for 1 yard on 2nd and goal from the 14. Burrow won it and Boyd lost it, simple as that apparently. Boyd needed to catch it so he certainly had a hand in the loss, but just struck me as funny at how quickly it became he lost what Burrow had won.

Totally agree, people act like Boyd cost us game with drop but forget Joe cost us 6 to 14 points with 2 ints last 9 mins of game, which would have made Boyd drop pretty much null and void.

[casear2727]

(01-07-2024, 01:05 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Totally agree, people act like Boyd cost us game  with drop but forget Joe cost us 6 to 14 points with 2 ints last 9 mins of game, which would have made Boyd drop pretty much null and void.

Boyd dropped an easy 13 yard pass TD with a minute to go.  He catches that it doesn't matter what any player did prior.  Burrows interceptions didnt help but we had the ball twice after those, anything could have happened.  Playing the politically correct "one play didnt lose us the game" is unnecessary with fans on. message board as we all witnessed the timing of the drop.  A better argument would be that Stroud still had a minute something left.

Burrow detractors are comical at best.  He is not perfect and has been hurt too much but we are a much better team with him.

[*pally*]

Lou did adjust his defense by not calling half his playbook. You can make adjustments but when your DBs zig when they were supposed to zag it doesn't matter what the adjustments are.

Dehner had an interesting column in The Athletic (paywall warning) https://theathletic.com/5179557/2024/01/05/bengals-secondary-explosive-plays/
-Mike Hilton spent most of the season babysitting the young ones instead of focusing on his own play
-Logan Wilson was watching behind him to make sure they were doing the right thing not ahead of him

Because the young DBs were still learning they never developed chemistry or improved on their communication skills. That in turn disrupted the entire defense. The good news is that no position shows great improvement from year one to year 2 than DB. We saw some flashes of what they can be when everything clicks. I'm looking forward to seeing it.

[casear2727]

(01-07-2024, 12:51 PM)pally Wrote: Lou did adjust his defense by not calling half his playbook.  You can make adjustments but when your DBs zig when they were supposed to zag it doesn't matter what the adjustments are.

Dehner had an interesting column in The Athletic   (paywall warning) https://theathletic.com/5179557/2024/01/05/bengals-secondary-explosive-plays/
-Mike Hilton spent most of the season babysitting the young ones instead of focusing on his own play
-Logan Wilson was watching behind him to make sure they  were doing the right thing not ahead of him

Because the young DBs were still learning they never developed chemistry or improved on their communication skills.  That in turn disrupted the entire defense.  The good news is that no position shows great improvement from year one to year 2 than DB. We saw some flashes of what they can be when everything clicks.  I'm looking forward to seeing it.

That was a very insightful article by Dehner.  

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-06-2024, 08:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Joe Burrow was a full participate all Week 4 of practice. He stunk therefore he's "not healthy". He was a full participant in all of Week 5 of practice. He played well therefore he's "healthy".

The inclusion of a week where he was full go for all the practices but didn't perform well would have changed your 17 game extrapolation from 41 TDs to 34 TDs and 5,032 yards to 4,661 yards.

That's why it was cherry picked, because there's no real definitive point where Joe Burrow wasn't and was healthy. Just when he wasn't and was playing well. Those two are not necessarily the same. 

The fact that 1 extra game being included can change the numbers THAT drastically is also why you can't take 29.4% of a season and just say that the rest of the season would have continued like that. Even more so considering the games you're cutting off and extrapolating over to finish the season are the 1st, 7th, 15th, 27th, 12th, 7th, 3rd, and 11th scoring defenses. That's just one game against a below average scoring defense, and 4 against the top-7. 

You're extrapolating over nearly as many top-7 scoring defense games as there are games in your sample size. Lol

Just for the sake of argument (for both sides), the first game he broke out of the pocket to avoid a sack or to run, where he had to put stress on the calf multiple times, is a good time to determine that he was "healthy enough". 

Without going back, i'm not sure which game that was. 

[*Synric*]

(01-07-2024, 01:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Just for the sake of argument (for both sides), the first game he broke out of the pocket to avoid a sack or to run, where he had to put stress on the calf multiple times, is a good time to determine that he was "healthy enough". 

Without going back, i'm not sure which game that was. 

The Cardinals game I remember him skipping out of a sack just to get sacked a second later. He did have his longest air completion of his career that game right 40+ yards to Chase? I do know before the Cardinals game the average depth of target was like 3 yards or something. 

[reuben.ahmed]

(01-07-2024, 12:51 PM)pally Wrote: Lou did adjust his defense by not calling half his playbook.  You can make adjustments but when your DBs zig when they were supposed to zag it doesn't matter what the adjustments are.

Dehner had an interesting column in The Athletic   (paywall warning) https://theathletic.com/5179557/2024/01/05/bengals-secondary-explosive-plays/
-Mike Hilton spent most of the season babysitting the young ones instead of focusing on his own play
-Logan Wilson was watching behind him to make sure they  were doing the right thing not ahead of him

Because the young DBs were still learning they never developed chemistry or improved on their communication skills.  That in turn disrupted the entire defense.  The good news is that no position shows great improvement from year one to year 2 than DB. We saw some flashes of what they can be when everything clicks.  I'm looking forward to seeing it.

I hope he doesn't magically have to babysit or Logan look behind him next year, I just don't see that huge jump happening. How would they have to do that all year and then suddenly clicks in the offseason where they don't have to do that anymore? I know rookies improve. They were terrible. No other team has rookies on their defense also dealing with this issue? I get it's an excuse, but if Hilton is having to teach all year and Lou can't do anything about to help them other than throw out half the playbook? We were gashed 10 times a game with explosive plays. There seems like more going on than just blaming rookies, like Awuzie doesn't look nearly full speed and even with Reader in they're 31st against the run.

How are they suddenly going to get chemistry when they showed they don't have any, they had some flashes but that's because they have talent. I hope they learn from their mistakes but I believe in experience gets you better the fastest, you have to play to improve, and there aren't any games in the off season lol.

They've got to improve on defense and quick, whether that's drafting or trading, they don't belong in the AFC-N letting squeaky offenses beat their porous defense while Burrow struggles to move the ball on any of them. CTB and Battle looked like they were good picks though!