Thurman#1

While I disagree with Jones-Drew that Cook is a bell-cow (44 carries is 12 per game, and that's not a bell cow), yeah, he's having a really good start. Our whole run game looks good so far, though not so much during the Jets game. Yes, because of the 17 games a year. But not by much. A very few backs have averaged 25 carries a year or more. People always mention 25 carries a game when they talk about bell cows, but in reality it's really rare, and in the last fifteen years or so, spectacularly rare.

While I do agree wtih this, 37-3 isn't exactly a squeaker either.

That doesn't really make sense. Nobody argues Davis is a #1. Other than the three or four teams with two guys who have claims at being a #1, there really isn't a team that would get #1 production from their #2 consistently. I mean, that would be ideal, but it's not really realistic. Practically what teams do when their #1 goes down is make it up by spreading it around more, everybody gets a few more. They don't just throw the extra five or six targets to the #2 guy.

If they liked him less than me, they could cut him from the team. They could make him inactive. They could sit him on the bench. They could just not throw to him. The idea that him being 66th in targets is a red flag is ridiculous. They're throwing to him in such a way that he's OVER-producing for his targets. The idea they'd be angry or frustrated about that is flat-out nuts. Instead, they've thrown him enough passes that he's 41st in yards and tied for 6th in TDs. That is a flag alright, but a very very green one. He's number two in targets on the Bills, more than Kincaid, more than Knox, more than Cook.... Unsurprisingly, Diggs is number one. But we are an offense that has some good targets but likes to spread it around.

When you look at the guys who have YPCs close to Davis's, most of them are inconsistent. It's really hard to be inconsistent when you're catching longer balls. The QB is likely not to be able to be as accurate and things just get tougher. Catch/target ratios go down for guys who are getting thrown a lot of longer balls. And that's Davis. It would be nice if we had a guy who could do everything well. But very few guys can, and those guys get paid like #1s. Very few teams have two of them. That's just the way it is. Gabe gets big plays, and that is a very very important and valuable skill. Could you just point out where I said he was a burner? I didn't. I did say that he does run past guys consistently. The reason I said that is because he does run past guys consistently. It's one of the reasons he often gets open deep. I'm not going to argue the measurables. I'm arguing that he gets open deep, that he's effective and productive. He is. This is what makes him a very legit #2.

Thing is, it takes more than you capitalizing the word "ARE" to make a statement true. They are not deficient. If they were deficient, he couldn't do the job, and yet he can and does. Well enough that pretty much everyone agrees that he's likely to get a contact in the eight figures per year range. He could be better, as could everyone, really. But he's not deficient.

Richard, you're a great poster. But come on. Production doesn't mean you're playing well? Dude, that's ridiculous. You can have all the opportunity you want and you still either end up producing ... or not. Plenty of guys who get opportunities fail with them. Davis is succeeding. As for receiving opportunities, let's look at both last year and this year. Last year he was 33rd in yardage in the NFL and tied for 15th (a 9-way tie), putting him in the top 23 in the league in TDs ... all despite being 48th in the league in terms of targets. In other words, he got an awful lot more production than his opportunities would have led you to expect. 33rd and tied for 15th are both excellent production for having the 48th most opportunities in the league. This year so far, he's 66th in the league in targets. And despite that he's 41st in yards and tied for 6th in TDs. He's OVER-producing for the opportunities he's had. And projected season numbers have a great deal to do with efficacy. Everything, really. They are produced directly from his productivity. He's been very productive. That's why his projected effectiveness is high.

You know what they call a number 3 receiver masquerading as a number 2? They call them a number two. If you can do the things a number two can - and Gabe absolutely does - you're a #2. And the people who call you a #3 are wrong. Gabe is currently on track for 901 yards and 11.3 TDs. That would make him 27th in yards and put him in a four-way tie for 3rd in TDs if you put him into last year's rankings. Now in reality three games isn't a big enough sample size. We don't really know how he'll do yet. Duh. But he's performing well. He just is.

Ability doesn't equal skills. It's a ton of different things, how hard you work, mental processing ability, fitness, strength. Fit with the QB and the system. There's a lot to it. But Josh loves him, there's no question about fit with Josh. And he absolutely does have speed, that's not a question either. Not Tyreek speed, or even close, but he gets open deep a lot and a lot of the time it's because he outruns his guy. But without the skills, you don't even get in the door. Gabe's got skills, and a lot of them. It would certainly be nice if we had - outside of Diggs - yet another guy with #1 skills. But very very few teams are in that position, particularly teams that consistently draft later than #20. Very true. However, that's not Gabe, Gabe has stepped up. He's a #2, and a productive one. For a 4th round pick, that is without question stepping up bigtime. It's not clear that they'll re-sign him. They want to, but they absolutely won't be able to make all the moves they'd like to and retain everyone they would retain in an ideal world.

All things absolutely equal? Daboll. But if Daboll was fired - chances are close to zero right now, but for the sake of argument - the Bills would keep Dorsey. He deserves the chance for at least the rest of the year, he knows the guys, and firing him now would be a crappy move that would have repercussions on what coaches would sign with us. Not to mention that Dorsey is doing well so far this year.

Thank you. Yes, exactly. Einstein was seriously spinning. The starting offense kept the Commanders really good DL on the back foot the whole game. The starting offense maybe wasn't great, but they were very good. They wore down the Commanders D and that's why near the end of the game they were getting what they wanted. And yes, Einstein's comparison to the Broncos offense was simply ridiculous. The Broncos were in desperation mode from the 1st quarter, throwing wildly. We very much were not. If anything we were battening down, running a ton. Of course their Yards per Play was high. They were awful. We were really really good.

He's right, of course. Defense and STs absolutely do make a huge difference, whether negative or positive. Over the course of a season, those will cause wins and losses.

I think the Dolphins looked very good but that score was just as much about Denver looking really really bad. I mean, two of those TDs came on one drive that went three yards total and one that went eight yards total. Take those away and it's 56 points, which is still fantastic but not epochal. And the Broncos looked unable to make tackles. I'd put the Fins as top five, but not #1. They still have a lot more to prove. This is an interesting thread. Thanks, everyone.

You're very kind. I don't consider myself a heavyweight, and certainly not Transie either. Kick in any time, I enjoy your posts. As to your points, what Transie said about Tyrod Taylor is totally relevant. He made a dumb mistake (that lasted YEARS for him), based on his misunderstaning that completion percentage means accuracy. He just simply would not hear that the reason Taylor had a high completion percentage was that he was throwing shorter more easily completed passes and that teams took a while to learn how to defense him and his completion percentage for his first half season was greatly raised by that. It's pretty much the exact same mistake he has continued making over and over ever since. He look at Allen's college stats and before the draft spent months telling us how awful Allen was going to be as a pro, finally saying he had no chance. Mostly because of completion percentage. And I'm sorry, but the fact that Archie Manning played a long time ago does zero to refute his relevance as an example. You're absolutely right that the game has changed. But tell me, how has accuracy changed since Manning's day? Does it mean something different? Do they judge accuracy differently? Do they calculate completion percentage differently? They do not. He is the classic example on this, a very accurate QB who played on an awful team with a crappy OL and poor receivers. His completion percentage suffered greatly as a result. It's a perfectly good example, and still relevant. But there are plenty more. David Carr was also really accurate, but ended up with poor completion percentages for the same reason. Elway didn't have a good completion percentage. Favre's completion percentage was wildly unstable his whole career. Lamonica was one of the most accurate deep ball guys of all time. Bad completion percentage. Steve Young was accurate. Great completion percentage. Except when he was not in a great situation. Bad completion percentage in the first half of his career, and then a miraculous turnaround where he either became more accurate or found a good team and system to put up excellent completion percentages. John Elway is tied for 115th for career completion percentage. He was a very accurate QB on a really underwhelming offense. Here are Elways' completion percentage rankings for each year of his career: 28th, 14th, 16th, 14th, 18th, 16th, 16th, 6th, 25th, 20th, 3rd, 7th, 16th, 5th, 19th, 11th. By completion percentage he was really average for his time. Which is nonsense. More, Allen himself is a great example. Awful completion percentage in college. Awful his first year in Buffalo. Still bad his second. Excellent his third. Below 20th best in his fourth and fifth years. Unless you think Allen was actually well below average at accuracy among starters the last couple of years, you have to understand that completion percentage just doesn't equal accuracy. It just doesn't. Agreed there's no real way of judging accuracy, certainly by stats. Have a great Fins week.

Again, I did not list that Knox catch in the end. It certainly was not a good or particularly accurate throw, but it wasn't bad enough But the two throws I did list were absolutely not present "in just about any game" from an accurate QB. Both were very short passes. Both completely out of reach of the WR. And the ball to Cook was right to a defender, who luckily didn't hold onto it. I listed them again below: Look at the throw to Diggs on the slant at Q1 12:35 in the Jets game, way behind him. Or Q12 at 9:15 to Cook against the Jets. Short little pass across the middle, open, thrown to the defender. Probably five to six feet left and high on a pass to a guy four feet beyond the LOS.

My posts make sense over the years because I'm older. True enough. Thing is ... as I grew older I kept examining my methods of thought. It's quite clear you haven't looked at your mistakes. You, the young guy, said that Tyrod Taylor was "near -elite." I told you over and over you were wrong. You went on and on about it, how he was going to be the Bills franchise guy for 15 years, how he as top ten, on and on and on and on. Then before the 2018 draft you said Josh Allen had no chance of being a successful NFL QB. So yeah, I think like an older guy, getting wiser with my years. Whereas you have been consistently, relentlessly wrong in virtually all of your opinions about QBs over the years. You were wrong. I was right. I'll take growing older and learning from mistakes any time time over being younger, wrong and inflexible. The sad thing with you is that you haven't learned from your mistakes. All of your dumber opinions about Tyrod were based on how his completion percentage was high and that was super-important. Then your remarkably bad, sad take on Allen before the draft that there was zero chance he'd ever be a decent NFL QB was also based greatly on how his completion percentage was low and how important that was. Sure, you always moved the goal posts, with nonsense like you did here about throwing other stats in next to completion percentage. But that was dumb thinking then, and it's still dumb thinking now. Consistently through the years you've been horrible on QBs, and a great deal of it comes down to how consistently and sadly you overestimate the importance of Completion Percentage. Oh, and once again, thanks for coming up with the formula you suggested above ("accuracy combined with YAC," dunderheaded on the face of it in that it's not "accuracy," it's completion percentage). That formula rates Josh Allen's accuracy in 2021 and 2022 as 27th best in the league. Most people think Josh is quite a bit more accurate than that, but I'm sure we all really appreciate having it proven by you that he was one of the least accurate in the league the last couple of years. 'Preciate the knowledge bomb. 27th most accurate QB in the league, two years running. Got it!!! I can only stand in the radiance of your intellect.

Why do people not get this? He's too expensive. We don't have the cap space. It's not impossible. But it's punitive for the future. You're right that anyone who picks him up will not have to deal with the signing bonus, making him cheaper. But not cheap. He'd be $19.965M x (14/17) this year Then $15.8M next And $14.85 the year after. Not counting workout and roster bonuses, which aren't much, but do add a bit. Not to mention the 1st rounder. Chances are probably non-zero, but not by much. That's ridiculous, seriously. He's absolutely a #2. You're not a #3 when you're 30th in the league in yards despite being 41st in targets, when you're tied for 12th in TDs, and you accomplish all that with an injury that greatly decreases your ability in a large chunk of the season. It simply is not so. Fair enough he's not one of the best #2s. He's not. But he is a #2.

Yeah, really sweet!

I see, "YAC combined with Completion Percentage is pretty darned good," you say. Fine. In 2022, Josh Allen was 31st in YAC/completion. Of QBs with more than 200 attempts, he was 23rd in Completion Percentage. That averages out to 27th. Congratulations, your dumb method conclusively proves that Allen in 2022 was the 27th most accurate QB in the league. In 2021, Josh Allen was again 31st in YAC/completion. Of QBs with more than 200 attempts that year, he was 22nd at Completion Percentage. That averages out to 26.5. And congrats again, your method shows he was the 26.5th most accurate QB in the NFL in 2021. The method is dumb. Pure dumbness. There is a reason there is no stat called "Accuracy." The reason being there's no stat or stats that do a good job showing accuracy consistently. It's a concept But thanks for letting us know how inaccurate Josh is. I'd personally strongly disagree, but hey, your method, your business.

Typical you. Moving the goal posts, a Transy special. He asked for a QB who fulfilled requirements. I gave him a quick and excellent answer that fulfilled those requirements. Am I old enough to have watched Manning? Yes, of course I am, not that it's any of your business, you little snotball. Should've been very obvious to anyone from the way I wrote the answer. Well, anyone with a clue, anyway.

Yes, the murders weren't the problem or the reason I'm in jail. It was my decision-making when I get irritated. Hope you're right about him getting better. Certainly not impossible, but when I see it, I'll believe it. He's already very very damn good.

Nice. Love it! He deserves it!!

Fair enough, Bill, that few if any are as accurate as Brees. But Josh has quite a few more throws that are seriously off target than say Brady or Manning who you mention here. If you find me arguing that Josh has "real problems with accuracy," let me know. I'll know I've been posting drunk. It's why I said that he is accurate in the post you're replying to. Does he miss a throw or two now and then? Yeah, as does everybody. But Josh has wild throws more often than most. Certainly I'm agreed that his biggest issues have been decision-making. But he absolutely has had problems with consistency. Look at the throw to Diggs on the slant at Q1 12:35 in the Jets game, way behind him. Or Q1 9:15 against the Jets. Short little pass across the middle, open, thrown to the defender. Probably five to six feet left and high on a pass to a guy four feet beyond the LOS. I'm 50/50 about listing the first pass in OT. Knox was pretty open and the pass hit the ground, but it probably wasn't quite bad enough to make this list. Same with the throw right at the end of the first half that would have been a TD if he'd put a little air under it. Not a great throw but fairly tough. I'm not even listing the INTs, two of which were bad throws as well as bad decisions. But those two throws were just bad. And Allen has a history of that. Nobody's perfect or even very close. Allen is more inconsistent than most accurate QBs. Did Josh throw a lot of accurate passes also against the Jets? Yeah, he did.

I have to disagree. It's not always Josh. It was Tyrod also. Any Bills QB for more than a few weeks really. But you're dead right. Completion percentage, particularly through two weeks, means very little As a quick example, anyone remember who was tops in completion percentage after two weeks in 2019, with 45 out of 58 completions for a 77.6 percent completion percentage, higher than Josh's this year? That would be Gardner Minshew. Who was riding high in 2015 after two weeks with a completion percentage of 37 out of 49, 75.5? That would be Tyrod. 70% after his first three games in 2007 and then 71% after two games in 2008? Trent Edwards. Too small a sample and it's simply not a close enough connection to draw much from. There certainly is some relation. But too many other factors involved in accuracy make this a stat you can't derive accuracy from.

It's an incorrect argument. I'm not overstating it. Incorrect is incorrect. One of my favorite examples of this is Archie Manning. He was known for being quite accurate. His completion percentage numbers were not especially good and showed a lot of variance as well. This is because there are a ton of factors that go into completion percentage far beyond accuracy.