Message to Chan: RUN THE BALL!

[OCinBuffalo]

This is the same old correlation rather than causation problem. Anybody ever read Football Outsiders? That website was started as an effort to overcome the false analysis that the reason the Pats missed the playoffs one year was that they passed too often.

 

Also....I think losing Fred Jackson in game 8 might skew your #s just a tad. It might make sense to peruse that site and compare before IRed Fred, to after, in terms of QB play, total offense, etc. It certainly would be easier than doing all the stats yourself, and possibly having methodology problems in them. Also might make sense to look at our DVOA

 

Anecdotally, IIRC It wasn't until the Denver game when we used Spiller in Fred's true role, and he tore it up.

[thewildrabbit]

This years OL is going to be huge and is going to be easy to run the ball. We should see a lot more of FJ and Spiller running out of the backfield.

CJ Spiller could become another Chris Johnson should Gailey ever decide to run him more often, particularly out of that spread formation. Once he initially breaks free there are no defenders that are going to catch him from behind.

[John Cocktosten]

This is the same old correlation rather than causation problem. Anybody ever read Football Outsiders? That website was started as an effort to overcome the false analysis that the reason the Pats missed the playoffs one year was that they passed too often.

 

Also....I think losing Fred Jackson in game 8 might skew your #s just a tad. It might make sense to peruse that site and compare before IRed Fred, to after, in terms of QB play, total offense, etc. It certainly would be easier than doing all the stats yourself, and possibly having methodology problems in them. Also might make sense to look at our DVOA

 

Anecdotally, IIRC It wasn't until the Denver game when we used Spiller in Fred's true role, and he tore it up.

 

What you're not mentioning is the adjustments that opposing defenses made to Fitz's style and Gailey's play calling. The Bills would've had the same problems whether Freddy was playing or not. If you didn't notice, the Bills lost 3 in a row before Freddy got hurt. In those 3 games losses Fitz threw 101 passes, Freddy had 38 rushes and CJ had 6. Sounds like defenses made adjustments to me and Chan's did not adjust.

[Kelly the Dog]

What you're not mentioning is the adjustments that opposing defenses made to Fitz's style and Gailey's play calling. The Bills would've had the same problems whether Freddy was playing or not. If you didn't notice, the Bills lost 3 in a row before Freddy got hurt. In those 3 games losses Fitz threw 101 passes, Freddy had 38 rushes and CJ had 6. Sounds like defenses made adjustments to me and Chan's did not adjust.

No, the problem was that by game 8 we had lost a couple WR, Stevie was playing hurt and we we own our 3rd LT and 3rd OG, and our QB was hurt.

[RyanC883]

The year the Saints won they had over 2000 yards rushing and were 6th in the league. When the Bills played them that year we were holding their passing game in check and then they ran it down our throats and destroyed us. And you're proving my point, we don't have Brees. We have an inaccurate QB who is very limited. So I don't care what the rest of the league is doing, we don't have the QB. I'd rather have a balanced offense where Freddy/CJ are the focus, not Fitz.

 

One more thing to think about is the way NFL defenses are being built. Smaller faster DE's and more DBs activated. So why not counter that with more run heavy sets and wear down defenses?

 

 

I like the idea of running more. We have a big, nasty O-line. Time to pound the oppossing D's. No-huddle it. We can also go 4-5 wide and run or pass with this offense. We don't have the QB who can win the game for us, we have a good "game manager" so we need to run more. We also have prob 2 of the top 10 backs in the NFL.

[OCinBuffalo]

What you're not mentioning is the adjustments that opposing defenses made to Fitz's style and Gailey's play calling. The Bills would've had the same problems whether Freddy was playing or not.

What's your evidence for these two sentences? I could just stop there, as it is you making the claim...but I'll try to help you along.

 

How exactly do we know what the adjustments were, their relationship to our offense, their effectiveness, and how can we quantify Freddy playing, in terms of those adjustments? You're claiming that there would be no statistical relevance to something, in this case Freddy not playing, due to adjustments whose method of measurement you have yet to define. This is the statistical equivalent of trying to prove a negative, unless you can show that these adjustments are consistent in their effect, and are never effected by RB play, good or bad, as you claim. In other words, in order to prove your claim is true, you also have to prove that the opposite of it is false. You would have to show that had Freddy played, these adjustments would still have had the same outcome. I wonder how you are going to do that.

If you didn't notice, the Bills lost 3 in a row before Freddy got hurt. In those 3 games losses Fitz threw 101 passes, Freddy had 38 rushes and CJ had 6. Sounds like defenses made adjustments to me and Chan's did not adjust.

I don't need to notice anything, I already know. If you didn't notice, I tipped you off to the flaw already once. Now, I am doing it again.

 

Sounds like is fine, as is correlation, as long as you limit it to correlation. Some may not care for casting aspersions. It's when you start claiming that correlation is in fact causation, that the real trouble starts.

 

That's about as much effort as I want to put into this in a Sunday. I do this kind of stuff at work. It's not work time. Perhaps I will be more interested during the week. Also, I'm not the one making the claims here. The burden is on you. I have already poked a few holes, and if I really get into it, I can poke a lot more. Perhaps you should look at the link above, understand how that works, and then consider your claim again.

[r00tabaga]

Everyone is kinda right here. We need to run more to be more of a balanced attack and not be one-dimensional. FJax, Wood & Bell going down early made that tough to consistantly achieve. And most of Fitzy's stats were fairly decent before getting banged up in Toronto. Basically, Ralph is cheap is where I'm going with all of this.

[Reed83HOF]

I think what you see in this thread is that it is difficult to properly analyze Fitz using stats. I will get into that more in a minute...

 

Should we run the ball more, yeah we have 2 great RBs we should be taking advantage of them. Our attack should in theory be a balanced attack. This goes back to the K-Gun; run multiple plays run & pass out of the same formation and make the D prove they can stop you before you start doing anything else. Keep them off balance and not sure when we may run or pass. There will be games where you can ram the ball down the opposing team's throat and they can't stop it - by all means run the **** out of the ball until the stop it or the game is over. Same theory holds true for the pass.

 

It is impossible to tell what kind of QB Fitz is by using statistics - there are way to many outlying factors that go into those numbers (hurt OL, WRs taken off the street, playing with cracked ribs; even the season before again a crap OL and WRs) that prevent an accurate picture of Fitz from being made.

 

We know that he struggles with accuracy. I look at the Giants game where he got picked off twice by under-throwing the ball and placing it on the inside to SJ. Any QB can make a bad pass and have it picked, he did it twice. IIRC Levitre was playing LT on the second one; our OT depth was atrocious. Fitz was rushing to get the ball out once Levitre was playing LT. I am sure his mechanics were falling apart as his mindset was not to take a sack and to get rid of the ball like a hot potato. I also know that at times he isn't overly accurate and can throw ducks even when he has time to throw the ball.

 

What I like about Fitz is is intelligence to know what to do with the football, he doesn't always execute. To attempt to use stats in analyzing Fitz you have to look at how he was when our team was at full strength. Fitz is NOT an elite QB that can overcome glaring weaknesses around him. He is an average run of the mill QB. He like elite QBs forces throws that do get picked from time to time. With our OL elite QBs maybe be able to better mask the issue because of their superior athleticism; that isn't Fitz. Fitz is a QB that needs help and when the help isn't there, he can't physically overcome the deficiency. That doesn't make him garbage - it makes him an average QB with above average mental capacity that allows him to make the correct check downs, call the correct audibles and place his teammates in a position to make plays. As long as he is our QB, he needs help to make plays. Using stats to prove a point when players that directly impact his ability to make plays isn't a fair way to assess him. You have to see how he plays when the tools are there...

[Kelly the Dog]

I think what you see in this thread is that it is difficult to properly analyze Fitz using stats. I will get into that more in a minute...

 

Should we run the ball more, yeah we have 2 great RBs we should be taking advantage of them. Our attack should in theory be a balanced attack. This goes back to the K-Gun; run multiple plays run & pass out of the same formation and make the D prove they can stop you before you start doing anything else. Keep them off balance and not sure when we may run or pass. There will be games where you can ram the ball down the opposing team's throat and they can't stop it - by all means run the **** out of the ball until the stop it or the game is over. Same theory holds true for the pass.

 

It is impossible to tell what kind of QB Fitz is by using statistics - there are way to many outlying factors that go into those numbers (hurt OL, WRs taken off the street, playing with cracked ribs; even the season before again a crap OL and WRs) that prevent an accurate picture of Fitz from being made.

 

We know that he struggles with accuracy. I look at the Giants game where he got picked off twice by under-throwing the ball and placing it on the inside to SJ. Any QB can make a bad pass and have it picked, he did it twice. IIRC Levitre was playing LT on the second one; our OT depth was atrocious. Fitz was rushing to get the ball out once Levitre was playing LT. I am sure his mechanics were falling apart as his mindset was not to take a sack and to get rid of the ball like a hot potato. I also know that at times he isn't overly accurate and can throw ducks even when he has time to throw the ball.

 

What I like about Fitz is is intelligence to know what to do with the football, he doesn't always execute. To attempt to use stats in analyzing Fitz you have to look at how he was when our team was at full strength. Fitz is NOT an elite QB that can overcome glaring weaknesses around him. He is an average run of the mill QB. He like elite QBs forces throws that do get picked from time to time. With our OL elite QBs maybe be able to better mask the issue because of their superior athleticism; that isn't Fitz. Fitz is a QB that needs help and when the help isn't there, he can't physically overcome the deficiency. That doesn't make him garbage - it makes him an average QB with above average mental capacity that allows him to make the correct check downs, call the correct audibles and place his teammates in a position to make plays. As long as he is our QB, he needs help to make plays. Using stats to prove a point when players that directly impact his ability to make plays isn't a fair way to assess him. You have to see how he plays when the tools are there...

Nice post and well put. Fitz is not the most accurate QB, this is hard to debate. BUT -- 2-3 times a game he will thread a ball in he has no business threading, or make a perfect pass into a tight window that should never be complete. Or make a ridiculous play that results in a completion that 9 times out of 10 shouldn't be. And then 2-3 times a game he misses a pass he should be completing and it's infuriating.

 

But if he completed the 2-3 he should be and he didn't hit the 2-3 he had no business hitting, no one would think he was that inaccurate. When he and the team were healthy, he was hitting well over 60%.

[Reed83HOF]

Nice post and well put. Fitz is not the most accurate QB, this is hard to debate. BUT -- 2-3 times a game he will thread a ball in he has no business threading, or make a perfect pass into a tight window that should never be complete. Or make a ridiculous play that results in a completion that 9 times out of 10 shouldn't be. And then 2-3 times a game he misses a pass he should be completing and it's infuriating.

 

But if he completed the 2-3 he should be and he didn't hit the 2-3 he had no business hitting, no one would think he was that inaccurate. When he and the team were healthy, he was hitting well over 60%.

 

Fitz can drive you nuts at time for the exact reasons you state above. When the team was healthy Fitz was one of the top QBs in the game statistically; once the injury bug bit us his & the teams wheels came off. What I said above is why Gailey & Nix feel they can win with him, he just needs help carrying the load. Qb in general is such a tough position to evaluate because their success is usually tied to the talent around them. Why do you think Edwards got so many shots? Same with a Kyle Boller and other similar QBs. You don't fully know what you have until you give them some help. Only the real elite franchise guys like Peyton Manning or, as much as it pains me to say, Brady come in and the team all of a sudden looks amazing. Look at what happened to the Colts this season. If Manning played and wasn't hurt, the team would have been a contender; make no mistake about it. If Brady was out last season, the Pats* would have been lucky to win 6 games with the D and lack of WRs. Fitz's biggest strength is his the head on his shoulders and he uses to his advantage and minimizes his weaknesses as much as possible.

 

I still think,as of now, next year is a perfect time for us to grab a 1st rounder who has the ability to be better than Fitz; just an Aaron Rodgers type guy who can ride the pine for a few seasons. With the our potential FA loses and the depth we have from this draft, we should be in a position to make a play on a franchise QB. We should be able to find one in the mid-first/mid20s where we will most likely be picking. Lots of teams in the NFL either have Franchise QBs or are still evaluating their young QBs. It is a perfect time for us to take a shot if one is there. It has nothing to do with Fitz, but he will be 30 this year. If he plays lights out, you might be able to wait a season or 2 longer and go after the Calvin Johnson type WR if one is there. The stars are lining up nice for us to take a shot on one as early as next season. Again nothing against Fitzy, but all positions need to be looked at to be upgraded; the key is to make sure that they will end up being better than Fitz and either elite or a rung right below it.