Jump to content

Which career would you rather have? Dan Marino or Eli Manning?


Which career would you rather have?  

40 members have voted

  1. 1. Which career are you taking?

    • Dan Marino
      12
    • Eli Manning
      28


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, AngusMcFife said:

Unfortunately this analysis is abominable. Who you are at the end the pursuit is conditioned by your memory of the pursuit as it happened. I am not simply claiming the money, stats, and money accumulated by the player and the end of his career, but I am imagining what is what like to experience that playing career.

The idea that having a gold jacket or Super Bowl ring is meaningful just because you own it is incredibly stupid. Those are meaningful because the player remembers playing and dominating, and those accolades symbolize or represent that experience.  

We've reached the "arguing about philosophical pursuit" point of an Eli Manning thread. Time to shutter this, men. I'll see you all again in about 6 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Soko said:

I don’t have or know where to find average passer ratings by postseason, league wide. But I think it’s a safe argument that most of those passer ratings in the postseason are well above average and way above mediocre.

According to statmuse, Eli's passer rating in the 2011 playoffs is good for 14th all time if you use yards as a qualifier, and 20th when I used TDs as a qualifier. 

So yes it was a very good postseason run but I think it's fair to say it wasn't an all-time great one.

My overall assessment of the 2011 run is, yes, Eli played quite well, above his typical "average" self, but the defense played outstanding, holding teams in the teens for most games. Out of his 8 postseason wins the defense gave up 20 points only 2 times, and the rest of the games were below. So every win he had the D kept the offense below league average points. 

Eli played well enough to get his teams points in the low-20s, which is the NFL average. If there was a game that Eli had to score more than low-20s, would he have succeeded? Well in 4 other games, the defense gave up 23, 23, 23, and 38, and Eli's offense scored 0, 20, 11, and 13 in all losses. So IMO the condition that allowed Eli to play efficient QB was the defense keeping the pressure off him so he didn't force INTs like he did so many times in the regular season.

 

Quote

Now, to your team offense/points Eli scored, here is Eli’s prime:

2007: 14th in PF, 11th in passing TDs.

2008: 3rd in PF, 11th in passing TDs.

2009: 8th in PF, 8th in TDs.

2010: 7th in PF, 4th in TDs. 

2011: 9th in PF, 6th in TDs.

2012: 6th in PF, 9th in TDs.

2013: 28th in PF, 21st in TDs.

2014: 13th in PF, 9th in TDs. 

2015: 6th in PF, 3rd in TDs.

2016: 26th in PF, 11th in TDs. 

Average placement: 12th in PF, 9th in TDs.

Earlier you used passer rating average to say Eli’s been mediocre in the regular season, and then used points to say his postseason games have been average. So if you flip that, what do we get? Mostly great postseason games (from a passer rating perspective) against elite teams and mostly good defenses, and mostly good points (average placement 9th in TDs) throughout his prime. This is why cherry picking doesn’t work.

Yes the reason just analyzing TDs is flawed is because Eli was a pick machine, which is why passer rating sheds more light on the topic. 3% INT is quite high in the 2000s and 2010s but that's Eli's career percentage.

 

We probably don't need to litigate this further, but I would like to point out that the average passer rating from 2004-2019 was 85.7, and Eli's career rating was 84.1. IMO he was much closer to "average" than pushing the top 10, and one *could* make the argument he was a below average passer over the totality of his career.

He was also 7th all-time in fumbles, and brought no mobility or threat to scramble as well. So his ONLY skill was passing, and he was a below average passer from an efficiency standpoint for his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Soko said:

I think if you’d ask players today, “would you rather be a top 5-7 all time at your position with $50M (starting ~240 games) and never win, or be a fringe HOFer with two rings, two SB MVPs, and $250M (starting 240~) games”, the latter would win in a landslide.

This convo is maybe getting too deep, but I think the $ analysis is a bit off. If you had money in the early 80s and you invested it in the stock market you'd make back like 10x your initial investment. Market went from 3k to 20k. Similar with real estate.

However being cash rich in NY in the 2000s and 2010s, yes you can make investments but the stock market is already above 20k and NY real estate was very expensive too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AngusMcFife said:

According to statmuse, Eli's passer rating in the 2011 playoffs is good for 14th all time if you use yards as a qualifier, and 20th when I used TDs as a qualifier. 

So yes it was a very good postseason run but I think it's fair to say it wasn't an all-time great one.

I mean...what's considered all-time great then? I don't have a dog in this fight, but roughly the 17th best postseason run ever seems like an easy qualifier for all-time great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

I mean...what's considered all-time great then? I don't have a dog in this fight, but roughly the 17th best postseason run ever seems like an easy qualifier for all-time great.

Montana in 1989 and Flacco in 2012 are considered benchmarks.

17th best all time isn't impressive when the league has been progressively making it easier to pass the ball. How many years are we really considering here? Was the run better than Stafford's? Better than Foles'? Seems like its in that category.

Tua Tagovailoa has the 12th highest passer rating of all time. Is he an all time great? No, he's just played in the most recent era.

Terry Bradshaw had great runs in 78 and 79 but the stats won't look as pretty due to the nature of the game back then.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said:

Montana in 1989 and Flacco in 2012 are considered benchmarks.

17th best all time isn't impressive when the league has been progressively making it easier to pass the ball. How many years are we really considering here? Was the run better than Stafford's? Better than Foles'? Seems like its in that category.

Tua Tagovailoa has the 12th highest passer rating of all time. Is he an all time great? No, he's just played in the most recent era.

Terry Bradshaw had great runs in 78 and 79 but the stats won't look as pretty due to the nature of the game back then.

So, like, #1 or #2? That's the benchmark? That's wild. That's too high of a standard, even for something that should be as unattainable as all-time great. Is Hakeem Olajuwon not an all-time great player because he's probably not in the top 10 all-time? Is Marshall Faulk not an all-time great RB?

Your own numbers you brought into this would suggest he at minimum had a top 20 run (and that was in the less impressive playoff run), especially considering the circumstances and context of his 2 runs. You bring up Bradshaw and his numbers won't look pretty, but the numbers also don't show that Eli led his team to 3 road wins in the playoffs to even make the Super Bowl in 2007 (first team to ever do that IIRC), then led one of the greatest 4th quarter drives in history to knock out the "unbeatable" 18-0 Patriots. His passer rating won't reflect that.

Aren't you the one who brought passer rating into this argument as a negative against Manning? Now it seems like you're bringing more context into it to disprove your own point, but I admit I could be misinterpreting.

I am not an Eli fan, I wouldn't vote him into the Hall of Fame (though I understand why he will make it), but I'm just not understanding your threshold for all-time great. You point to passer rating as a seemingly blanket stat to knock Eli when it's convenient...and then give it context to prop up others when it's convenient (again, maybe I'm misreading). He did amazing things in the playoffs that, when context is provided and the end result is a Super Bowl win and MVP, it's incredibly hard to believe that he doesn't have 2 of the absolute worst 25 best postseason runs for a QB ever. No, he wasn't a very good regular season QB, but saying he was carried like you implied in your posts is just factually incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

So, like, #1 or #2? That's the benchmark? That's wild. That's too high of a standard, even for something that should be as unattainable as all-time great. Is Hakeem Olajuwon not an all-time great player because he's probably not in the top 10 all-time? Is Marshall Faulk not an all-time great RB?

I'll have to do a separate analysis of how many postseason runs are under consideration and figure out Eli's place in it. Marshall Falk is an all-time great back because out of the thousands and thousands of RBs, he was in the top 0.1%. If we are considering 60 QB postseason runs and Eli's is 15th, then Eli is in the top 25%. You are measuring vastly different things, one is much harder to do than the other.

Quote

Your own numbers you brought into this would suggest he at minimum had a top 20 run (and that was in the less impressive playoff run), especially considering the circumstances and context of his 2 runs. You bring up Bradshaw and his numbers won't look pretty, but the numbers also don't show that Eli led his team to 3 road wins in the playoffs to even make the Super Bowl in 2007 (first team to ever do that IIRC),

Well the league added more playoff games, which makes these comparisons hard. That's why I'm not sure how to measure "greatest playoff runs by QB," because the league has tilted the game in favor of passing and added more games. If the 78 Steeler played some weak wild card team for a 4th playoff game, then they would have crushed them and Bradshaw would have another W.   
 

Quote

then led one of the greatest 4th quarter drives in history to knock out the "unbeatable" 18-0 Patriots. His passer rating won't reflect that.

The drive with the luckiest catch in history? They scored 17 points, it was all on the defense for this one.
 

Quote

Aren't you the one who brought passer rating into this argument as a negative against Manning? Now it seems like you're bringing more context into it to disprove your own point, but I admit I could be misinterpreting.

If you want a single stat that can encapsulate how well a QB played over a sustained period of time, passer rating is probably the most useful one.

If you want to discuss the results of an 8-game sample, it makes more sense to discuss the details of each one. Passer rating can be relevant, of course.

Quote

I am not an Eli fan, I wouldn't vote him into the Hall of Fame (though I understand why he will make it), but I'm just not understanding your threshold for all-time great. You point to passer rating as a seemingly blanket stat to knock Eli when it's convenient...and then give it context to prop up others when it's convenient (again, maybe I'm misreading). He did amazing things in the playoffs that, when context is provided and the end result is a Super Bowl win and MVP, it's incredibly hard to believe that he doesn't have 2 of the absolute worst 25 best postseason runs for a QB ever. No, he wasn't a very good regular season QB, but saying he was carried like you implied in your posts is just factually incorrect.

I hope I was clear that Eli's 2011 was impressive and he played very well overall. But IMO the defense was more impressive in both runs. Overall held teams to 14.6 ppg (including counting the safety against Brady in the SB), and only allowed 20 points two times. Eli was an efficient passer but was never in a shootout or had to produce more than 21 points to win.

Maybe I or someone can put together a poll on greatest postseason runs by a QB of all time. If "4 wins" is the main criteria, then you are really limiting to the contemporary era. Players like Montana never played 4, Brady only played 4 games in one postseason (with Bucs). How much do you weight 3 great games vs 4 very good ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, HerbertGOAT said:

2 Super Bowls doesn't make up the gap between a top 5-10 QB ever and a borderline Top 30ish one. 

Totally agree but if you paid me 200m to pick Eli, I would lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, HerbertGOAT said:

2 Super Bowls doesn't make up the gap between a top 5-10 QB ever and a borderline Top 30ish one. 

Is the point of the game to accumulate stats or win rings?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HerbertGOAT said:

2 Super Bowls doesn't make up the gap between a top 5-10 QB ever and a borderline Top 30ish one. 

What if Eli gets the gold jacket?

I think gold jacket + 2 super bowls definitely makes up the gap of just not being a top 10ish QB ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...