Mikie2times

It was one pick, not a company and lifetime of work. One pick. Further, I'm not even downgrading Beane, it's the defensive Nancy types like you that can't even discuss what is obvious. Dude hasn't drafted well outside of Allen. Pretty factual. It's really hurt us that he hasn't. Also pretty factual. Allen being bigger than it all, also factual but not the point of this thread. That much is pretty obvious I would think. I also think it's a tad bit crazy to think Beane didn't have an element of luck in the drafting of Allen. Even if that was always his guy, hitting on any QB is not an exact science and every GM needs some luck in that process. If you don't agree with that, do you honestly think Beane would hit on every franchise QB he swung at? Hell even 50%? It's only looking at performance of all draft picks in 2004 and 2005. Nobody, including me said it was perfect and I even said the 2017 draft class was a bit of a nomad class, but for how the data is evaluated in this, it works pretty well. The 2017 draft picks didn't make up much scoring and including them allowed me to give Saint Doug one more year of evaluation which was much more rooted in the previous 4 years than 2017. I didn't remove Allen. In the graph you see the performance with Allen. Is the statement true that outside Allen Beane has not drafted better than Donahoe? I would say it's true. Determining if that question is relevant or not is up to who is asking the question. I think it is very relevant given we won't be drafting a franchise QB again, we need to start hitting on our draft choices, and Beane hasn't shown a high ability to do so. So if you don't think it's relevant that Beane has not done well in drafting players that will be his targets for his remaining time as GM of this team that's fine. It also has no bearing that Beans draft picks still have plenty of years left. This data captures the exact same duration of time for every player in it. It does not give any consideration to anything past the maximum of 5 years in the league and that would only be the case if the player was drafted in the first year of the sample.

You going to make the entire team sign it? It’s not like Damar asked them to stop playing.

I wanna puke over that one. Hell, I remember exactly where I was when Ben was drafted. 😕 I don’t disagree with this. I think the thought of a single draft pick basically ceiling the fate of an entire body of work is a little crazy to me, but it’s the way it is. It didn’t go TD’s way in this area and history will never be kind as a result. In broader terms I don’t think the ability of the two is very different. I think TD has arguably out drafted him, at the least it’s neutral, and he likely did better in FA, but Beane has won the two biggest areas, QB and Coach. Henry sure did decline though didn’t he? But ya. That will always be puzzling. Was really fun at first though.

Milano was in the 2017 draft with White, so no, I did not give Beane credit for that draft. I gave it to Whaley. It arguably should go to nobody, but it's a weird year. Dumb error, I corrected it outside the graph, thank you. I wouldn't go that far. McGee was outstanding, McGahee was a wasted pick, but a decent player. Lee Evans was also very good. Then you have the start of our high motor dynasty which could have been worse. I mean is Schobel not currently better than any of our DL picks?

I was curious in looking at ways to compare the last 3 relevant GM's we had as far as draft results. I used AV as others have in the past. Not by any stretch perfect but decent = https://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/approximate_value.htm My initial thought prior to doing this was Beane, outside of Allen, has drafted about as well as Donahoe and that Whaley was awful. In large part that appears to be the case. Below is years 4 and 5 for each of these GM's. I wanted to look at those years as I wanted to see the impact of several years worth of shaping a roster. It is also the cut off we have on both Beane and Donahoe while just missing Whaley (although for this study I think 2017 qualifies as a 5th year). -For Beane this includes drafts from 2018-2022 / 2021-2022 -For Whaley this includes drafts from 2013-2017 (I assigned the 2017 class to Whaley for this exercise) / 2016-2017 -For Donahoe that includes drafts from 2001-2005 / 2004-2005 I looked at the last two years for each GM which are in bold above. I looked at how many picks remained on the team that they drafted. Then what the sum of the "AV" of those picks was, then what the AVG "AV" value of those picks was. These are the results: If you subtract Allen from Beane, he goes to a AV total of 97 and 86, with an average of 3.88 and 3.90. So again, very TD like, which some might think is an insult but it's not intended to be. More just perspective. Whaley is obviously atrocious. You also see the impacts in 2017 of McD taking over the roster and purging his picks. Top 5 players drafted as far as AV is concerned: Beane= Allen, Singletary, Rousseau, Oliver, Edmunds Whaley= Preston Brown, Robert Woods, Tre White, John Miller, Dion Dawkins 😨 Donahoe= Nate Clements, Terrance McGee, Willis McGahee, Lee Evans, Aaron Schobel

I think with an agent he would have gone a similar route as Kyler Murray. I think Murray's team knew the more he played the worse it was going to look, that, and he was under risk of injury given how he played. So instead of letting the deal expire then having the Cardinals in a position where they saw another year with god knows what possibly happening, Murray's camp aggressively pursued a new contract. Which ended up being pretty smart given Murray only hurt his stock prior to suffering a season ending injury.

That's all she wrote. Impressive. I don't know about you guys, but in doing this I was pretty surprised on a few things: 1. How high Allen is (he has had some incredible games) 2. How much higher Mahomes is than everybody else 3. Where Brady, Manning fell relative to Montana 4. Just how awful Lamar is. Starting to make that contract request even more laughable. 5. Rogers hasn't exactly been known for playoff success, but in the scheme of things has had his moments

I don't get it either, but I double check pro football reference and that is what they have. It was Russ and Dak.

He was one of the stunning ones. Very close!!! This one surprised me as well, great call!

Very warm on Brady, Mahomes that high across a big sample of games as well. A bit scary to say the least.

I was curious how it felt looking at playoff QB's without the names. I included a lot of modern guys, but some old greats as well. These are the following QB's that make up the data. I will post the results as people guess correct. I'm using per game averages to better hide the players. Aaron Rodgers P. Manning Josh Allen Joe Montana Lamar Jackson Tom Brady Dak Prescott Phillip Rivers D. Watson Joe Burrow Patrick Mahomes Russel Wilson Updated*

Watson in Cleveland > Jackson in Baltimore Look at what Watson did in Houston vs Lamar in Baltimore in playoff games (I don't know where you got 1-2 from, Lamar is 1-3). It's not close. Lamar Jackson 1-3 75 for 136, 55.88%, 225 Yards, 3 TD's and 5 INT's, 68.3 Passer rating Deshawn Watson 1-2 80 for 126, 63.5%, 290 Yards, 4 TD's and 1 INT, 91 Passer Rating No, again, the difference is Lamar can't throw the ball. He would be signed right now if he could throw the ball.

I would say the Ravens had a slightly better core than Houston 🤣 I would also triple down on Watson going deeper in the playoffs in his career. Lamar will never see a championship game, Watson has a legit chance at a Super Bowl with the right group. Much better passer and that's what matters. Not regular season wins under Romans joke offense that Tyrod Taylor made the pro bowl with.

Ya, I'll keep you posted for sure. I actually know that area pretty well. I got my head completely torched on vacation in that area last year. I had my "respect the west coast sun" moment. It's going to be so weird adjusting to a 10am kickoff. I love some Labatt's, I'm actually from the Detroit area originally, Labatt's is pretty big in that area as well.

It's odd you posted this as the thought crossed my mind recently. I was hoping somebody who is more researched on the subject could speak to it. The thought was surrounding Terry's age and Kim's health and what if Terry just wanted to move on. I wasn't sure how the new stadium played a part. What our agreement is. Obviously the OP's post seems far fetched on the surface, but who knows.

Lamar for 150 Million or Watson for 200 million? I'm paying the 200 million. Watson doesn't have anything in his game that should put a ceiling over him while Lamar arguably does. I just couldn't commit the kind of money he wants until he shows he's better as a passer. He certainly can be exciting at times. He's an incredible athlete. But for premium money I need a guy that can win from the pocket. Investing a large sum in somebody who can't is a disaster and certainly worth additional money to get somebody who can.

I think for some people the thought of a church using it's forum or somebody like Kim who has been through hell, as means to possibly increase publicity or branding is about as low as it gets. It's so low that even the faint risk of the intent not being pure is enough to draw a strong reaction. A lot of us don't exactly trust churches to not be this way. Perhaps the church called them and said we would like to do a prayer service for you, do you have anything you would like to say during the service? I doubt it could have been more than that. If you don't want to be skeptical about the intent that's up to you. As some have said, it seems a bit weird. If she was a member at that church it wouldn't seem weird at all. If that seems weird to you so be it.

Wow, that’s a turn out. Well count me in for week 1. So you guys get together for anything football related prior? Like the draft or preseason?

Does Kim belong to this church?

I mean, I don't see any chance of getting him, but if you watched hard knocks it was clear every player in Arizona thought he was the hardest working, toughest player on the team. He is 100% a McD type of guy. I just don't see how this is possible or if it even could make sense given the Rapp signing who has played both Safety spots along with our cap situation and needs. Too bad though, he is just about the perfect player for us.

Tulane road Spears all year and won vs Kansas State and USC. Watching him play, very elusive, great balance, can win with the pass or run. Addison was very good in two major conferences, two systems. Mind you, generally looked at as the two weaker conferences. Watching both this year, they stood out. Now, I don't have a huge appetite for either position very early, but as far as players, I think both can do very well in the NFL.

You have had some great contributions in this thread and this is how I feel the most about this topic. I'm 40, but I enjoy the history of the game and really have since before my teens. I did feel that Brady, and what he has done in this era, is better than anybody else has ever done it. If you compare him to QB's of his era, he has done far more than any of them and by a larger margin than any QB in history. Certainly when you factor in the length of his career he has to get the nod as GOAT and I'm ok with that. What inspired this thread was the thought that he just couldn't have did what he did if he was in Montana's era. It's just wouldn't be possible. The style of play, the nutrition, the rules, the medical advances we have made. It isn't that much different than what Lebron is doing either so we see it in multiple leagues. I mean just thinking about how our average passer rating in the league is now in the 90's. That was barely possible in that era with the defensive contact rules. Then you look at what Montana did and to me it does make for a interesting discussion. It isn't as black and white as the stats seem. Then I always love when other guys like Marino and Peyton get brought up because both were better pure passers than either QB. The release for both QB's was instant, the accuracy was perfect, the arm strength nearly unmatched. Yet in both Brady's and Montana's case they performed at very high levels in the postseason where Marino and Peyton never did. Thanks again for the great contributions. It's awesome hearing some of the things you saw first hand for those of us that were a little after that time.

Most of the teams who have owners that inherited the team are in the 20's. While most of the teams that generated wealth from other sources rank much higher. Makes sense. I don't consider Ralph cheap, it was more, he just wasn't as wealthy as other NFL owners. I will say it's very nice to be in the rich club. Terry is loaded and it shows.

Brady never had a year with a passer rating above 87 under the old rules. Mind you he was still very young so hammering that point doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense to me. In broader terms, not dealing with defensive contact for the first 5 yards helped him, along with all QB's, tremendously. It completely changed the game, increasing average rating and completion % by almost 10 points each and making this a passing league which it never was before. It was Steve Youngs first two seasons in the league on an awful Bucs team. People keep using this time to say, see! Look at how much better he was in with SF. Well, no sh!t, he was a rookie playing on a horrible team. The thread was about trying to compare the eras and discussing this debate. Not just deciding who is independent of era. Most people in this thread have lost site of the thread. Who is the best one independent of era has been discussed here and everywhere else to nauseous levels. Clearly Brady has more of just about everything. Would he do that in the 80's? I don't think he would. Would Montana do it in the era Tom played? I don't know either.

So allow defenders to do whatever they want to WR's for the first 5 yards, which Brady didn't deal with after 2004. Thus slowing down his ability to get rid of the ball quickly, making him hold the ball longer Holding the ball longer exposes you to more physical punishment, which in Montana's time was savage. You either knocked him out or lost. Even in the early 2000's the NFL was not allowing that and by midway thru his career you couldn't touch Brady, a point most of this forum conceded long ago Add in the increase in sports science, medical advances, training advances Brady was, thus far, a player that performed the best at QB when you could avoid the major hits, when you didn't have to deal with your WR's timing getting totally F'ed in the first five yards. You could be elite at reading defenses and get the ball out quick, be accurate and clutch and nothing could stop it. All are things very few players had like Brady did, he is far better than any of his pears in excelling in this environment. That said, his weaknesses, namely his inability to perform when he is under duress and the requirement that he get the ball out quick are basically gone if he plays football in the 80's. His longevity would also be gone. Average passer rating in the 80's was 75, it's in the 90's now. It' very much all hypothetical. But this concept of a landslide victory is just not the case. It's hard to imagine how you could have done Better than Brady did in the era he played, it's equally hard to imagine how you could have done better than Montana did in the era he played.