Soggust Posted January 22, 2023 Author Share Posted January 22, 2023 9 hours ago, Bullet Club said: Weak comparison. Baker regressed in year two. Trevor grew. Baker thrived in year 3 because he was asked to do less. Trevor was asked to do more with worse weapons. Why are we punishing Baker for having a solid rookie year? Is it really a detrimental thing that he had a decent rookie year as opposed to Lawrence who sucked immediately? Because he "regressed" year two when he had a historically bad coach? By that logic, didn't Trevor "regress" from college underneath Urban? Hell, isn't a "sophomore slump" pretty common in NFL? I just can't get on board with punishing a guy for having a decent year statistically. 9 hours ago, Bullet Club said: Plus Baker's 8 game stretch was wildly over-hyped. He beat up five teams with 6 or less wins (four 4 or less win teams and the 6 win Giants playing Colt McCoy), and the Steelers playing backups, while throwing the ball under 30 times/game. I'll need another year before I cement Trevor in my top ten because one year isn't enough to get there. However, if he's even good next year he'll have more consecutive good seasons than Baker ever did. The rest of this I actually agree with, but remember, as I mentioned in the OP I'm not saying Trevor = Baker. I'm saying their resumes to date are almost identical, which surprised me because it felt like common consensus was that Trevor was a solidified top 10 QB this year (even I felt like this). Sure, Baker had better talent around him (Trevor better coaching imo), so it's not 100% perfect (no comp ever is), but the stats are eerily similar. My real point is just that - next year, if Trevor even slightly regresses (which might be reasonable given that his 9-game stretch this year put out pretty unsustainable numbers), it's not outside of the realm of possibilities that he still may not be the franchise / top 5 QB we all expect him to be (at least this early on). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 2 hours ago, SmittyBacall said: If I had to win a game tomorrow I am taking the following QBs over Lawrence: Patrick Mahomes Joe Burrow Josh Allen Jalen Hurts Dak Prescott Lamar Jackson Justin Herbert Aaron Rodgers Tom Brady He’s teetering on the edge right now for me. Agreed in a 1 game scenario. But if we are talking about moving forward, I'd immediately take him over Rodgers, Brady and maybe even Dak. For me, he's on the edge of the top 10 now, but will definitely be cemented there by mid season next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Soggust said: Why are we punishing Baker for having a solid rookie year? Is it really a detrimental thing that he had a decent rookie year as opposed to Lawrence who sucked immediately? Because he "regressed" year two when he had a historically bad coach? By that logic, didn't Trevor "regress" from college underneath Urban? Hell, isn't a "sophomore slump" pretty common in NFL? I just can't get on board with punishing a guy for having a decent year statistically. The rest of this I actually agree with, but remember, as I mentioned in the OP I'm not saying Trevor = Baker. I'm saying their resumes to date are almost identical, which surprised me because it felt like common consensus was that Trevor was a solidified top 10 QB this year (even I felt like this). Sure, Baker had better talent around him (Trevor better coaching imo), so it's not 100% perfect (no comp ever is), but the stats are eerily similar. My real point is just that - next year, if Trevor even slightly regresses (which might be reasonable given that his 9-game stretch this year put out pretty unsustainable numbers), it's not outside of the realm of possibilities that he still may not be the franchise / top 5 QB we all expect him to be (at least this early on). He's not getting punished for being a great rookie. He's getting punished for massively regressing after all the hype from said season. When a pro ready guy noticeably regresses in year 2 that's a concern. Especially when it's from greatest rookie QB ever to below average starter level. On the other hand, when a physical specimen shows considerable growth in year 2 that's encouraging. It shows the mental part of the game is catching up to the physical. Considering he's getting Calvin Ridley next year, Trevor should have an easier time keeping a baseline level of play that is good, even if the numbers regress a bit. All he'd have to do is be league average to show more consistency then Baker ever did. Even still, we'll need more to put him top 10, which is what everyone here has said. The only part I find similar is that this question was asked for both after a good year. Except Browns fans thought Baker had cemented himself as top ten based on those 8 games, which I vehemently disagreed with even then. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles1 Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, Bullet Club said: He's not getting punished for being a great rookie. He's getting punished for massively regressing after all the hype from said season. When a pro ready guy noticeably regresses in year 2 that's a concern. Especially when it's from greatest rookie QB ever to below average starter level. On the other hand, when a physical specimen shows considerable growth in year 2 that's encouraging. It shows the mental part of the game is catching up to the physical. Considering he's getting Calvin Ridley next year, Trevor should have an easier time keeping a baseline level of play that is good, even if the numbers regress a bit. All he'd have to do is be league average to show more consistency then Baker ever did. Even still, we'll need more to put him top 10, which is what everyone here has said. The only part I find similar is that this question was asked for both after a good year. Except Browns fans thought Baker had cemented himself as top ten based on those 8 games, which I vehemently disagreed with even then. Exactly. It's about progression. If two guys are at the same point after 2 seasons, but 1 got there by falling drastically and the other got there by improving drastically, which is more likely to be good in year 3? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted January 22, 2023 Author Share Posted January 22, 2023 7 minutes ago, Bullet Club said: He's not getting punished for being a great rookie. He's getting punished for massively regressing after all the hype from said season. When a pro ready guy noticeably regresses in year 2 that's a concern. Especially when it's from greatest rookie QB ever to below average starter level. You're still comparing them as players. I'm comparing production/resume to date. This isn't a situation where we need to analyze the temperature, wind condition, barometic pressure, etc to try to forecast the weather. We can just stick our heads out the window and see it's raining. Trevor is clearly ahead of Baker in terms of talent or as a player on eye test alone. But they have almost identical resumes to date and when it's early in the career it's easy to make projections that they will easily keep improving but injuries, bad coordinators - I mean a million things can derail a career. Regardless of his "progression" or "surrounding talent" or anything else you debate, if Trevor Lawrence gets hit by a bus tomorrow, he ends with a career very similar to Baker's first couple seasons. I 1000% agree Trevor has a much better chance to get there than Baker (who I also argued against). But until he does, I think I agree I need to see more, personally. Just now, seminoles1 said: Exactly. It's about progression. If two guys are at the same point after 2 seasons, but 1 got there by falling drastically and the other got there by improving drastically, which is more likely to be good in year 3? Well, considering Baker's best year was year 3, not sure this example is making the point you want it to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drew39k Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 Top ten by what marker? Single game, 1 year, 3 year, career? If I need a QB for one game, today, no, he is not top ten. If I am looking for a QB for the next decade then yes, he is a top ten QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted January 22, 2023 Author Share Posted January 22, 2023 (edited) 31 minutes ago, drew39k said: Top ten by what marker? Single game, 1 year, 3 year, career? If I need a QB for one game, today, no, he is not top ten. If I am looking for a QB for the next decade then yes, he is a top ten QB. Yeah, for sure. You might even make a case for top 5, by that argument. But I don't like this definition because, by this logic, I want Justin Fields over Brady. But I certainly do not consider Justin Fields a better QB than Brady by any stretch of the imagination, even at this point in their careers. I want to take it as "who would I take to win a game tomorrow" but then I think it favors big time QBs over guys who have a "choker" label, so I'm not really sure what the best definition is. So, for me personally, I think I take it as a "who has the best resume with recency bias and context considered", but many people interpret this differently. Edited January 22, 2023 by Soggust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigInBoys Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 No love for Stafford? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 3 hours ago, Soggust said: You're still comparing them as players. I'm comparing production/resume to date. This isn't a situation where we need to analyze the temperature, wind condition, barometic pressure, etc to try to forecast the weather. We can just stick our heads out the window and see it's raining. Trevor is clearly ahead of Baker in terms of talent or as a player on eye test alone. But they have almost identical resumes to date and when it's early in the career it's easy to make projections that they will easily keep improving but injuries, bad coordinators - I mean a million things can derail a career. Regardless of his "progression" or "surrounding talent" or anything else you debate, if Trevor Lawrence gets hit by a bus tomorrow, he ends with a career very similar to Baker's first couple seasons. I 1000% agree Trevor has a much better chance to get there than Baker (who I also argued against). But until he does, I think I agree I need to see more, personally. Well, considering Baker's best year was year 3, not sure this example is making the point you want it to. They don't though. That's the thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted January 22, 2023 Author Share Posted January 22, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Bullet Club said: They don't though. That's the thing. I mean, okay lol. They have almost identical stats, unless you're looking at different numbers than me. Neither has any hardware or postseason success (more than the other) to talk about at the NFL level. If you think that their resumes are vastly different to date, then I'll just have to respectfully agree to disagree because I literally don't know how much closer of a comparison you can realistically make. I cannot get on board with the idea that 2 good years and 1 terrible season is somehow enough to discredit the entire argument because the other guy had....[checks notes].... 1 good year and 1 terrible season. We say "it shows progression", but Bakers best year was the year after his abhorrent second year, so that argument doesn't really make sense to me. Now your point about him doing less DOES make sense, but remember I'm not making the point that Baker is a great player, simply that the numbers are close. So even if I concede absolutely everything you are saying and that Baker's help was better and that Baker wasn't really as responsible in year 3 blah blah blah, the argument simply becomes "Trevor has put up Baker numbers to date with a worse supporting cast". Edited January 22, 2023 by Soggust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE DUKE Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 Lawrence is close enough to where I won't have a hard disagreement if he is inside or outside anyone's top 10. Still a hard no on top 5, but the potential is there. So for right now, i'd say anywhere 7-15 is justifiable. If someone has him outside of their top 15, then i'm disagreeing. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted January 24, 2023 Share Posted January 24, 2023 On 1/22/2023 at 12:14 PM, seminoles1 said: Exactly. It's about progression. If two guys are at the same point after 2 seasons, but 1 got there by falling drastically and the other got there by improving drastically, which is more likely to be good in year 3? Yep. The Baker Mayfield Thesis. If he has his year 2 year 1, year 1 in year 2, and year 3 in year 3, I think you're pretty excited about Year 4 from a progression arc standpoint. ...but here we are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 I'd say my top 10 after the season: 1. Patrick Mahomes 2. Joe Burrow 3. Josh Allen 4. Jalen Hurts 5. Tom Brady 6. Aaron Rodgers 7. Lamar Jackson 8. Justin Herbert 9. Trevor Lawrence 10. Tua Tagovailoa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.