Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
like I said, I like the player a lot. I just don't think it was a good value or fit for the team. if you love the pick, then you have to admit the free agent signings were terrible. tough to give them high marks for both.What? Wow, color me very surprised. He could be one of the best backs in the NFL for years to come. The free agency money will pale in comparison to that return.
Malo,
mbuehner, I'm not sure what film you're watching, because Orton HAS DONE all the things you mentioned...
and agree 100%. If McDaniels' and co. plan is to go after a franchise QB next year, they're even dumber than they have already been proven by the Cutler saga. For one, a sure-fire way to not accomplish that is to trade away their own 1st next year. Even if they were optimistic that it could be bottom 5 instead of top 5 (I'd put my money on the latter), having let's say the 22nd pick from Chicago and their own 27th pick would go a lot further in moving them into a position to get such a QB. Not to mention that if they did struggle, that pick could be used on its own to get a QB, leaving Chicago's pick to grab another defensive player.Two, unless they are counting on some kid coming in next year and replicating Ryan and Flacco's early success, they need to be planning on giving the kid 3 years (from now, minimum) before the kid is ready to lead a playoff team. And that's operating under the major assumption that this unknown QB will actually be a good to great QB. If I'm McDaniels, I'm not comfortable that I'll still be there to see through the QBs development.Back to agreeing with you, seems like McD thinks he could make Orton/Simms into a QB that fits his mold, or he thinks he can grab someone off the FA heap a year from now. Maybe he hopes Cassell doesn't sign a long term deal with KC and takes his two franchise tenders and then joins him as a FA in 2011 (I believe that's when he's first eligible for UFA).
Yeah, don't love the FA signings, most of them, in retrospect. I don't know if I'm right on this, but it is my feeling that Denver didn't think they'd have a shot at Moreno early on. Thus, the signings. As it were, as things drew closer, they changed their M.O. and obviously jumped at the chance. As such, a stud RB, ironically enough, fits perfectly into one of their needs -- the new offense. They obviously thought one of the DL's would still be available at 18, but the reverse probably doesn't happen...so not a reach, either. And the fact they should now be able to keep that D, at the very least, more rested, and it makes even more sense, to me anyway.Yeah, I love their 1st round. The TE is where I have the biggest problem...like I said, I like the player a lot. I just don't think it was a good value or fit for the team. if you love the pick, then you have to admit the free agent signings were terrible. tough to give them high marks for both.What? Wow, color me very surprised. He could be one of the best backs in the NFL for years to come. The free agency money will pale in comparison to that return.
Brady has one of the stronger arms in the NFL to be fair. Lets not forget the downfield assault in 2007 where he was hitting Randy Moss 50-60 yards downfield consistently. Cassel has very good arm strength - he can throw it even further than Brady, but without the velocity of Brady's throws, which at times resemble darts flying on a rope downfield. It was Cassel's accuracy that was the issue. Orton has a similarly good arm, but he like Cassel had trouble hitting players deep, although hitting Moss you would think would be easier as he has about 5 inches on Hester, so if Orton can fix that aspect of his game he should be very solid on the Broncos. I'm predicting a pretty big year for Orton. 4100 yards, 24 TDs is my generous estimate.
Moss is the only WR that can actually make the QB. In most cases, it's the QB that makes the WR who they are. Who would Chad Johnson be without Palmer? Moss is the only WR I have ever watched to actually make a QB. Look at what he did to Cunningham and Culpepper. They would just throw it up anywhere and he would get it. Similar to how Brady used him.Orton is going to have a great year. They may start out a little slow until they start clicking, their first three games are a joke, Cincy, Cle, Oak... they should be fine after that.
I don't think they had their draft plan together at the start of free agency. McD knew that the RB position needed to be solidified, and made that a priority (not sure why RB was prioritized over DL). Remember - Cutler was still around when Arrington, Buck, and Jordan were all signed. I really doubt that if the Broncos had only one pick in round 1, they go RB there.Once they had that second first round pick, Moreno became a real possibility. I'm still not convinced that it was the right thing to do.Yeah, don't love the FA signings, most of them, in retrospect. I don't know if I'm right on this, but it is my feeling that Denver didn't think they'd have a shot at Moreno early on. Thus, the signings. As it were, as things drew closer, they changed their M.O. and obviously jumped at the chance. As such, a stud RB, ironically enough, fits perfectly into one of their needs -- the new offense. They obviously thought one of the DL's would still be available at 18, but the reverse probably doesn't happen...so not a reach, either. And the fact they should now be able to keep that D, at the very least, more rested, and it makes even more sense, to me anyway.Yeah, I love their 1st round. The TE is where I have the biggest problem...like I said, I like the player a lot. I just don't think it was a good value or fit for the team. if you love the pick, then you have to admit the free agent signings were terrible. tough to give them high marks for both.What? Wow, color me very surprised. He could be one of the best backs in the NFL for years to come. The free agency money will pale in comparison to that return.
You take drugs Danny?
At the 32 from the 7 comes to 25 yards with my calculator. The skinny post, nice throw, not what i'm talking about. He got hit- AFTER he set up in the pocket, set his feet and followed through. I didn't say he wouldn't stand up in the pocket, i said if he doesnt have that 5 seconds he can't deliver an accurate strike. He needs his full body to get the ball out even 25 or 30 yards. 2:41- 30 yard strike, again great throw. Again- 5 step down, stepped all the way into to his throw and unloaded. Look at that windup. Thats Orton at his best. Can Denver constantly give him that kind of protection? Because if not, he can't : roll out or "shift his feet in the pocket and unload" or 3 steps, quick release- back shoulder.
Why do you think this is helping your case? In 2:29 his receiver isn't moving, he cant get the ball out and hit him in stride. And of course he has an unimpeded drop, steps into the pocket and delivers. What does Orton do when the pocket collapses? Sure as hell doesn't shift his feet and zing it down the field, he dumps it off. Want to keep Orton's offense in front of you? Don't worry about sacks, just push into where he wants to step up- he is neutralized.Btw, are there any 40 yard Orton TDs? That's how you keep a defense honest.
He also played very well in the cold. In the Green Bay game in 07 where Favre sucked because it was cold and very windy he was zipping balls into the end zone.Malo,
mbuehner, I'm not sure what film you're watching, because Orton HAS DONE all the things you mentioned...
here's some film - watch the play at 0:57 in, he hits the player in stride 30 yards down the field between two defenders, the throw was a rope. He got hit as he threw so don't say there was no pressure either. Got to 2:41 as well, Orton steps up as the pocket collapses and throws another stirke on a rope for the TD, 29 yards in the air.
No running the ball does keep the defense off the field, but if they give up TD's whenever they are on the field it only slows down the inevitable.I don't mind the Moreno pick but Ayers isn't a 5 technique and they needed linebackers and more defensive linemen. They should have taken more defensive players after Moreno.I didn't like the Quinn pick. How about Jarron Gilbert or Michael Johnson instead?
I don't really see this. Here are the RBs other than Moreno on the roster: Arrington, Buckhalter, Hall, Hillis, Jordan, and Torain. Buckhalter and Jordan are 30, Hall probably won't make the team, and Torain is coming off an ACL injury that occurred midseason last year. Without Moreno, there would be no chance of a strong rushing attack.It's not like they paid big bucks for Arrington (4 years, $10M, $1.8M guaranteed), Buckhalter (same as Arrington), or Jordan (2 years, $2.5M, $500K signing bonus). I doubt Buckhalter plays out all 4 years, and Jordan is cheap. :(
Well, fortunately, he is now playing behind a much better offensive line than he had in Chicago, so he shouldn't face that situation nearly as often.From a fantasy perspective, if Orton wins the job and stays healthy, I think there is little doubt he will be above average. Last season, Denver attempted 620 passes. McDaniel's offense attempted 534. Denver's defense will presumably still be weak, so I'll project 550 passing attempts. Last season, Orton averaged 6.4 ypa and had a 3.9% TD percentage and 2.6% interception percentage. Just carrying those numbers over, with 550 attempts, he'd throw for 3520 yards, 21 TDs, and 14 interceptions. But those numbers don't reflect better offensive coaching and playcalling, better OL, and/or better targets. And it uses numbers that were hurt when he played hurt, which we don't know he will have to do this season. I think he could easily throw for 3700 yards and 25 TDs.Now, granted, there are some ifs and suppositions in there, but I think the upside potential is there.
Orton had a 51 yard TD to Booker, a 65 yard TD to Hester, and a 52 yard completion to Olsen last year. He completed a total of 13 passes for 30 or more yards. That doesn't sound like a lot, but you do have to consider that he only attempted 465 passes. As a point of comparison, Manning only had 14 completions of 30+ yards in 555 attempts. And Manning had better receiving targets than Orton had.
RE: the first point, I don't know that I agree with that. True, I don't love any of the other backs but I think they could have pieced something together and/or found a RB later in the draft that could have done pretty well.RE: the second point, those aren't cheap deals for guys who are going to be sitting on the bench but I guess they can cut them without taking too big of a hit. If Denver has the cap room to waste money like that, so be it. I just think a RB is one of the last pieces a team should look to add. I think that defense needs a lot more work and could have used another high pick. But, either way, if Moreno works out like most of us expect him to, I guess the Broncos will be happy.Without Moreno, there would be no chance of a strong rushing attack.It's not like they paid big bucks for Arrington (4 years, $10M, $1.8M guaranteed), Buckhalter (same as Arrington), or Jordan (2 years, $2.5M, $500K signing bonus). I doubt Buckhalter plays out all 4 years, and Jordan is cheap.
Completely agree with this. I think it's tough to say how good Orton will be in real NFL terms, and I think Simms will be a threat to him all year (and vice versa if Simms gets the job), but the bottom line is that the Denver QB will be very valuable for fantasy purposes, so if you grab both Orton and Simms, you'll have yourself a very nice value and a lot of upside from your QB2, while other guys in your league will have picked David Garrard or Jason Campenll a round or two earlier.
that's not really a QB2 though. Unless you have Manning, Brees, or Brady, you should think about playing match-ups and starting which ever QB you will think scores the higest. Orton/Simms combo prevents the ability to play match-ups. You do have injury protection, but you don't have the ability to swap out a new QB if the whole team is in a funk. I think Simms would be a great QB3, IF you have the luxury of carrying a 3rd QB.
Lets not confuse 50 yard plays for 50 yard passes. If I recall the Hester TD was a slant he took to the house.Also you just listed 2 out of the 3 40+ yard pass plays Orton completed last year. Cutler had 7.I agree, if Denver can protect Orton he can be very effective. But if not, he's in trouble. My point is that defenses in today's NFL know better than to let a QB stand up in the pocket and survey the field- just about any NFL QB can be successful if they have that kind of time. If you can collapse the front of the pocket on Orton, he is contained and the offense will have to dink and dunk. That doesn't require blitzes or even sacks- just muck up his passing lanes and don't give him a space to step into.
You asked, I answered. Slants or not, Orton completed 13 passes of 30+ yards. Where does that fall among other QBs in the league, especially percentage-wise? I chose Manning because he is generally accepted as a premier QB, and Orton had a higher percentage of long completions.
And comparing this kind of statistic to Cutler is apples and oranges... Cutler had better offensive coaching & playcalling, better OL, and better targets, and he also attempted about 150 more passes (roughly 33% more than Orton). But since you brought him up, by my count Cutler had 18 completions of 30+ yards... that's roughly 2.9% of his attempts, compared to 2.8% of Orton's attempts, despite all the advantages Cutler had. I'm not seeing the big issue here.Got me, where'd you get the data? I disagree with judging that as a percentage. Why did Orton have so many fewer attempts? Because he doesn't throw deep well, so he's not called upon to do it much. He could have had 1 scramble for 50 yards, does that mean we should compare his rushing yards per attempt with Michael Vick?For that matter the Bears didn't run as many offensive plays largely because they werent converting first downs. That's partially on Orton as well.We can judge what players do or fail to do, not what they might have done.
I got the data from the FBG player pages, scanning the play by play. That's why I don't know where to find the data for all.
No offense, but your stance on this doesn't make a lot of sense. If Cutler threw 33% more passes, it stands to reason that he'd have roughly 33% more deep completions, which he did. Now, if he had twice as many deep completions, that would show that he was demonstrably more successful at deep passing... or if he had the same number or even fewer deep completions, it would show he wasn't as successful at deep passing. But just saying Cutler is better because he completed 5 more passes for 30+ yards doesn't make a lot of sense.Yes, Denver passed more in part because Cutler is better than Orton. But also because Denver's OL is better, its receiving targets are better, and its defense is worse (or at least it was last year)... plus Denver went through several RBs due to injuries. As for plays, Denver ran 1019, compared to Chicago's 991... less than 2 more plays per game. True, Denver had many more first downs, but even if Chicago ran 28 more plays, and Orton attempted passes on all of them, Cutler still would have attempted more than 120 more passes. So that doesn't appear to be overly relevant here.All that said, when did this become a comparison between Orton and Cutler? Orton can be a viable fantasy QB whether or not he is a better NFL or fantasy QB than Cutler.Your Michael Vick analogy is silly and doesn't warrant any response.
How is using percentages not judging players on what they did? Do you not value completion percentage? Yards per attempt? QB rating? Yards per carry? Yards per reception?
hmmm why not keep ur pro bowl qb, draft moreno at 12, then draft D in the rest of the draft....
But he DID have more than twice as many deep passes completed, which was 4 more. The sample size is too small to hold up to data alone. Want to look at career stats? Orton has 7 40y+ pass plays on 913 attempts (.7%).
I agree, its an argument ad absurd um. It goes to my point that when a guy isn't called upon to do something it doesn't make a lot of sense to extrapolate what he would do given a very limited data set.
What doesn't make a lot of sense is assuming you can extrapolate what Orton would do if you simply gave him a bunch more attempts, particularly with the deep ball. He wasn't throwing deep for a reason.Percentages are fine! Just don't think you can extrapolate those percentages out and get a meaningful result. It's the same mistake people make all the time with part time running backs. Just because they can rack up 5 yards a carry on 5 carries doesn't mean they can do that with 20 carries.
Ummm, yeah, and most of it had to with shoddy WRs, and conservative playcalling - NOT Orton's inabilities. Unless you can find me a quote somewhere that has the OC saying that they had to go to a short passing game with dumpoffs because of Orton.
Stop confusing Orton with the Bears. No team expects the Bears to throw it over their heads... why? Because they simply don't run an offense built on long passing. They play ball control, let the defense win.
You really need to stop going back to this already proven wrong argument. Orton doesn't need to wind up long to throw the ball far, he can drill it on a rope, he can get it out far and fast. Your continuing to claim the opposite takes away credence from your other arguments.
OK, good counterpoints. However, that still leaves us with the question of how much of those differences between Orton and others ahead of him have to do with situation - OL, receiving targets, playcalling/coaching, defensive performance, etc. Probably not enough to get him from a low rank to the top, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's enough to move him up considerably.
I already addressed it from a fantasy perspective:
In case you want to say it isn't reasonable to extrapolate from Orton's 465 attempts last season, consider that he average 31 passing attempts per game last year, and 550 attempts in 16 games is 34.4 attempts per game... not such a difference that it is unreasonable to extrapolate IMO.From an NFL perspective, we have already seen that Orton can be moderately successful in a conservative offense - he is 21-12 as a starter. And with an improved situation (outlined previously), he should be able to post better numbers to go along with that.Just Win Baby said:
Turner is a conservative play caller by nature? That's news... And converting the fastest player in the game into a WR so he can catch dump offs? Why is it that Grossman was airing it out (for better or for worse) more often? Grossman's career 40+ plays is 16 out of 962 attempts, 1.6%, better than Orton or Cutler. His 20+ yards were 87 out if 962, 9% (Orton 6.5%).Did Grossman have better receivers? Was he ignoring the playcalling and drawing plays in the dirt?
I'm sorry- when was that established? Classic switz- it is so because i said it was so, and I decline to address the substance of your objections. I invite anyone to go look at the exact links switz posted and tell me Orton didn't have to wind up and step fully into the throw to get the ball out even 25 yards. The problem with looking at Orton video is that when you see him set up for the long ball you would think its going 40 yards in the air, and it would be if it was a different QB. Other QBs can throw the ball 25 yards flat footed with accuracy and strength. Much like a golfer, Orton needs his legs and body lined up to get the ball down the field.
If those are your expectations, we are pretty much on the same page. My only point is that it is a mistake to take a guy that can make lemonade out of lemons on a bad offensive team and assume he will scale up to a top flight QB. Some guys look pretty good on bad teams and look mediocre on good teams. I think Orton is along those lines.
I'm handcuffing Moreno with all these guys this year so I can lock up the Denver running game.
Ummm... yeah he did. As far as Hester goes... he may be fast, but he runs horrible routes....
You accuse me of saying it is what it is - but then admit I provided evidence. Evidence you obviously didn't even look at, because if you had, you wouldn't be saying what you're saying.
Oh? Who was Grossman throwing to in 06 that Orton didn't have in 05?
I broke down your links specifically. Either you didn't read what I said or you just don't feel you need to react to it, because youre switz and if anyone disagrees with you they are de facto wrong... but they may just not be listening closely enough or looking at the links, so benefit of the doubt, maybe they're not willfully ignorant just lazy.So to play the game your way- i'll just assume you didn't read my break-down of your links, and not assume you can't break down QB tape and clearly notice what a wind up and slow delivery looks like on a 25 yard pass compared to what a real NFL stud can do with arm alone.
Bad example. Chad Johnson would still be Chad Johnson. He was Chad Johnson when Palmer was holding Jon Kitna's clipboard.Also disagree with your Cunningham example as he was pretty darn good on PHI before tearing up his knee. I think Moss might have been in grade school then.
This.
Exactly... you didn't prove anything, except that Favre has one of the best arms EVER in the NFL.You keep claiming there's this 'NFL arm' that Orton doesn't have... but you've yet to prove it.
My reply to buehner? Or his joke of a post, where he uses Favre lofting the ball on a huge arc, to show how Orton throwing it on a rope is not up to NFL arm standards. If anything is a joke it's this insistence without basis that Orton doesn't have an arm. I'd love to see how Orton "steps into his throw" at 1:00 when he gets nailed as he's throwing, and never takes a step forward to throw. The ball is out of his hands as he's in the air to throw over the rushing defender. He'd be better off arguing that he was erratic, or inaccurate. I'd buy both of those arguments. But I'm done with this argument. I think this season will be answer enough.
Nothing McMuffin does should surprise me but the players are not even wearing pads yets and he names his QB.
Brilliant post. Amazing value QBs like this are so easy to pick out. (My QBs last year were rodgers and cutler)I find it so funny that the myth of orton's weak arm still remains. It is based on the bears using him as a game manager during his rookie season. When he had one of the best defenses in the league on the other side of the ball. LOL.Orton is my guy this year. Nothing makes me happier than hearing people talk about his weak arm.. "No look you don't understand he's not as good as favre because he doesn't make risky throws off his back foot" LOL this thread is gold.
Orton could be a steal, but if you grab his as your starter, you have balls that could fit in a dump truck. Orton doesn't have a "weak" arm, he is the bottom half of arm stregnth in the league. He is no Tim Couch. LOL at the 25 TD's and 3700 yards.... not many QB's can do that with them being on the team 3+ years, better targets, better coaching (thats for sure) and a better D to keep giving him the ball back. To say Orton can is seriously like asking for a Ferrari for Christmas.The ONLY reason he was named starter NOW is because of McDaniels Ego. If McDaniels played everything right and has proved to us he knows what he is doing, I would have TONS more faith in this move. But since McDaniels hasn't done ANYTHING that makes me think he is playing madden 2008 in his head as he tries to run the team... this is an Ego move. He got Orton in the trade with Cutler. If he started Simms, that trade would look very bad... oh wait it already does LOL! Tooo late.Broncos will definitely be a team I will root against all year long. Just so they can get a real head coach in there and make real decisions.
all of your grandstanding against Orton makes me think that like Kyle Shanahan, you have some sort of unholy mancrush for Chris Simms.
Its not so much man crush on Simms.. I do like Simms I think he could be a very good QB under the right tutelage, Simms has unlimited potential where Orton does not. I already said in multiple posts that Orton may end up being better then Simms on thsi team... I am just a little peeved and dumbfounded as to why you don't let a player who is superior in physical attributes at least get a shot at the starting job. Its not like this team is going to be good on defense, and Orton will not be the "mad bomber" which leads me to believe the Broncos will really suck, not only in real life but in fantasy land too.My disclaimer for all those who assume... I am not saying Simms at QB would be the end all be all, I would just be much more excited for the offense of the Broncos... in the NFL and fantasy.
