Driskel should be starter next year

[wolverine515151]

(12-17-2018, 11:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This formula is ridiculous.

If a QB throws an accurate pass then what difference does it make it there is a defender close by or not?  And anytime you throw subjective aspects like a receiver "having to adjust" it turns into garbage.  What is the exact definition of "adjustment".  What if the receiver has to raise his hands 6 inches?  Or a foot?  What if it is an intentional "back shoulder" throw?  What if a receiver prefers to reach and make the catch with his hands instead of catching it against his body?  And how can a six inch adjustment on a 60 yard pass be just as bad as a six inch adjustment on a 16 yard pass?

When you add in the subjective BS you get a formula that gives the same  credit for a 16 yard pass "under pressure" into a "tight window" as it does for completing a 60 yard bomb where the receiver moves his hands 6 inches.  Go read this guys comments about Dalton each year.  It is clear he does not like Dalton. He clearly was harder on Dalton with his subjective grading because he does not like Dalton.  Perfect example is while he brags about how this formula eliminates a WRs ability to bail out a QB he still claims Dalton was more efficient because he had better receivers.

Basically you have presented a formula that would allow a QB to never throw a ball over 16 yards, complete a lower percentage than Dalton, throw fewer tds than Dalton, throw more ints than Dalton and still be rated higher than Dalton.

How the **** do you know he was harder on Dalton. That's just a bias statement by a Dalton defender. The guy doesn't have any favorites from the looks of it. 

[KillerGoose]

(12-18-2018, 12:11 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: There's a good chance it would have been true. He had two bad games out of 3 with the same depleted roster as Driskel.  No eifert, no green. Dalton posted an average qb rating of 74. 

So you’re saying that it isn’t true, just that it maybe/could’ve/would’ve been true, possibly.

Gotcha.

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 12:15 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: 4 playoff games and 4 non playoff games. Only half of them used playoff games. That was only one playoff game so it doesn't make a huge difference. Then just look at the last 4 years without playoff games.

One above average ranking , one average and two below average. 

Still BS.  

"My logic is only wrong half the time, so that means it is still valid. Derp."


BTW if you just look at the last 4 seasons with no playoff games Dalton ranked in the top half of the league half of the time. (2 of 4)

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: TDs should still count in the evaluation of deep passes.  It may be that a defense is willing to give up a deep pass as long as it is not a td.  Or a pass that hits a receiver in stride allowing him to score is better than one the player has to dive for and can not score.

You scream bloody murder over a QB getting an extra 30% increase in passer rating for throwing a deep td instead of a deep non-td, but you don't have any problem at all with a QB getting a 300% increase on a 16 yard completion based on subjective BS like how close a defender was or if a receiver had to move his hand 6 inches to catch it instead of 10 inches.

That is ridiculous.

Then make a perfect formula that is not biased. Every formula is going to have some flaw in it. The only thing that can be used is completion percentage on deep ball over 20 yards.

Then you still have to gauge quality of the receivers and offensive line. Iv'e gone over this in other posts. THERE IS NO PERFECT FORMULA

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:25 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Still BS.  

"My logic is only wrong half the time, so that means it is still valid. Derp."


BTW if you just look at the last 4 seasons with no playoff games Dalton ranked in the top half of the league half of the time. (2 of 4)

It's better to use recent years anyways and ones with no playoff games added. How is that being biased. The ***** stats don't lie. 

I've said he's average and those stats indicate average during the season. What about that is not accurate. 

Half the time he's below and half he's above. So overall that would be very average. He had only one excellent season out of 8. 

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 12:15 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: 4 playoff games and 4 non playoff games. Only half of them used playoff games. That was only one playoff game so it doesn't make a huge difference. Then just look at the last 4 years without playoff games.

One above average ranking , one average and two below average. 

Still BS.  

"My logic is only wrong half the time, so that means it is still valid. Derp."


BTW if you just look at the last 4 seasons with no playoff games Dalton ranked in the top half of the league half of the time. (2 of 4)

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:24 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: So you’re saying that it isn’t true, just that it maybe/could’ve/would’ve been true, possibly.

Gotcha.

Can only use stats available where they both had similar weapons. What else can be used to compare them this season.

Both have not done well this year without Green Eifert and a bad offensive line.   

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Still BS.  

"My logic is only wrong half the time, so that means it is still valid. Derp."


BTW if you just look at the last 4 seasons with no playoff games Dalton ranked in the top half of the league half of the time. (2 of 4)

In first 4 years ,where he was in the playoffs , he was substantially below average TWICE, so even with  bad playoff games he's below average those years and above average the other two years. 

Once again, even for the first 4 years he has two above average seasons and two below average seasons. That works out to an average ranking. 

[KillerGoose]

(12-18-2018, 12:35 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Can only use stats available where they both had similar weapons. What else can be used to compare them this season.

Both have not done well this year without Green Eifert and a bad offensive line.   

You weren’t talking about stats.

You said it was a fact that Dalton would have been worse yesterday.

Then you backed up and said “well, it would have been likely”. So, that’s where I’m coming in. It isn’t true, but it COULD HAVE been true. Just maybe.

[*bfine32*]

The term "Dalton Line" was coined a few years back and whoever came up with it should be applauded; because it's been a point of contention in the forum for years.

Basically it says if you have a QB better than Andy; you're good. If you don't you need one, If you have Andy then.....

Andy is the best QB currently on the Bengal roster; I've never disputed that in all his years here, but it may be time we look for an upgrade; unfortunately, Driskel doesn't appear to be it, with the current scheme

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:39 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: You weren’t talking about stats.

You said it was a fact that Dalton would have been worse yesterday.

Then you backed up and said “well, it would have been likely”. So, that’s where I’m coming in. It isn’t true, but it COULD HAVE been true. Just maybe.

Its a fact there's was a more likely chance for him to struggle than to have a good game considering all the injuries, and his previous bad games this year without green and eifert. Obviously nothing is 100% when predicting some players game. 

Stop playing word games. I know what was meant by the statement. 

[KillerGoose]

(12-18-2018, 12:42 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Its a fact there's a more likely chance for him to struggle than to have a good game considering all the injuries and his previous bad games this year without green and eifert. Obviously nothing is 100% when predicting some players game. 

Stop playing word games. I know what was meant by the statement. 

It isn’t more likely, considering there is much more data about Dalton without Green since Dalton has been a starter in the NFL for going on 8 seasons now. He has played 13 games without Green and has posted an 80.3 rating in those 13 games.

So, now, the question is whether or not 80.3 is a good QB rating.

[wolverine515151]

(12-18-2018, 12:49 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: It isn’t more likely, considering there is much more data about Dalton without Green since Dalton has been a starter in the NFL for going on 8 seasons now. He has played 13 games without Green and has posted an 80.3 rating in those 13 games.

So, now, the question is whether or not 80.3 is a good QB rating.

Ya but some of those games without green in previous seasons he had a better offensive line than this year. So he'd struggle even more this season without green. 

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 12:21 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: How the **** do you know he was harder on Dalton. That's just a bias statement by a Dalton defender. The guy doesn't have any favorites from the looks of it. 

Comment from 2014...."Andy Dalton has shown an incredible lack of progression in his first 4 years in the NFL, but, amazingly, he isn’t close to being the worst deep ball passer on the list"


FACT  Just the year before Dalton had finished 3rd in the league in tds and NUMBER ONE in completions of 40+ yards.  Why the hell would anyone think it was AMAZING that a guy who led the league the year before in long completions would not be among the worst in the league in deep ball passing.

Comments from 2015..."Andy Dalton’s increase in efficiency for the 2015 season seems like the result of the cast around him.  .  .  Like any Dalton season, there’s plenty of plays where the receivers bailed him out, as well as “WTF” moments"


FACT....This guy brags about how his amazing formula penalizes QBs who are bailed out by their receivers, but he was still forced to rank Dalton in the top ten.  But this was a good year to show how ridiculous his system is.  Tannehill attempted 31 more deep passes than Dalton (almost 50% more than Daltons 78) but complete one less for 37 fewer yards and 4 fewer tds yet he was ranked ahead of Dalton.

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 12:39 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The term "Dalton Line" was coined a few years back and whoever came up with it should be applauded; because it's been a point of contention in the forum for years.

Basically it says if you have a QB better than Andy; you're good. If you don't you need one, If you have Andy then.....

That makes no sense because there has never been a season when half the league changed their QB.

I have never claimed Dalton was elite, but there is a very good reason why 16 teams don't change QB every year.  Drafting a QB is a total crap shoot and free agent QB can bust your salary cap.  If you have a QB as good as Dalton you work on the bigger holes around him.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-18-2018, 01:04 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That makes no sense because there has never been a season when half the league changed their QB.

I have never claimed Dalton was elite, but there is a very good reason why 16 teams don't change QB every year.  Drafting a QB is a total crap shoot and free agent QB can bust your salary cap.  If you have a QB as good as Dalton you work on the bigger holes around him.

Unless you’re KC...

And yeah yeah Smith is 3 years older. Still doesn’t change that fact that hey had a pretty decent QB, but wanted to upgrade. Seems to have worked out too.

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 01:08 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Unless you’re KC...

And yeah yeah Smith is 3 years older. Still doesn’t change that fact that hey had a pretty decent QB, but wanted to upgrade. Seems to have worked out too.

Sure there are always exceptions to the rule.

But if they knew what they had in Mahomes why didn't they trade Smith LAST YEAR?

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-18-2018, 01:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sure there are always exceptions to the rule.

But if they knew what they had in Mahomes why didn't they trade Smith LAST YEAR?

Probably wanted him to sit behind a vet for a year. That was the plan Dorsey had for Mayfield in Cleveland too, but Taylor got hurt.

[Bengalzona]

Gentlemen. Argue points as much as you like. But please refrain from personal insults.

Thank you.

[*bfine32*]

(12-18-2018, 01:04 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That makes no sense because there has never been a season when half the league changed their QB.

I have never claimed Dalton was elite, but there is a very good reason why 16 teams don't change QB every year.  Drafting a QB is a total crap shoot and free agent QB can bust your salary cap.  If you have a QB as good as Dalton you work on the bigger holes around him.

Guess that's why the rule didn't say you must replace your QB immediately. It simply says you need an upgrade. 

Does it make more sense now?