Jump to content

We should be happy! Jay Gruden finally got to pick his QB!


Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, e16bball said:

I hear you guys on the W/L record thing. And when you pick out individual games where a QB played great and lost, it seems dumb and entirely unfair to hand him an L for that game. You guys know I love baseball too, and I’ve been banging the “pitcher wins don’t really matter because they’re a team outcome, not an individual stat” drum since I was old enough to understand what ERA is. 

But, and this is serious question, how many QBs who had a losing career record at age 30 were worthy of being made the highest paid player in the league? Take it out of the “Kirk/Redskins” context for a minute. He’s not the only QB who ever had a bad defense. How many losing-record QBs would have been a good investment as the highest paid player in the league?

Unless I'm mistaken, weren't Joe Barry's defenses historically bad? That's a little bit different then just having a bad defense, E. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

I think my, and others' problem is less with the fact that we didn't keep Kirk, and more with what the Front Office did and how they have continually screwed this up from end to end.

I agree, none of that little thought experiment is intended to justify the Smith move. Letting Cousins walk and trading for Smith are two separate decisions, and choosing to do the former doesn’t mean we have to do the latter. And I also don’t think Smith’s elite W/L record (at least standing alone) justifies the deal we made for him — don’t need a whole list to prove that a great record doesn’t mean you’re a great QB. All you really need to say are two words: Joe. Flacco.

 

I’m just saying that it appears, in the history of the game, that most/all QBs who turn out to be true elite players (justifying elite contracts) had already figured out ways to win more games than they lost by age 30 (or maybe more accurately, by start 50). The best among the ones who haven’t appear to all be in the “he was good but not really good enough to break the bank for” category. 

Maybe Cousins breaks that trend. I don’t really know. Maybe his defense was just that bad, worse than any a great QB has ever had to try to win with. Maybe the Redskins are just that stupid, stupider than any franchise a great QB has ever had to deal with. But I don’t think I’d want to be the team gambling the largest contract in NFL history on that. And I’m glad the Redskins didn’t, even though I think he (like Stafford and Palmer) is a pretty good player. Just not good enough for a contract like that to be wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Hmmm.  I’m on my phone and can’t do the research, but I’ll just guess Rich Gannon, maybe Steve Young?  

Steve Young was a very good call. He was 10-19 as of his age 30 season. He didn’t come up on the list because he only had 29 NFL starts by that age.

He did go 19-7 the next two seasons, so by start 55 (about equal to Kirk’s 57 career starts), he was 29-26. And his career was unique in a lot of senses. But yes, he would be a good example of an eventually great QB who lost a ton in his first 6-8 seasons in the league. 

Gannon was actually above .500 by age 30 (20-19) and by start 50 (27-23), believe it or now. He just did it for like 4 different teams xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

Unless I'm mistaken, weren't Joe Barry's defenses historically bad? That's a little bit different then just having a bad defense, E. 

They sure seemed like it xD 

I have to admit, I’m a little surprised to report that they were actually 17th and 19th in the league in points allowed under Joe Barry in 2015/16. They gave up a ton of yards (28th and 29th in yards allowed), but teams only scored 23.8 pts/g against them — just about a point worse than the league average (22.8 pts/g).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2018 at 11:53 PM, e16bball said:

They sure seemed like it xD 

I have to admit, I’m a little surprised to report that they were actually 17th and 19th in the league in points allowed under Joe Barry in 2015/16. They gave up a ton of yards (28th and 29th in yards allowed), but teams only scored 23.8 pts/g against them — just about a point worse than the league average (22.8 pts/g).

 

I wish Football Outsiders' DVOA stats were working, but they're not right now. Trust me, it was a lot worse than just average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/03/14/jay-gruden-no-brainer-to-trade-for-alex-smith/

“Some quarterbacks are better than others, and Alex is one of the best at it. His off-schedule plays are well-documented. He’s a problem when he gets outside the pocket. You have to be well aware of your rush lanes when you’re playing Alex Smith. You have to be aware of the coverages you play. You can’t have your defensive backers and safety and corners with their backs to the quarterback covering receivers in two-man because he’ll gut you. His movement skills are very, very underrated. He can really, really run. He’s really a good athlete. That’s not to say we’ll run the zone read every time, but the ability to get on the edge and outside the pocket and do some of the college stuff [is appealing].”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldman9er said:

Also from that post:

Quote

Filling out the 2018 roster

While those numbers look great for compensatory picks in the 2019 draft, the Redskins still need to field a team in 2018. The franchise clearly has big needs:

LG, DL, ILB, OLB, CB, RB

along with a number of lesser needs (another safety, developmental TE, etc).

I’m hoping that at least two of those holes will be filled by guys like Zach Brown and Junior Galette, who — after checking out their value to the rest of the NFL — come back to the Redskins.

It seems like DR-C is still in play as a nickel cornerback. There is certainly a lot of fan enthusiasm for Tyrann Mathieu, who was cut by the Cardinals yesterday. If we can fill those three needs, then plug one more hole (LG or DL) via free agency, then the Redskins can go into the April draft with a decent plan for filling out the roster.

Honestly, given what's on the left on the market (Jack Mewhort being the notable exception), if they don't bring back Brown, the Redskins are going to be locked in to fill those first three needs in the draft. Unfortunately, barring a trade down, they're not really going to be able to do that.

I don't get the whole DRC happiness, personally. He's adequate but not someone I really want to be splurging on. Mathieu, on the other hand, I can understand going hard for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aceinthehouse said:

Imagine how much Alex Smith would have cost, if we would have waited to bid on him in FA?

He wasn't a free agent, he still had 1 more year left on his contract.  Also we gave him a huge contract anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

He wasn't a free agent, he still had 1 more year left on his contract.  Also we gave him a huge contract anyways.

I guess he means he would have been cut, and if Alex Smith REALLY wanted to come here that bad, then it would have been the same right?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...