transplantbillsfan
-
Posts
10,901 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by transplantbillsfan
-
-
Based on my own special blend of metrics I've been working on I've got Tyrod at 13th of 37 qualifying QBs in 2015, 14th of 33 qualifying QBs in 2016, and 15th of 26 qualifying QBs over the two years compiled.
You and I are almost exactly on the same page in terms of Taylor's 2015 season. I put him at 12
-
I really wasn't trying to be snarky. I don't think Taylor was the seventh best QB in 2015. I think he was more like the 12th best QB.If you think someone could "reasonably put him at 7" (direct quote from you, pay attention), then we'll never agree. That's just far too high. 8 is also too high. And 9. And 10.
I appreciate you trying to parse language to play the snark game, even though I knew exactly what you said, and responded correctly.
I said "a reasonable person." Maybe you're a reasonable person having an unreasonable moment, but saying Taylor was the 20th or 25th or worst QB in 2015 is far from reasonable. And it would be equally unreasonable to say that he was the best QB.
What's the magic number for you? When does it start becoming "reasonable?"
Do you even understand what I'm saying? I'm guessing that your belief is that only "reasonable people" believe Taylor is exactly as good or bad as you believe he is. If that's what you believe, Let's just and what turned out to be an explanation of something that shouldn't have needed to be explained to you.
-
Plenty of those guys played at starting QB level. They just didn't play at good starting quarterback level. Same as Tyrod. They played like guys who when you see them enough you want to replace them. Same as Tyrod. Which is why he is likely to be replaced unless he improves a lot.
Being one of the top 32 QBs in the world doesn't earn you the right to be a starter for the rest of your career. It's being about top 16 or so. Much at all beyond 16 or so and unless you're a young, developing guy, your team is thinking about drafting a new guy. Further back and teams are looking to replace you. Tyrod is absolutely a top 32 QB. But so is Fitz. Siemian. Hoyer.
Unlike most of those fifteen or so guys I named, many of whom are no longer playing, Tyrod could still improve. It's just quite unlikely, as it's never happened outside Gannon and maybe Plunkett that a guy with six years behind him in the league who hadn't yet proved himself as a franchise guy did still later in his career.
As you so often do, you're mistaking what you said for what I said. And then asking me to "back up" words that are yours, not mine. Which, clearly I have no interest in doing, nor would anyone, really.
For what is now the fourth time, I think, I said what I said above about nobody but Gannon becoming a franchise guy after having finished six years without already having done so. At that point, some people complained that wasn't fair because Tyrod had only started two years and I pointed out that it was plenty fair, and that a ton of guys had been in that situation, not starting for three or four years and then getting a significant chance to start for a year or two. That's the group of guys I was examining. I said there were a lot of them. Having found fifteen of them including Gannon in less than 10 minutes of non-exhaustive researching going back only around 13 years, it appears that there may be quite a bit more than 50. Of those there are a few real successes like Aaron Rodgers, but those successes didn't take till their seventh year.
There's basically one exception, one guy who became a franchise guy in his seventh year or later, Gannon. Plunkett is maybe arguable. Maybe. And that's it.
Again, you keep talking about them being my rules, but the ones you're looking at are yours. Mine are the ones above. If you'd like to make a different point about different guys, go ahead. But don't pretend you're dealing with something I said.
Do you have early onset Alzheimer's Thurm or are you just being intentionally dense so as not to be wrong about something? It seems one or the other here, because you specifically stated when I presented that criteria to you that you could easily come up with 50 or so guys and clearly now you either don't remember (and you can easily go look through our past conversations to find it set forth to you, don't act like it would be that hard or take that long) or you're trying to twist the narrative to suit your purpose.
The QBs you put forward do not match the criteria. Why does the criteria matter? Because none of those QBs sat on the bench for all of the four years. They started in year three, or even four, or two. That means that they had more time to be Evaluated. Bang asked me if I felt the same about Collin Kaepernick as I do Taylor, I assume it's because Kaepernick is going into his seventh year as well, but Kaepernick has 57 career starts under his belt. He's started double the games Taylor has started. We know much more concretely what Kaepernick is then we do Taylor considering over five seasons he had a significant number of starts.
Taylor sat on the bench for four years behind the incumbent starter. It's not like there was a kewpie battle to win. He didn't have any opportunity to start until he got out of his rookie contract and went to another team where he earned at the starting job and played at NFL starting QB level. And he's been doing it for two seasons. Watching any QB play at the level she did for two seasons as his first two seasons starting our intriguing at the very least.
It's the reason Taylor is still in Buffalo despite there being a new coaching regime, a new GM, a top 10 draft pick to go out and get "your QB" or the opportunity to go get a QB in FA.
I'm gonna say this again, just in case you forgot since you seem to forget easily, your arbitrary seventh year thing isn't a thing in this situation because this is an incredibly unique situation.
You can't find a single QB who sat on the bench for his first four years and then started in year five, so what sense does it make for you to quote history as though it's definitive in this case? It's not definitive and the odds are really no more against Taylor (generally speaking) than they are against any other 3rd year starting QB who's played really well at times and poorly at other times, but has generally looked like he belongs under center as a starting QB.
There are no insurances that Taylor will improve, but saying the odds are so starkly against him because of some arbitrary seventh year rule is simply ludicrous when you consider the rules that have already been broken here.
-
How do you know? Have you finally done the necessary comparative film study to really make this kind of statement? Or are you just making assumptions?He's leaving a higher rate of plays on the field than most do.
I'd say that puts him at slightly below average, which is the problem.
What are the rates on normal NFL QB will miss open receivers versus Taylor? How significant is the difference?
I suspect all your doing here is making an assumption.
Someone brought up and the Benoit and his comments on Taylor missing receivers. It's an issue that Benoit has had with Taylor for a long time. It also seems like it's quoted as gospel.
Here are some alternative thoughts from a guy who scrupulously went through the film of every single QB in the NFL from 2016:
"Benoit has consistently been one of Taylor's most ardent critics and that was his most damning statement. It's a fair criticism that Taylor will miss open receivers at times. whether the veracity of what Benoit states is true is more debatable."
and
"There are times when one negative can be so bad that it ruins the rest of the positives in a player's skill set. If that was the case with Taylor it would be fair to focus on his missed plays but it's not."
and
"in 2016 Taylor did a better job getting off his first read and cycling through his progressions to find the open receivers. That didn't mean he didn't miss receivers, but the good severely overshadowed the bad."
and
"You could ignore all the context. You could just point to missed throws. It'd to be about as rational as throwing out a four course meal because you're a fork is bent."
That's from Cian Fahey's QB catalogue for which he watches and breaks down every single snap from every single QB in the NFL.
-
"Issue with Tyrod Taylor are the throws he doesnt attempt. Leaves too many open receivers on the field. No stat can show this."
This is absolutely the crux of the Tyrod issue. You simply have to go and watch the tape, because the problem with Tyrod is not the plays he makes.... it is the ones he doesn't. The 2 yard gains on a scramble that should have been a 25 yard pass play to a wide open receiver he has not seen.
*sigh*
Except Taylor gains 8 yards per scramble.
That's more yards than all but the 5 best QBs in the NFL in YPA when they pass the football.
-
Benoit? One of my guys?And this is one of Transplants guys that he used to help support his Tyrod argument basically telling you he lacks major passing ability.
He obviously can't make reads well, and he fails to anticipate receivers as well as use certain portions of the field.
This guy is so limited, it's pathetic. Moving on from him is inevitable.
Have you ever seen it before?
He didn't have that permission within the offense because he hasn't shown the ability to read the defense and exploit weaknesses.
Of course we will hear the usual excuses such as it was Roman's offense and other nonsense, but all the signs point to a limited QB that while possessing great talent, he doesn't possess the QB awareness and intellect at that position.
There is literally nothing that disproves this. All the way back to college his issues were making reads and processing the field. The same rings true going into season number seven in the pro's.
Expect limited passing with some flash mixed in due to his great physical talent. There will be no significant jump in play, and he can only really go down or maintain average play.
Neither is good enough, and it's only a matter of time before he becomes a high end backup. That's where his value lies IMO.
Ummm... nope...
You're all sorts of confused now.
-
What are your thoughts on Kaep as a QB? I'd assume you think as highly of him as you do Tyrod.
Why the hell would you think that?
-
I said somewhere in there, yes. I said exactly "By whatever measurements or metrics or I tests you want to use, you could put Taylor anywhere from 7 to 15 reasonably, I think."You didn't say he had the 7th to 15th best QB season in 2015?
To which you reply...
With this... as though he was definitively 7.7....
I don't think we're gonna agree on anything, my friend.
Just some strange interpretation there.
-
7....
I don't think we're gonna agree on anything, my friend.
How did I know 7 would be the number someone like you would believe I was saying Taylor belonged.
That isn't where I think he was, btw... read what I said...
I wonder if transplant thinks Kaepernick is also rated that high. His stats are pretty similar with also a similar skill set. Who were his receivers last year in SF?
C'mon man!!!
Can we all try to stop selectively reading posts?
-
Already answered this. In this thread. Post #165.
To repeat, you said you had asked me for ten guys according to some criteria. Didn't see that before and don't really care what criteria you asked for. I'm only interested in the criteria I've been addressing all along on this issue.
I've said all along that Gannon's pretty much it for guys who hadn't shown themselves to be franchise guys by the time they had six years in the league and then did so later. Several times people have complained that that wasn't fair because Tyrod didn't play significant snaps his first four years. And I always pointed out that there are many people who also didn't play much in their first three or four years and then had a shot at starting jobs. And what happened is what you'd expect, that of all those many guys, the ones who succeeded, guys like Danny White for one and Aaron Rodgers, succeeded pretty quickly when given their chance. Unlike Tyrod, they became franchise guys before going into their seventh year.
With again, the one exception of Rich Gannon.
To quote myself from earlier in this thread:
Ten? That's what, fourteen? Took me less than ten minutes to come up with that group. There have been tons of guys in Tyrod's position, guys who didn't have experience for three or four years and then got their chance to start. Problem is that nearly all of them aren't good enough. And the ones who are have shown it pretty much immediately.
Again, of all guys who hadn't proven themselves through six years as franchise guys, almost none have later improved enough to become franchise guys. That's the likely result with Tyrod.
So, you really just don't want to address the point?
I'm really interested and legitimate discussion here. You were the one that told me 50 guys met the criteria that I sent forth. You said that. And that's the criteria that you're now saying you don't care about? If you really just don't want to discuss because you're incapable of ever being wrong and admitting it, that's fine. I was legitimately intrigued and kind of hoping you could actually find 10 guys out of your list of 50 Who met the criteria that I gave you and you said at least 50 guys easily made it.
Some real communication issues here. I certainly can't say I'm guilt free, but it's hard to talk to someone seriously about an issue when they're on the other side of the road searching for keys under the streetlight while you're sitting in their running car because they told you to go unlock and start the car while you paid the bill.
Such a shame...
-
See, what you can easily find or 50 to 100 guys who sat on the bench for most of the rookie contract like I said and then maybe got some kind of a chance to start after that. What does not happen is that those QBs end up winning starting jobs and then playing at starting QB level once they get their opportunity.Yup, tons of NFL QBs were on the bench throughout almost all of their rookie contracts.
But when those QBs got their chances, the ones who became franchise QBs became franchise-level guys in their first opportunity. Can't name a single guy who sat out for a long time at the beginning of his career, got his chance to start, didn't show franchise level QB ability early in his long-delayed chance to start and then did later. There really isn't a guy who's ever done that, with the one single exception of Rich Gannon.
As you point out, many many guys were in a situation to possible make that kind of a leap after not playing much at all in their first three or four years. And out of those probably 50 - 100 guys, one has succeeded when he hadn't done so by the end of his sixth year.
The odds against Tyrod are indeed very high. History shows it.
Why are you including Gannon on this list? He started 14 games in his fourth year.
So, basically, you apparently can't think of a single QB who meets the criteria that you actually said 50 or so QBs met.
You say the odds are against him.
Guess what, he already broke those odds.
There isn't a single NFL QB (apparently, i'm relying partly on your own trustworthy mind) has done what Taylor has already done. And so your arbitrary rules don't really seem to apply here since those rules have already been broken.
Taylor is already doing what "couldn't be done" so saying the odds are against him to keep it up, seems kind of weird.
-
How did TT rank as a QB in 2015?
Certainly not 20th. That's just ludicrous. It's ludicrous in the same way it would be if you were to say that Taylor was a top three quarterback in 2015. By whatever measurements or metrics or I tests you want to use, you could put Taylor anywhere from 7 to 15 reasonably, I think.
-
If you're saying Taylor was the 20th best QB by production in the NFL in 2015, you're being ridiculousI've heard of a sophomore slump. Not a 7th year super senior slump.
2015 TT was the 20th best passer or so. That being hard to match for him is a bad sign.
But I literally said yes. I wouldn't be happy.
You and I are generally on the same side with Taylor, but now you're backtracking regarding something we don't agree on.You're exaggerating what I'm saying, maybe you should stop hitting your head. The team is going to identify and target at least 1 highly rated QB in the upcoming draft. Depending how things shake out they may take him with either of their 1st rounders or trade up to secure him. If the prospects they have identified are gone, obviously they aren't taking one they don't like just to take one.
You essentially guaranteed the Bills would take a QB in the 1st round next year... now you're saying only if the "prospect they have identified" is still there...?
Which is it?
Not a clue how many QBs match the criteria. I can't think of a single one off the top of my head.So how many QBs match the criteria you set forth? What was even the point you were trying to make there?
I'm still waiting for someone to give me names. Thurm said that he could come up with 50 names. I'm still waiting on his list of 10. Do you even have 5?
Maybe I'm getting you mixed up with other posters. It's late. I could be mistaken.Is this where we start putting words in each other's mouths because I never said he couldn't improve.
Did you not insinuate that I would be very unlikely for Taylor to improve and/or become a franchise QB given that he's going into his seventh here at this point? If you did not, I apologize.
If you did, that was the point of the post. Taylor is already the exception to the rule. Saying he won't do this because no other QBs ever do this is shortsighted considering that Taylor has already done things that QBs never do.
And that's not me saying he will, that's me saying this is still up in the air and anyone defining him one way or the other concretely is misguided.
-
Lol at the excuses and just flat out delusional statements I've been subjected to reading.
Sophomore slump?!?!
Grocery baggers as WR's?
A top ten offense that he was less responsible for than nearly every other QB in the league?
Hyperbole and delusion is what the CoT is selling, and only a fool would buy such propaganda.
Stick to statements closer to reality if you still want to discuss this expired topic some more, even though I suggest other wise.
It's just all around ugly for everyone involved at this point.
Pointless post.
-
So you set forth a pretty specific set of criteria that probably doesn't apply to anyone but Tyrod?
I'd feel better about Tyrod if this was the 1950's era of football but it's not. He's not a rookie or sophomore players. He's a 6 year veteran. You sound ridiculous really.
I'm sorry dude but it's not all that specific.
TONS of NFL QBs were on the bench throughout almost all of their rookie contracts. It's the next 2 criteria that separates Taylor.
I know you aren't seeing it, but you might want to reconsider the notion that Taylor can't improve just because of years of service
-
No, you don't just draft a QB in the first "no matter what."In a stacked QB class? Absolutely. At a minimum I would fully expect a 1st round rookie to be an upgrade to Yates/Peterman. Ideally, he's so good that he takes Tyrod's spot (easier said than done).
This upcoming draft is also ideal because we still have Tyrod on contract through '18. What I don't want to see is us pass on these QBs, Tyrod plays his contract out, and then we are forced to draft a QB who's thrust into action immediately because we have nobody else.
I can't believe anyone actually thinks this is a smart or even reasonable approach
What Tyrod did in his 5th and 6th years after riding the pine for 4 years was the unlikely thing.sophomore slump for a 6th year vet???????
Unlikely.
Given that Taylor's already the exception rather than the rule we can throw any ridiculous rules like "NO WAY HE IMRPOVES IN YEAR 7!!!!" out the window
-
So your answer is no, then. You would no longer feel "bleh."This is such a ridiculous question. Obviously if Tyrod started here as a rookie then you'd feel better about him because he'd still be very young and getting acclimated to the NFL. You could be much more optimistic about his development as a player and passer. The reality is that he's entering his 7th year in the league so it's not as simple as you want to make it seem. It's probably likely that he's reached his ceiling as a player or is pretty close to it
Okay, now I'm going to ask you to do something I asked another poster to do because both of you share the same belief that what we've seen is what we've got simply because of age and number of years on an NFL roster. Throughout history, name me 10 QBs who going into year 7 in the NFL:
-Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years)
-Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job
-After earning the starting job, plays years 5 & 6 at "NFL starting QB" level
That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of the arbitrary "sixth year" as some kind of watermark.
My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. But if you can find me a number of QBs who meet that criteria, maybe you're on the right track, after all.
-
It's simple. There is a distinction between an above average quarterback based on some kind of standardized criteria and a quarterback who is above average based on being ranked above 15 among the 32 quarterbacks.
In other words, there can be 32 above average quarterbacks based on some standardized criteria if they are all assessed above what is considered "average."
I didn't read all the pages. So, someone may have already explained this to you.
This is such an excellent point.
Quarterbacking in the NFL might just be at a really high level right now. And if that's the case, even the 20th best QB in that type of year would still be perceived as a good QB in many other years.
That's what needs to happen regardless. And then the pick needs to live up to the hype and take Tyrod's spot.
Seriously?
Draft a QB in the first no matter what?!?!
Absolutely not!
Actually, it can't really be much worse, certainly not EASILY....
The coaching staff did their best to hide TT last year and almost did so behind the best running game in the league.
Expect more of the same this year....
Wow... this is ridiculous...
It absolutely can easily be much worse.
-
Yes. I saw no improvement from 15-16. A QB who isn't trending up is a bad sign.
That wasn't a "yes" or a "no."
Ever heard of "sophomore slump?"
It happens.
Plus, 2015 will not be an easy year to match in terms of production and efficiency, anyway.
-
There's a reason why we passed the ball less than anyone else. Most of it has to do with having an elite rushing attack. The other part is having a QB who is not all that great at throwing from the pocket.
I know you like to get super defensive when people question Tyrod and his ability so I'm not really interested in this super long and pointless back and forth with you.
You're probably smart enough and watch enough football to know what really good QB play looks like. We don't have that and until we do I want to keep looking for potential upgrades.
I think he's adequate for now but his play does not make me content with the position long term.
First of all, it's not about questioning him as a QB, it's about defining him. I still have questions about him, which is why I'm glad he has another year to try to define himself.
I'm glad you acknowledge our low passing attempts was essentially because of an elite running game.
I agree.
As to the end of your post I just want you to answer a very simple "yes" or "no" to the following question:
If 2015-2016 were Taylor's rookie and sophomore years and he played as he did, would you still feel "bleh" about him?
-
The bills called 35 passing please per game with Tyrod Taylor at the helm and 2016.I don't disagree. It cuts both ways, but it's hard to quantify X positive plays outweighing X negative plays and viceversa.
I was discussing sacks in the context of the Bills "passing less than everybody else." Looking at the sack and scramble numbers, it's arguable we were not #32 in pass plays called.
29.1 attempts per game
42 sacks (192 yards)
47 scrambles (371 yards)
He lost 4.6 yards per play on every sack.
He gained 7.9 yards per playing on every scramble. He also scored four of his six touchdowns on scrambles.
Since last off-season I have been a proponent of a new stat: YPD (Yards Per Dropback)
I haven't done this for any QBs in 2016, but I did look at Newton compared to Wilson compared to Taylor in 2015. And their numbers looked like this:
Tyrod Taylor
6.9 YPD
33.1 DPG
52.1% passing plays for the offense
Cam Newton
6.8 YPD
34.5 DPG
51.8% passing plays for the offense
Russel Wilson
7.1 YPD
36.3 DPG
56.5% passing plays for the offense
Hope that helps to quantify had a bed for you
-
You included sacks in your discussion as a negative without also (and fairly) including the positive alternative, which are the scrambles.Cherry picking? I listed almost every passing stat. We ARE discussing his passing stats.
I agree the scrambles do something to offset his poor passing numbers. But they don't wash out his deficiencies either.
TT is expected to play efficient football. In 2016, he wasn't really. Outside of INT's.
I understand att/game are going to be low in this offense. But instead of seeing 32 in attempts/31st in yards/31st in TD's/26th in efficiency, I want to at least see 32 attempts/26th in yards/20th in TD's/15th in efficiency. That's not unreasonable if he's gonna stick around, IMO.
That's what I'd call cherry picking.
Doesn't matter, neither were good enough.
If we get the Tyrod from 2015 and he passes for 30 times a game rather than 27 and maintains the same efficiency on every play as he did in 2015, it's good enough. At that point, the rest of the team needs to hold up their end of the bargain and the bills are a playoff team for sure.
-
Wait. If you want to include sacks in this discussion, that's fine. Those were passing plays, you're right. Let's include the other passing plays: the scrambles. The plays where the QB is pressured, escapes pressure, and gains positive yardage instead of negative yardage.Sort of but not really. They had 3 less attempts than the Dolphins, but the Phins had 16 less sacks, so it's feasible that we had more passing plays called.
And even if you say no, those 3 extra attempts translated to 30 more completions, 10 more TD's, 2.1 increased in TD%, 95.5 passer rating (compared to the Bills offense 86.7), a .9 yard more Y/A, a full yard more NY/A, and an extra 20 passing YPG.
TT ain't gonna put up Brees numbers. But to be the man, you gotta beat the man. And that man is Ryan Tannehill and Matt Moore.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/#all_passing
Happydays recently posted a football outsiders study that examined all passing plays. Including sacks and scrambles. On such plays, the bills had of the second highest DVOA in the NFL, behind only Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers.
I can tell you from having done my own scrupulous research, Taylor gained 8 yards per scramble in 2016. Those are passing plays. I agree. Just like sacks are. The problem is that people want to talk about sacks as the negative without talking about scrambles as the positive. And when Taylor scrambles, he gained more yards per scramble and all but the top five QBs in the NFL in the category of YPA.
What you're doing here is cherry picking.
-
If Tyrod is Tyrod again and we take a QB in the 1st I will have no complaints.
Is "Tyrod" the 2015 or 2016 "Tyrod"?
The Tyrod Taylor Question
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Your "passing TDs are all that matter" agenda is absolutely an incredibly amazing!
Keep it up, at least it's entertaining