Is Kurt Warner done? (1 Viewer)

[Maven]

Football Outsiders

Kurt Warner is now 38 years old. Only two quarterbacks have topped 3,600 yards or 25 touchdowns at that age or older: Brett Favre and Warren Moon. Yes, Warner is a special quarterback, but most special quarter- backs — including guys like Joe Montana, John Elway, and Dan Marino — were essentially done when they passed 37. It’s nigh-impossible to find comparable passers to Warner who are older than 34; the best com- parisons include Steve Beuerlein in 1997-99, Rich Gannon in 2001- 02, and Ken Anderson in 1981-82. Beuerlein and Anderson both declined the following year, and Gannon fell off the cliff. Further, a Warner injury seems likely; he’s yet to make it through a full 16- game slate in consecu- tive seasons

Fantasy Football Index

Kurt Warner should be one of the top passers in 2009, but don't expect him to match the numbers he compiled last season. When a team averages 305 passing yards per game and throws 31 TDS, the bar is set awfully high.

In the last 30 years, for example, 21 teams have averaged over 290 yards per game; 13 of those teams fell to fewer than 270 in the following season. Average decline: 38 yards.

The numbers are similar for touchdowns. Since the move to the 16 game schedule, 43 teams have finished with 30 -32 TD passes in a season. Of that group, only 13- less than a third- returned to that range the following season. Average decline: 3.9 TD passes.

It's not hard to envision similiar shifts for the Cardinals. They passed the ball on an unrealistic 66% of their plays last year - far more than any other team. This year they have a new tailback and new offensive coordinator.

Age and durability are issues, as well. At 38, he'll likely be the oldest starting quarterback this season. Playing at the same age. Brett Favre broke down last season, with his arm turning into a wet noodle late in the year.

Countdown to Leinart...

-offseason hip surgery

-horrible preaseson

-last time he threw 500+ passes he got injured

 

[Truman]

Warner started later than all those guys....

 

[joffer]

-horrible preaseson

looked fine to me against the Packers other than the fumbles. His WRs must have dropped 4 balls.

 

[gianmarco]

How many of those guys, even Montana, et. al put up #'s like Warner did at age 37?

 

[FantasyTrader]

I believe he's done. But I'm in the minority.

 

[Chase Stuart]

John Elway was very good at age 38, although he only started 12 games.

 

[Monk81]

I picked up Leinart in case he's done but I'm not holding my breath. I think Warner is going to start most/all of the season.

 

[Banger]

I always get a kick out of the age based comparisons and think they are largely pointless. Every player and situation needs to be evaluated as an isolated incident and how Elway, Marino, Montana, etc., performed with their different lines, different RB's, wr's, defenses, strength of schedules, nagging injuries, etc. have nothing IMO to Kurt Warner this year.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I always get a kick out of the age based comparisons and think they are largely pointless. Every player and situation needs to be evaluated as an isolated incident and how Elway, Marino, Montana, etc., performed with their different lines, different RB's, wr's, defenses, strength of schedules, nagging injuries, etc. have nothing IMO to Kurt Warner this year.

I always get a kick out of people who don't factor it in. You're right. Kurt Warner is on his own timeline with his own unique set of circumstances. But at some point, age does become a limiting factor. I think he's reached that point at 38. Doesn't mean he can't, just that the liklihood of him doing so is dropping to an unknown degree.

 

[senyera]

Another factor that ties in with his age is Leinart. If the Cards get off to a mediocre start and Warner starts to see the effects of age I think Leinart has a legitimate chance of taking over. Even if you don't agree as much it is still another thing to consider. Warner has a great chance to be top 5 this year but at his ADP I think there is better value.

 

[CrossEyed]

I believe he's done. But I'm in the minority.

What happened between February and September that would take him from an elite passer to being done?

 

[rock753]

John Elway was very good at age 38, although he only started 12 games.

Elway was never a great fantasy QB until the end of his time. He was always winner, up to his last season.

 

[Judge Smails]

Warner will be given every opportunity - deservedly so. But he does have a lot against him this year. Age does matter. So he started late. He's also got a lot of miles on him in terms of injuries, hits, etc. Bad hip, bad preseason, and let's face it, SuperBowl losers have not fared well the following year. He'll have great games when healthy from a PPG perspective, but I'm willing to risk a lot of chips that his year end numbers will be down significantly. That being said, he slid in a lot of drafts, so may be worth the risk depending on where you got him. Just get a SOLID backup - that's all I'm sayin..

 

[FantasyTrader]

Another factor that ties in with his age is Leinart. If the Cards get off to a mediocre start and Warner starts to see the effects of age I think Leinart has a legitimate chance of taking over. Even if you don't agree as much it is still another thing to consider. Warner has a great chance to be top 5 this year but at his ADP I think there is better value.

I don't believe this factors in at all. There's roughly a 0% chance of Arizona benching a healthy Warner for Lienart.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I believe he's done. But I'm in the minority.

What happened between February and September that would take him from an elite passer to being done?

Nothing other than age and his own history. That's why I'm in the minority.

 

[joffer]

I believe he's done. But I'm in the minority.

What happened between February and September that would take him from an elite passer to being done?

Nothing other than age and his own history. That's why I'm in the minority.

why do you think he's done?

 

[FantasyTrader]

I believe he's done. But I'm in the minority.

What happened between February and September that would take him from an elite passer to being done?

Nothing other than age and his own history. That's why I'm in the minority.

why do you think he's done?

Seperate thread back in May covered this topic really well. The word "Done" doesn't do a very good job of explaining my thoughts on the matter. Just that he has a much lower degree of liklihood than the average QB to start more than 11-12 games this year. I'm not saying he CAN'T have a phenomenal year. http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...rt+warner\

 

[moviedude25]

I drafted Warner and Leinart this season. I can see the OP's point very well. It was nice to see Leinart pass for 300+ yards and show he could be a player in this league. It's the first time I've ever handicapped a QB but with the weapons Arizonas got around them I think it's worth it

 

[David Yudkin]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

 

[Banger]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

 

[Tau837]

I always get a kick out of the age based comparisons and think they are largely pointless. Every player and situation needs to be evaluated as an isolated incident and how Elway, Marino, Montana, etc., performed with their different lines, different RB's, wr's, defenses, strength of schedules, nagging injuries, etc. have nothing IMO to Kurt Warner this year.

 

[FantasyTrader]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Disagree. I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little. I'm not arguing that if Warner stays healthy, he'll have another exceptional season. I don't think he stays healthy. Three 1,000 yd. WR's means nothing if you're not on the field.

 

[Banger]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Disagree. I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little. I'm not arguing that if Warner stays healthy, he'll have another exceptional season. I don't think he stays healthy. Three 1,000 yd. WR's means nothing if you're not on the field.

Well then you aren't making a 38 year old QB argument, you're just making an injury prediction. There's a good chance Warner gets hurt and misses some time...based on his injury history alone that's not exactly a shocking prediction. There was a good chance that he would get hurt last year too and many made the prediction but he bucked the trend, stayed healthy and finished top 5. I disagree that the surrounding cast doesn't matter or doesn't impact his ability to stay healthier. If he has great wr's that can get open quickly and spread the field that means he can get rid of the ball quickly and reduce the number of hits he takes in the pocket. Last year most teams couldn't get to him like they did when he was on the Giants or the end of his Rams tenure and while the line has something to do with that so does the ability for his wr's to get open so he doesn't have to hold onto the ball and get hammered. That's where he gets into trouble.There's definitely risk there but there's also reward...you just have to factor that risk in to your draft and either handcuff him or grab a nice backup.

 

[David Yudkin]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Disagree. I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little. I'm not arguing that if Warner stays healthy, he'll have another exceptional season. I don't think he stays healthy. Three 1,000 yd. WR's means nothing if you're not on the field.

Then IMO, you are not saying Warner is DONE (as the thread title suggests). You are saying you think Warner is an injury risk (of which there have been plenty of people that agree with you in numerous other threads).To that I would point out that since coming to ARI, IIRC Warner has had one minor hamstring injury (in his first year) but has been available the rest of the time.Last year, Warner, McNabb, and Pennington all played in every game. Raise your havd if you saw that one coming. Things happen, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. I don't think anyone would be shocked if Warner got hurt and missed some time. But then again, I doubt people would be shocked if any QB got hurt and missed some time. (How many QB get hurt each year, like 40-50%?)

 

[Tau837]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Disagree. I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little. I'm not arguing that if Warner stays healthy, he'll have another exceptional season. I don't think he stays healthy. Three 1,000 yd. WR's means nothing if you're not on the field.

Then IMO, you are not saying Warner is DONE (as the thread title suggests). You are saying you think Warner is an injury risk (of which there have been plenty of people that agree with you in numerous other threads).To that I would point out that since coming to ARI, IIRC Warner has had one minor hamstring injury (in his first year) but has been available the rest of the time.Last year, Warner, McNabb, and Pennington all played in every game. Raise your havd if you saw that one coming. Things happen, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. I don't think anyone would be shocked if Warner got hurt and missed some time. But then again, I doubt people would be shocked if any QB got hurt and missed some time. (How many QB get hurt each year, like 40-50%?)

Actually, I believe Warner missed time due to two different injuries in his first year in Arizona. However, that was 2005, and he hasn't missed a game due to injury since then. IMO his injury history is overblown. Sure, he's an injury risk... but the risk he gets hurt isn't significantly higher than any other starting QB IMO. And if you draft Warner, you should be able to add Leinart reasonably late for insurance.

 

[FantasyTrader]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Disagree. I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little. I'm not arguing that if Warner stays healthy, he'll have another exceptional season. I don't think he stays healthy. Three 1,000 yd. WR's means nothing if you're not on the field.

Then IMO, you are not saying Warner is DONE (as the thread title suggests). You are saying you think Warner is an injury risk (of which there have been plenty of people that agree with you in numerous other threads).To that I would point out that since coming to ARI, IIRC Warner has had one minor hamstring injury (in his first year) but has been available the rest of the time.Last year, Warner, McNabb, and Pennington all played in every game. Raise your havd if you saw that one coming. Things happen, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. I don't think anyone would be shocked if Warner got hurt and missed some time. But then again, I doubt people would be shocked if any QB got hurt and missed some time. (How many QB get hurt each year, like 40-50%?)

Correct. I'm only saying that in the black and white world of repeat last year vs. done, that I'd be a strong lean toward done. I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality. I'd estimate Warner's liklihood of injury to be in the 60's. And I'm factoring that into the overall discussion of, "Is he done?"

 

[Ray_T]

How many 38 year old QB had three 1,000 yard receivers to throw to?

that was my point in my post above. Yes Warner is old but he was old last year when he threw for 30 tds and went to the SB with a hip problem. Is it earth shattering to predict that he'll miss time? Look at his history and you'll see he's missed chunks of time throughout his career.In order to really compare him against other 38 year old QBs you have to consider what their surrounding casts were, their injury situations, lines, etc.. QB's do not play in a vaccumm and the surrounding talent make a huge difference in their success so unless there's a 38 year old with the same exact situation and history (pretty doubtful). Warner is in one of the best situations possible so making a blind comparison vs. other 38 year old QBs is pretty pointless.

Last year was the first full season Warner has played in a very long time.Most QB's retire when one of two things happen:1) the skills erode to a point where they are not good enough to play.2) the skills do not erode to a point where his ability to play comes into question, but they run into injury problems. Lets face it.... a 40 year old is not meant to be Mauled by 330 lb linemen.now, Warner is not 40, he is 38. but I suspect when he retires, it will be because of #2.he has had numerous career threatening injuries before. -Concussions. he is probably one good hit away from having another one, and this time I think it would finish him off.-hand issue- he has had injuries to the hand that have made it harder for him to grip the ball. he lost many fumbles in the 2 year stretch when this was an issue. He seems to be better, but still turns the ball over more than your average QB. another hand injury and I'd say he likely wont recover.-The Hip issue. I am not sure just how bad it was, and whether it is career threatening, but the one game I saw him in he did not look good. He looked gimpy and old.The above issues, along with his age are causes for concern.He should be one of the last starting fantasy QB's taken or the first Backup Fantasy QB taken. and if he is your starter, get a backup early or handcuff with Leinart.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

 

[FantasyTrader]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

 

[pantherclub]

If my memory is correct, Montana was never a gunslinger. Just an extremely accurate passer that had moxie and balls of steel.

 

[joffer]

Brady, Brees, Manning, Rodgers are the only QBs i'd rather have this year.

 

[Ray_T]

If my memory is correct, Montana was never a gunslinger. Just an extremely accurate passer that had moxie and balls of steel.

what does this have to do with Warner?

 

[Ray_T]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

The last full season Warner played prior to this last season was in 2001.some of those games were lost due to ineffectiveness (or turning the ball over too much due to the hand issue mentioned earlier)My understanding is that he grips the ball differently now to compensate for the injury.either way, you know where I stand.

 

[jon_mx]

Warner has the best set of receivers in the NFL to throw to. Warner will do just fine.

 

[Gr00vus]

I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little.

That's the key isn't it? If they keep him off the turf he'll be gold. So the question then becomes how do you like the Cards pass protection and their strength of schedule in terms of tough pass rushing teams.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

So not only are you playing Nostradomus, but now you are predicting the severity of injuries?Here's a better way to look at it . . .Here are all the current starters in the league that have missed at least 3 games in a season before:AFC EastPennington, Brady, Edwards (Sanchez hasn't played yet)AFC NorthRoethlisberger, Palmer (Quinn and Flacco haven't played very much)AFC SouthColllins, Schaub, GarrardAFC West(Starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC EastRomo, McNabb, CampbellNFC NorthCulpepper (Other starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC SouthLeftwich, Delhomme (Ryan played one year)NFC WestBulger, Warner, Hasselbeck (Hill hasn't played a full season yet.)That's 17 guys that have been hurt bad enough to miss 3 or more games out of 32 starters in the league (and many of the starters haven't played enough to have a chance to miss time.) There are many other QB in the league as backups that have also suffered injuries that caused them to miss time as well (Garcia, Vick, Kitna, Simms, Jackson, Brunell, Croyle, Carr, ASmith, Boller).I hear what you are saying and don't totally disagree. Warner is older, has had other injuries, and should be considered more of an injury risk than other QBs. If you think he is going to suffer some major calamity, then don't draft him. It's that simple.But the flip side is he's been phenomenally productive in ARI when he's played, and it's been that way for the past 4 years (not just one like some people tend to think).

 

[Maven]

I think supporting cast in this argument (outside of O-line) matters little.

So the question then becomes how do you like the Cards pass protection and their strength of schedule in terms of tough pass rushing teams.

Football Outsiders

This unit was blessed with great health in 2008, as all five regulars started every game. If there is an injury here

in 2009, it will likely come on the right side. Left tackle Mike Gandy hasn’t missed a game in four years; left

guard Reggie Wells, three. That’s the good news. The bad news is that the Cardinals’ line appears to have been

built inside-out.

Usually you look for strong run blocking from your guards and center, and strong pass blocking from your tackles. The Cardinals’ interior linemen — Wells, center Lyle Sendlein, and right guard Deuce Lutui — combined for 5.5 blown blocks leading to sacks or hurries last season, an above-average performance considering Arizona attempted more passes than any team except New Orleans. Only 10 left tackles allowed more sacks on blown blocks than Gandy’s 5.5, though, and Levi Brown’s eight tied for the highest total among right tackles.

On the other hand, the team was terrible running up the middle last season, and much better running to either side. The problem does not lie with fullback Terrelle Smith, who impressed our game charters with his blocking ability last season. (The same can not be said for all Arizona backs; Tim Hightower’s poor

pass protection, coupled with poor running, had him glued to the bench by the end of the season, and led to the drafting of Beanie Wells.)

 

[The Moz]

didn't Favre almost have an MVP season at 38?

 

[David Yudkin]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

The last full season Warner played prior to this last season was in 2001.some of those games were lost due to ineffectiveness (or turning the ball over too much due to the hand issue mentioned earlier)My understanding is that he grips the ball differently now to compensate for the injury.either way, you know where I stand.

Very, very, very flaVVed analysis here. Warner missed like two games to injuries in ARI, the rest of the time he didn't play because the team wanted Leinart or others to be the primary QB. You can't hold him responsible for not playing due to injury when the team didn't play him. Look at the games Warner HAS PLAYED in ARI. Counting the post season, he's had 18 games with 300 passing yards and another 14 with 250 passing yards out of 51 total games. And that includes games where he came in for mop up duty (7 of those games he had 20 or fewer attempts).

 

[pantherclub]

If my memory is correct, Montana was never a gunslinger. Just an extremely accurate passer that had moxie and balls of steel.

what does this have to do with Warner?

I thought the guy was comparing QB stats of a 37 yr old. My point was that Montana was never a gunslinger so its irrelevant what he did at that age.

 

[Tau837]

The last full season Warner played prior to this last season was in 2001.

some of those games were lost due to ineffectiveness (or turning the ball over too much due to the hand issue mentioned earlier)

My understanding is that he grips the ball differently now to compensate for the injury.

either way, you know where I stand.

Very, very, very flaVVed analysis here. Warner missed like two games to injuries in ARI, the rest of the time he didn't play because the team wanted Leinart or others to be the primary QB. You can't hold him responsible for not playing due to injury when the team didn't play him. Look at the games Warner HAS PLAYED in ARI. Counting the post season, he's had 18 games with 300 passing yards and another 14 with 250 passing yards out of 51 total games. And that includes games where he came in for mop up duty (7 of those games he had 20 or fewer attempts).

David, I agree with your post in general, but wanted to get Warner's injury history correct in Arizona. From Wikipedia:

In early 2005, Warner signed a one-year, $4-million contract with the Arizona Cardinals, and was quickly named the starter by coach Dennis Green. Warner posted three relatively mediocre performances before injuring his groin and being replaced by former starter Josh McCown. McCown played in two games during Warner's injury, performing well enough that Green named McCown the starter for the remainder of the season.

After McCown struggled in two straight games, Green re-inserted Warner into the starting line-up. After playing fairly well in two consecutive losses (passing for a total of nearly 700 yards), Warner defeated his former team, the Rams, by a score of 38–28. He passed for 285 yards and three touchdowns while posting a quarterback rating of 115.9. Warner's season ended in Week 15 when he partially tore his MCL.

So he missed part of game 3, then games 4-7, due to a combination of the first injury and McCown's good play in relief. Then he missed part of game 14 and games 15-16 due to the MCL injury. A total of 6 full games and 2 partial games due to 2 injuries.Edit to emphasize this was in 2005 and Warner hasn't missed a game due to injury since then.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

So not only are you playing Nostradomus, but now you are predicting the severity of injuries?Here's a better way to look at it . . .Here are all the current starters in the league that have missed at least 3 games in a season before:AFC EastPennington, Brady, Edwards (Sanchez hasn't played yet)AFC NorthRoethlisberger, Palmer (Quinn and Flacco haven't played very much)AFC SouthColllins, Schaub, GarrardAFC West(Starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC EastRomo, McNabb, CampbellNFC NorthCulpepper (Other starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC SouthLeftwich, Delhomme (Ryan played one year)NFC WestBulger, Warner, Hasselbeck (Hill hasn't played a full season yet.)That's 17 guys that have been hurt bad enough to miss 3 or more games out of 32 starters in the league (and many of the starters haven't played enough to have a chance to miss time.) There are many other QB in the league as backups that have also suffered injuries that caused them to miss time as well (Garcia, Vick, Kitna, Simms, Jackson, Brunell, Croyle, Carr, ASmith, Boller).I hear what you are saying and don't totally disagree. Warner is older, has had other injuries, and should be considered more of an injury risk than other QBs. If you think he is going to suffer some major calamity, then don't draft him. It's that simple.But the flip side is he's been phenomenally productive in ARI when he's played, and it's been that way for the past 4 years (not just one like some people tend to think).

So now you're reviewing all of the current starters that have EVER missed 3+ games to injury...in their career. David, that spins this conversation so far sideways I can't even respond. I'm talking about the average % of QB's in any given year to miss significant playing time. Let's face it, if Warner played 15 games this year, averaging 270 yds and 2.3 TD's per game BUT only started 15 games I wouldn't be coming back here to say I told you so. So I don't think it's fair that we lump QB's who "only" appeared in 15 games last year when looking at yearly averages of the same. That number is not more than 40%. PERIOD. Yet Warner is substantially more likely than that to miss significant time this year (my belief only) and I believe being 38 years old contributes to that.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

So not only are you playing Nostradomus, but now you are predicting the severity of injuries?Here's a better way to look at it . . .Here are all the current starters in the league that have missed at least 3 games in a season before:AFC EastPennington, Brady, Edwards (Sanchez hasn't played yet)AFC NorthRoethlisberger, Palmer (Quinn and Flacco haven't played very much)AFC SouthColllins, Schaub, GarrardAFC West(Starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC EastRomo, McNabb, CampbellNFC NorthCulpepper (Other starters in this division haven't played very much.)NFC SouthLeftwich, Delhomme (Ryan played one year)NFC WestBulger, Warner, Hasselbeck (Hill hasn't played a full season yet.)That's 17 guys that have been hurt bad enough to miss 3 or more games out of 32 starters in the league (and many of the starters haven't played enough to have a chance to miss time.) There are many other QB in the league as backups that have also suffered injuries that caused them to miss time as well (Garcia, Vick, Kitna, Simms, Jackson, Brunell, Croyle, Carr, ASmith, Boller).I hear what you are saying and don't totally disagree. Warner is older, has had other injuries, and should be considered more of an injury risk than other QBs. If you think he is going to suffer some major calamity, then don't draft him. It's that simple.But the flip side is he's been phenomenally productive in ARI when he's played, and it's been that way for the past 4 years (not just one like some people tend to think).

So now you're reviewing all of the current starters that have EVER missed 3+ games to injury...in their career. David, that spins this conversation so far sideways I can't even respond. I'm talking about the average % of QB's in any given year to miss significant playing time. Let's face it, if Warner played 15 games this year, averaging 270 yds and 2.3 TD's per game BUT only started 15 games I wouldn't be coming back here to say I told you so. So I don't think it's fair that we lump QB's who "only" appeared in 15 games last year when looking at yearly averages of the same. That number is not more than 40%. PERIOD. Yet Warner is substantially more likely than that to miss significant time this year (my belief only) and I believe being 38 years old contributes to that.

My point was that a significant amount of QB get hurt each year, and a significant amount of the QB population will have a serious injury at some point that will knock them out for 3 games or more. And I was only using the players that started the season as starters. Other teams, like KC, DET, TB, etc. had SEVERAL guys get knocked out.So to summarize, I say QB get hurt all the time, you say Warner will get hurt longer because he's 38. In football, everyone is an injury risk, some guys just more than others. As I said before, then don't draft Warner.

 

[gianmarco]

Drafting Warner simply has to do with your risk profile.

However, the only guy IMHO that has the ability to put up Brady/Brees type #'s that isn't being drafted where Brady/Brees are is Kurt Warner. Yes, he's still commanding a high draft pick, but it's still, on average, at least 2 rounds later than those 2. I love guys like Rodgers, Rivers, Peyton, etc., but Warner has a higher potential ceiling than those guys and a track record over the last 2-3 yrs to show he has a good shot of hitting that ceiling.

I personally don't see any added injury risk this year compared to last year as I don't think the hip surgery will have lasting effects into the season and affect his #'s. But, if I were to be concerned about injuries other than very obvious ones (like Reggie's knee or Stewart's foot), then Warner would probably be the guy. I don't mind taking that risk, though, for a truly elite player which Warner can easily be.

 

[stevegamer]

Is this FO throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks again? Please.

There's no "Curse of 38", just like there isn't a "Curse of 370".

Old QB's get hurt, and a bit longer than younger guys - body takes more time to recover.

Old QB's get replaced when the team sucks & they need to rebuild.

Old QB's get old and lose effectiveness.

There's no magic age where it happens, situations are different & need to be evaluated as such.

 

[massraider]

No one is talking about my main issue with Warner, and that's his ADP. His consensus ADP is 37 on FBG. It's not as simple as "Hey, if you don't like him, don't draft him."

I'll draft him--in the 7th round. But he won't be there.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Is this FO throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks again? Please.There's no "Curse of 38", just like there isn't a "Curse of 370". Old QB's get hurt, and a bit longer than younger guys - body takes more time to recover. Old QB's get replaced when the team sucks & they need to rebuild. Old QB's get old and lose effectiveness. There's no magic age where it happens, situations are different & need to be evaluated as such.

Pretty sure that FO was really down on Warner last year as well. I love their game charting and statistical breakdowns, but using group statistics to predict future production of individuals is fraught with errors.

 

[David Yudkin]

No one is talking about my main issue with Warner, and that's his ADP. His consensus ADP is 37 on FBG. It's not as simple as "Hey, if you don't like him, don't draft him."I'll draft him--in the 7th round. But he won't be there.

The last three drafts I was in, he went in the 50s.

 

[Ray_T]

I think your estimation of QB's hurt each year is high, that 40% would be the higher range in reality.

Looking at this very quickly:IIRC, 2008 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Romo, Orton, Schaub, Garcia, Edwards, Russell, Brady, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Croyle, ASmith, TJackson14 of 32 starting QB = 44%IIRC, 2007 QB that did not play 16 games due to injury:Big Ben, McNabb, Campbell, Garcia, Bulger, Schaub, Harrington, Pennington, Edwards, Huard, Grossman, Delhomme, ASmith, McNair15 of 32 starting QB = 47%That's a quick pass. There could be more or less, I just can't remember the details for all of these guys . . .

To be fair though, we're talking about the liklihood of QB's missing an amount of time due to injury that would substantially impact their year end totals (a subjective number to be sure). I'm thinking 12-13 starts or less would be the neighborhood. Two of the QB's on your list last year missed ONE game. Very gray area, but that's why I think simply taking QB's that failed to start all 16 games is misleading.

The last full season Warner played prior to this last season was in 2001.some of those games were lost due to ineffectiveness (or turning the ball over too much due to the hand issue mentioned earlier)My understanding is that he grips the ball differently now to compensate for the injury.either way, you know where I stand.

Very, very, very flaVVed analysis here. Warner missed like two games to injuries in ARI, the rest of the time he didn't play because the team wanted Leinart or others to be the primary QB. You can't hold him responsible for not playing due to injury when the team didn't play him. Look at the games Warner HAS PLAYED in ARI. Counting the post season, he's had 18 games with 300 passing yards and another 14 with 250 passing yards out of 51 total games. And that includes games where he came in for mop up duty (7 of those games he had 20 or fewer attempts).

True, but the reason Warner lost his job in the first place was due to fumbles & turnovers. at that time he was having issues with his hand and was losing grip on the ball. I think he was pulled after a game where he fumbled twice and threw a couple of picks.either way, he probably needed the time to finish rehabbing the injury. I wont hold it against him for the time lost due to not being a starter, but I will make note of the reason he lost his job at that time.

 

[Maven]

Is this FO throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks again? Please.There's no "Curse of 38", just like there isn't a "Curse of 370". Old QB's get hurt, and a bit longer than younger guys - body takes more time to recover. Old QB's get replaced when the team sucks & they need to rebuild. Old QB's get old and lose effectiveness. There's no magic age where it happens, situations are different & need to be evaluated as such.

I threw that "Curse of 38" in ... not FO just to clarify.