What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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.

QB Andy Dalton, CAR (1 Viewer)

Again - I want to reiterate to make myself perfectly clear since I seem to have done a poor job the first time.

I am not proposing that Dalton is the second coming of Manning. I am just saying that the criteria for measuring Dalton vs his peers using playoff success as the primary factor might be pretty flawed.

And I know you guys have to get into details to debunk any Dalton vs Manning playoff record, but if you want to do that then don't forget the following; No one I know of is stating that Dalton is an elite QB among the current group of players. An argument can be made that Manning may be the greatest QB ever to have played the game.
The playoff example carries over into the regular season too. He has games in which he puts up gaudy numbers, but they're almost always against inferior opponents. Whenever they play a good team they either get beaten or have to win a low scoring game. He's not shown any development, it's been the same thing since year one. Last year's game against San Diego may have been the worst of all the bad.
Which game against San Diego are you talking about? This year's wildcard game?

 
Again - I want to reiterate to make myself perfectly clear since I seem to have done a poor job the first time.

I am not proposing that Dalton is the second coming of Manning. I am just saying that the criteria for measuring Dalton vs his peers using playoff success as the primary factor might be pretty flawed.

And I know you guys have to get into details to debunk any Dalton vs Manning playoff record, but if you want to do that then don't forget the following; No one I know of is stating that Dalton is an elite QB among the current group of players. An argument can be made that Manning may be the greatest QB ever to have played the game.
The playoff example carries over into the regular season too. He has games in which he puts up gaudy numbers, but they're almost always against inferior opponents. Whenever they play a good team they either get beaten or have to win a low scoring game. He's not shown any development, it's been the same thing since year one. Last year's game against San Diego may have been the worst of all the bad.
Which game against San Diego are you talking about? This year's wildcard game?
Yep.

 
I really don't think that was his worst game. At all. I think there is a bit of selective memory when it comes to Dalton's playoff games. He threw for 334 yds that day. The problem in that game was turnovers, bad field position, the Bengals defense not forcing any turnovers, and the Bengals defense allowing 200 rushing yards which allowed the Chargers to control the clock. But at least the Bengals offense was rolling and while it wasn't Dalton's greatest game as he had those turnovers late when they were chasing - it CERTAINLY wasn't Dalton's worst game. I blame that loss just as much on the Bengals defense not stepping up in that game, and the crucial momentum switch when the score was 7-7 and Gio fumbled at the 4 yard line at the end of the second quarter.

As for the playoff games versus the Texans, Dalton had 0 INTs in the first game and 1 INT the second year so he protected the ball well. The problem in those games was that the offense couldn't get going against the Texans defense and it ended in a 1 pt loss the first year and a 6 point loss the second year. Those games were very frustrating to watch but even in those games, considering the quality of the Texans defense and Dalton being at the very beginning of his career....I find it a bit ridiculous to keep slaughtering Dalton for those games. It's a team sport, it's not archery. The whole team is failing in the playoffs, from coaching to the defense to the different offensive parts. AJ Green has averaged 4 catches, 57 yards and 0 TDs on 9 targets per game over those three playoff games. Is AJ Green not clutch?

 
Yeah, if you genuinely believe that non-elite rookie prospects and much older proven mediocrities carry more NFL EV than Andy Dalton moving forward, we're not going to be able to have a meaningful discussion. Eli Manning? Alex Smith? Ryan Tannehill? Joe Flacco? Jay Cutler? Those guys are definitively more valuable moving forward than Andy Dalton? Come on man...
Eli, Flacco, and Smith have all done things Dalton has not - stepped up and played big in December/January, when the games matter. Dalton has not. I don't think either of those 3 are any more skilled than Dalton, but if you're asking me who to take on my team to lead me to a playoff victory I am taking the other 3 without hesitation.

I think Cincy is a better team with Tannehill as their QB. Plus they have three more cost controlled years to figure out if he is the guy whereas Dalton has just one.

I had difficulty with Cutler. He was #22. If he slid into the Dalton tier I wouldn't fight it. I prefer him because he has stepped up in big spots before, but he is maddening and has not been successful enough to justify the headaches.

And if you'd rather have 1 more cheap year of Dalton then having to pay out the nose than five cost controlled years of Manziel and Bridgewater then I think you're nuts. That said, I am more optimistic than just about everyone on Bridgewater and based on your response I assume you're anti Manziel. I'm neither, but am going to enjoy the ride. I think there's just as great of a chance of him thriving as there is him flaming out. I'd rather do that than be stuck in purgatory like I would be with Dalton.
It wasn't on the topic of Andy Dalton specifically, but Bill Barnwell had a great thought experiment in one of his columns last year:

Just for fun, since we’re all trying to figure out what this round of playoffs means for the legacies of guys like Ryan, Joe Flacco, and Peyton Manning, let’s actually go through year-by-year and see what opinions might have cropped up with regard to Tom Brady if we flipped his 13-year career on its head. I promise that I will only be as jaundiced in the descriptions as most people would be about the likes of Ryan and Manning. You can play along with his playoff game log here.

2012
Record: 1-1
Career-to-date: 1-1


Brady makes his playoff debut and easily dispatches the Texans at home, but despite the fact that his Patriots are heavy home favorites against the Ravens, New England loses when they fail to produce in the red zone. Brady shows his inability to handle pressure situations when he mismanages the clock at the end of the first half and has to settle for a field goal, a problem that should hopefully go away when he matures. The Patriots have a shot late in the game, but an ill-timed Brady interceptionputs New England’s title hopes to rest.

2011
Record: 2-1
Career-to-date: 3-2


Although Brady takes a leap forward and makes his first Super Bowl, his performance during the playoffs leaves a bit to be desired. Brady runs up his stats against the lowly Broncos and Tim Tebow, throwing for six touchdowns and 363 yards. In the AFC Championship Game, Brady throws two picks against the Ravens and posts a passer rating of 57.5, but his defense bails him out with the famous strip of Lee Evans in the end zone and the Billy Cundiff missed field goal. And despite a stretch of hot play in the second quarter, when he sets a consecutive completions record, Brady comes up short when his team needs him most in the second half, failing to connect with Wes Welker on a long would-be touchdown and failing to protect a lead inside four minutes of the fourth quarter. Brady almost literally hands Eli Manning and the Giants the Super Bowl.

2010
Record: 0-1
Career-to-date: 3-3


In a shocking upset, Brady’s Patriots lose as 9.5-point home favorites to the Jets, who befuddle Brady while sacking him five times and forcing an early interception to set the tone. It’s Brady’s second playoff loss as a heavy home favorite in three years.

2009
Record: 0-1
Career-to-date: 3-4


It’s another crushing loss for Brady, who appears to have never recovered after blowing the lead in the Super Bowl and failing to hit Welker with the game on the line. He turns over the ball four times, including three times on the first four drives, as the Patriots fall to 2-3 at home in the playoffs under Brady.
Since Barnwell's article was written before last season, I'd like to take the liberty of adding my own preface:

2013

Following an up-and-down rookie campaign, Brady serves strictly as a game manager in winning his first career playoff start. He's asked to throw the ball only 25 times, completing 13 for 198 yards and no TDs, as Bill Belichick's RB corps pounds the rock for 234 yards and an astonishing 6 scores. Brady's rookie jitters evidence themselves in a lost 4th-quarter fumble, but it comes too late for the overmatched Colts. The following week in the AFC Championship, Brady fails to make any big plays for 3 quarters against a suspect Broncos defense, by which time the Pats have found themselves in a 23-3 hole. He does throw for one TD and scramble for another in the 4th quarter, but by then it's too little, too late, as the Broncos run out the clock and waltz to the Super Bowl.
Reading through Barnwell's descriptions (and my addendum), what in there would possibly lead you to believe that that very same quarterback is going to take his team to four Super Bowls in the next seven years, winning three of them, and that he'll be thought of as not just a first-ballot Hall of Famer but one of the greatest clutch post-season QBs in history?

The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between. Plain and simple. If you think the arc of possible outcomes for the Bengals going forward would be better with a guy like Tannehill or Bridgewater than with a maturing Dalton, then I'm not exactly sure what to tell you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.

 
I really don't think that was his worst game. At all. I think there is a bit of selective memory when it comes to Dalton's playoff games. He threw for 334 yds that day. The problem in that game was turnovers, bad field position, the Bengals defense not forcing any turnovers, and the Bengals defense allowing 200 rushing yards which allowed the Chargers to control the clock. But at least the Bengals offense was rolling and while it wasn't Dalton's greatest game as he had those turnovers late when they were chasing - it CERTAINLY wasn't Dalton's worst game. I blame that loss just as much on the Bengals defense not stepping up in that game, and the crucial momentum switch when the score was 7-7 and Gio fumbled at the 4 yard line at the end of the second quarter.

As for the playoff games versus the Texans, Dalton had 0 INTs in the first game and 1 INT the second year so he protected the ball well. The problem in those games was that the offense couldn't get going against the Texans defense and it ended in a 1 pt loss the first year and a 6 point loss the second year. Those games were very frustrating to watch but even in those games, considering the quality of the Texans defense and Dalton being at the very beginning of his career....I find it a bit ridiculous to keep slaughtering Dalton for those games. It's a team sport, it's not archery. The whole team is failing in the playoffs, from coaching to the defense to the different offensive parts. AJ Green has averaged 4 catches, 57 yards and 0 TDs on 9 targets per game over those three playoff games. Is AJ Green not clutch?
Totally disagree about that game. You're right about the Gio fumble, but winning Qb's overcome issues like that one. Dalton didn't do much good nor bad in the first half of that game. However, the moment they fell behind in the 3rd quarter, Dalton panicked and never recoevered. Sack-incompletion-fumble. Then after getting the ball back still within 7, run-incomplete-interception. Still within 10 when they got the ball back Dalton tried to shrink the field on his throws, which worked for a bit, but after you throw 5 passes in a row horizontal the defense will squeeze and once they did they picked off another short pass. Score didn't say so, but the Bengals played like game over from about that point on. Criticizing the Bengals run defense in that game is fun with numbers. They got more than 1/3 of those yards after the team mailed it in during the 4th quarter.

Is it an excuse for the defense to give up? No, but it happened because they quit on their QB. Championship ball clubs have to believe in their QB. This team does not.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
I would rather roll the dice on a QB I think can be great and risk imploding than be content with mediocrity. it's why I keep saying that purgatory word. Not bad enough to send packing, not good enough to win anything meaningful. I'm sure there are some Browns fans that would be happy with 10-6 and a quick playoff exit year over year, but I'm not one of them.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Year AgeTm Pos No.GGSQBrec Att Y/A+ NY/A+ AY/A+ ANY/A+ Cmp%+ TD%+ Int%+ Sack%+ Rate+2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 942012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 1032013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630 Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
I would rather roll the dice on a QB I think can be great and risk imploding than be content with mediocrity. it's why I keep saying that purgatory word. Not bad enough to send packing, not good enough to win anything meaningful. I'm sure there are some Browns fans that would be happy with 10-6 and a quick playoff exit year over year, but I'm not one of them.
Again, Dalton has played THREE SEASONS. And has improved each year. And you're closing the book on him as worse than Alex Smith.

There are exactly four unquestionably "great" QBs in the NFL currently, and a few more that could be argued. As many Super Bowls are won by "good enough" QBs on teams that are either very strong or just got hot at the right time as are won by truly great QBs.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Advanced Passing Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · PRE · LINK · ?Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Att Y/A NY/A AY/A ANY/A Cmp% TD% Int% Sk% Rate
2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 94
2012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 103
2013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104
Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630
Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.
I am much more of a context than raw data type. Dig into those individual games and the picture isn't as pretty. 363/4/0 vs. Minnesota and 372/3/0 vs. Detroit may be great for fantasy, but in the quest for a title it doesn't mean much.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
I would rather roll the dice on a QB I think can be great and risk imploding than be content with mediocrity. it's why I keep saying that purgatory word. Not bad enough to send packing, not good enough to win anything meaningful. I'm sure there are some Browns fans that would be happy with 10-6 and a quick playoff exit year over year, but I'm not one of them.
Again, Dalton has played THREE SEASONS. And has improved each year. And you're closing the book on him as worse than Alex Smith.

There are exactly four unquestionably "great" QBs in the NFL currently, and a few more that could be argued. As many Super Bowls are won by "good enough" QBs on teams that are either very strong or just got hot at the right time as are won by truly great QBs.
Hyperbole much? I said I preferred to build my team around Alex Smith, who has shown that he isn't phased by big moments. I never close the book on anyone before its written, except Weeden maybe.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
I would rather roll the dice on a QB I think can be great and risk imploding than be content with mediocrity. it's why I keep saying that purgatory word. Not bad enough to send packing, not good enough to win anything meaningful. I'm sure there are some Browns fans that would be happy with 10-6 and a quick playoff exit year over year, but I'm not one of them.
I get the whole concept of QB purgatory, but I don't think that there is anything Dalton has done that shows that he is a mediocre QB. He might turn out to be a mediocre QB in the end, but his play and his numbers so far doesn't back that up. To be a third year QB with 33 TDs on the season...that's pretty rare. In the last ten years the only QBs to have 33+ TDs in a single season are Rodgers, Favre, Brees, Peyton, Brady, Stafford, Culpepper and Romo. I think that shows what an accomplishment it is to reach that number. No, it doesn't necessarily mean that Dalton is at their level, but to say that his regular season performances have been bad...? Please.

I'm willing to bet that if he had a slightly more flashy playing style, if he was really good at deep balls, or if he was more athletic, or if he was more of a powerful presence in the pocket like Luck or Rothlisberger, people would be speaking much more positively about him even if he put up the same numbers as he does now. But since his playing style is more focused on the short and intermediate game, struggles with accuracy on deep balls and is a relatively static QB he gets the old noodle arm stamp and then people latch on to these three playoff games like that defines his talent and ability. There are certainly things in his game to criticize but you can't just erase all the good things that he has done.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Advanced Passing Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · PRE · LINK · ?Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Att Y/A NY/A AY/A ANY/A Cmp% TD% Int% Sk% Rate
2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 94
2012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 103
2013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104
Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630
Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.
I am much more of a context than raw data type. Dig into those individual games and the picture isn't as pretty. 363/4/0 vs. Minnesota and 372/3/0 vs. Detroit may be great for fantasy, but in the quest for a title it doesn't mean much.
Yeah...same thing with Manning last season. If you just remove all those unnecessary big games of his he was actually quite mediocre.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Advanced Passing Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · PRE · LINK · ?Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Att Y/A NY/A AY/A ANY/A Cmp% TD% Int% Sk% Rate
2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 94
2012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 103
2013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104
Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630
Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.
I am much more of a context than raw data type. Dig into those individual games and the picture isn't as pretty. 363/4/0 vs. Minnesota and 372/3/0 vs. Detroit may be great for fantasy, but in the quest for a title it doesn't mean much.
Yeah...same thing with Manning last season. If you just remove all those unnecessary big games of his he was actually quite mediocre.
And he only threw for 150 yds versus the Patriots in week 12. Not clutch.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Advanced Passing Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · PRE · LINK · ?Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Att Y/A NY/A AY/A ANY/A Cmp% TD% Int% Sk% Rate
2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 94
2012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 103
2013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104
Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630
Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.
I am much more of a context than raw data type. Dig into those individual games and the picture isn't as pretty. 363/4/0 vs. Minnesota and 372/3/0 vs. Detroit may be great for fantasy, but in the quest for a title it doesn't mean much.
Yeah...same thing with Manning last season. If you just remove all those unnecessary big games of his he was actually quite mediocre.
And he only threw for 150 yds versus the Patriots in week 12. Not clutch.
#1 - if you want a good discussion it isn't going to happen by comparing Peyton Manning to Andy Dalton

#2 - but because I'm a sucker...I didn't watch the game, but what was Denver's game plan after they went up by 4 TD's?

Either way, answer is probably similar to the 2nd Browns game for Dalton last year, which I intentionally did not cite.

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
I would rather roll the dice on a QB I think can be great and risk imploding than be content with mediocrity. it's why I keep saying that purgatory word. Not bad enough to send packing, not good enough to win anything meaningful. I'm sure there are some Browns fans that would be happy with 10-6 and a quick playoff exit year over year, but I'm not one of them.
I get the whole concept of QB purgatory, but I don't think that there is anything Dalton has done that shows that he is a mediocre QB. He might turn out to be a mediocre QB in the end, but his play and his numbers so far doesn't back that up. To be a third year QB with 33 TDs on the season...that's pretty rare. In the last ten years the only QBs to have 33+ TDs in a single season are Rodgers, Favre, Brees, Peyton, Brady, Stafford, Culpepper and Romo. I think that shows what an accomplishment it is to reach that number. No, it doesn't necessarily mean that Dalton is at their level, but to say that his regular season performances have been bad...? Please.

I'm willing to bet that if he had a slightly more flashy playing style, if he was really good at deep balls, or if he was more athletic, or if he was more of a powerful presence in the pocket like Luck or Rothlisberger, people would be speaking much more positively about him even if he put up the same numbers as he does now. But since his playing style is more focused on the short and intermediate game, struggles with accuracy on deep balls and is a relatively static QB he gets the old noodle arm stamp and then people latch on to these three playoff games like that defines his talent and ability. There are certainly things in his game to criticize but you can't just erase all the good things that he has done.
Then what happened in these games?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=330929005

http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331006004

http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331031015

espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331110033

espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331215023

http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331229004

That's just last year. I didn't include the 2nd Browns game (because it was just goofy), the first Chargers game (because the defense and run game won, but they still won and I don't think Dalton played poorly), or the Bears game (which was a loss but I thought Dalton played relatively well...it was week one though).

 
The point is, three games is too small a sample size to determine whether Dalton is going to be a perennial playoff choker, the second coming of Tom Brady, or somewhere in between.
When you combine it with his regular season performances I don't think the sample is too small.
But you can't honestly mean that his regular season performances have been bad...? :confused: At the very least they must have been above average considering his numbers and the results of the team?

His numbers are pretty close to historical for a QBs first three years in the league so how can you say that his regular season performances have been bad? Yes, I'm aware of people bringing up that he plays bad in important games, but even if that is true; would you rather have a QB that wins against good teams and loses against bad teams? I don't see the value in that. If anything it tells us that he is consistent and is able to keep his concentration against weaker teams. And quite possibly if he raises his overall game he would still be able to keep his consistency. But I don't get that kind of argument that he plays bad against good teams. It's like evaluating an RB and removing his best three games (which people do all the time on forums). Isn't it the total performance and total numbers that matters?
Yeah, color me confused by that statement as well. Here are Dalton's advanced passing metrics for his first three years in the league:

Advanced Passing Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · PRE · LINK · ?Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Att Y/A NY/A AY/A ANY/A Cmp% TD% Int% Sk% Rate
2011 24 CIN QB 14 16 16 9-7-0 516 90 95 94 97 91 95 105 114 94
2012 25 CIN QB 14 16 16 10-6-0 528 96 95 98 97 105 109 96 87 103
2013 26 CIN QB 14 16 16 11-5-0 586 105 110 102 105 103 114 88 115 104
Career 48 48 30-18-0 1630
Those three stat lines paint a picture of a guy who was basically an average NFL QB right out of the chute as a starter, has gotten progressively better by most measures each year since, and is now solidly above average across the board with the exception of interception ratio.

If you want to discount all these numbers because of the results of three games in January, go right ahead, but let's not pretend it supports your argument.
I am much more of a context than raw data type. Dig into those individual games and the picture isn't as pretty. 363/4/0 vs. Minnesota and 372/3/0 vs. Detroit may be great for fantasy, but in the quest for a title it doesn't mean much.
Yeah...same thing with Manning last season. If you just remove all those unnecessary big games of his he was actually quite mediocre.
And he only threw for 150 yds versus the Patriots in week 12. Not clutch.
#1 - if you want a good discussion it isn't going to happen by comparing Peyton Manning to Andy Dalton

#2 - but because I'm a sucker...I didn't watch the game, but what was Denver's game plan after they went up by 4 TD's?

Either way, answer is probably similar to the 2nd Browns game for Dalton last year, which I intentionally did not cite.
Well, the point was hardly to compare Manning and Dalton but rather to illustrate the silliness of removing big games when evaluating a player. You say that those big games might be good for fantasy but doesn't help win a title. But...the Bengals won their division by a three game margin...? Big games from a QB helps win games which in turn helps you win titles.

And no...the Broncos lost that game versus the Patriots by 3 pts. Just for the record.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The point is Dalton has a history of blowing up inferior opponents and playing badly vs. good ones.

 
The story on Dalton hasn't been written yet. At this point he's a young QB, who has put up improving stats year after year, and had a very big year 3. He also has led the CINCINNATI BENGALS to three straight playoff appearances!

The Detroit Lions only WISH that Stafford could get them to the playoffs year after year, but where are the calls for Stafford to leave?

Dalton is doing fine in his career. The twitter generation is killing him.

I wonder how Peyton Manning would have been treated if his first 4-5 years had been played under the media pressure and ridicule.

 
The story on Dalton hasn't been written yet. At this point he's a young QB, who has put up improving stats year after year, and had a very big year 3. He also has led the CINCINNATI BENGALS to three straight playoff appearances!

The Detroit Lions only WISH that Stafford could get them to the playoffs year after year, but where are the calls for Stafford to leave?

Dalton is doing fine in his career. The twitter generation is killing him.

I wonder how Peyton Manning would have been treated if his first 4-5 years had been played under the media pressure and ridicule.
since you brought him up i don't think Stafford is an answer either. He has done more with his opportunities but has not been successful enough. Right or wrong he gets a pass because his former coach was a joke. He'll run out of excuses if he doesn't get it done this year.
 
The story on Dalton hasn't been written yet. At this point he's a young QB, who has put up improving stats year after year, and had a very big year 3. He also has led the CINCINNATI BENGALS to three straight playoff appearances!

The Detroit Lions only WISH that Stafford could get them to the playoffs year after year, but where are the calls for Stafford to leave?

Dalton is doing fine in his career. The twitter generation is killing him.

I wonder how Peyton Manning would have been treated if his first 4-5 years had been played under the media pressure and ridicule.
since you brought him up i don't think Stafford is an answer either. He has done more with his opportunities but has not been successful enough. Right or wrong he gets a pass because his former coach was a joke. He'll run out of excuses if he doesn't get it done this year.
Jesus dude, I want to slap some sense into you. Do understand the concept of a career and that Andy Dalton has only completed 3 seasons of his NFL career? 3 seasons does not a career make. You must be trolling or you are really bad at prognosticating in fantasy football.

 
The story on Dalton hasn't been written yet. At this point he's a young QB, who has put up improving stats year after year, and had a very big year 3. He also has led the CINCINNATI BENGALS to three straight playoff appearances!

The Detroit Lions only WISH that Stafford could get them to the playoffs year after year, but where are the calls for Stafford to leave?

Dalton is doing fine in his career. The twitter generation is killing him.

I wonder how Peyton Manning would have been treated if his first 4-5 years had been played under the media pressure and ridicule.
since you brought him up i don't think Stafford is an answer either. He has done more with his opportunities but has not been successful enough. Right or wrong he gets a pass because his former coach was a joke. He'll run out of excuses if he doesn't get it done this year.
Jesus dude, I want to slap some sense into you. Do understand the concept of a career and that Andy Dalton has only completed 3 seasons of his NFL career? 3 seasons does not a career make. You must be trolling or you are really bad at prognosticating in fantasy football.
I'm just writing what I see and think based on what I see.I could also say nothing but positive things about everybody.

EVERYONE IS GREAT, EVERYONE GETS A MEDAL.

 
I'm just writing what I see and think based on what I see.

I could also say nothing but positive things about everybody.

EVERYONE IS GREAT, EVERYONE GETS A MEDAL.
Well, if nothing else you are 100% committed to your position and are exceptionally tenacious. I'm not sure why you're so absolutely devoted to convincing everyone that Dalton sucks, but you sure are giving it all you've got.

 
I'm just writing what I see and think based on what I see.

I could also say nothing but positive things about everybody.

EVERYONE IS GREAT, EVERYONE GETS A MEDAL.
Well, if nothing else you are 100% committed to your position and are exceptionally tenacious. I'm not sure why you're so absolutely devoted to convincing everyone that Dalton sucks, but you sure are giving it all you've got.
I'm probably not going to convince anyone who didn't already have a negative opinion of Dalton to create a negative opinion about him. Anytime someone questions my opinion I'll respond and explain why. That's all I've really done here. If people don't question my opinion I usually just make a post or two and bow out.

 
A potential pitfall in defining Dalton as being a product of padding stats against weak teams and losing against good teams, is if you define a team that loses to CIN as bad. That's just circular.

With out a 48 game-by-game breakdown (and citing a handful of games out of 48 isn't conclusively showing there is some kind of deep underlying principle at work), CIN had to beat good teams to make three straight playoffs. For that to be unacknowledged/unrecognized, it is as if "bad team" has become synonymous with or equates to losing to Dalton in your reckoning. :)

* If nothing else, nobody can say you aren't well acquainted with teams quitting on QBs, probably a lot more than you would liked to have been.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A potential pitfall in defining Dalton as being a product of padding stats against weak teams and losing against good teams, is if you define a team that loses to CIN as bad. That's just circular.

With out a 48 game-by-game breakdown (and citing a handful of games out of 48 isn't conclusively showing there is some kind of deep underlying principle at work), CIN had to beat good teams to make three straight playoffs. For that to be unacknowledged/unrecognized, it is as if "bad team" has become synonymous with or equates to losing to Dalton in your reckoning. :)
Look at all of Cincy's wins vs. teams with > 8 wins over the last 3 years. You'll either see a low scoring game (New England 13) or a lousy defense (Washington 12).

'Big game' is very subjective, but if you identified 4 per year over his 3 seasons you'll find mostly bad performances. Both Baltimore's and both San Diego's from last year stick out.

 
They have finished strong, losing only once in the last nine games of 2012 and six games of 2013.

That is a combined 13-2 in the second half plus of 2012 and the last month and a half of 2013. Sure, they may have beat some bad teams, but if it was that easy, there would be a lot more teams out there with a combined 13-2 record over a comparable time frame. It doesn't seem like the team quit on him too often going 13-2 to finish the 2012-2013 regular seasons.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They have finished strong going 8-1 and 5-1 to end the 2012 and 2013 seasons, respectively.

That is a combined 13-2 in the second half plus of 2012 and 2013. Sure, they may have beat some bad teams, but if it was that easy, there would be a lot more teams out there with a combined 13-2 record over a comparable time frame. It doesn't seem like the team quit on him much going 13-2 to finish the 2012-2013 regular season.
I said they quit at the end of the season? They quit during last year's playoff game, not in the lead up.

The team around him is great. Dalton puts up numbers against lousy defenses. That nets regular season wins against average or worse teams. It does not net wins in January.

 
MAC_32 said:
Bob Magaw said:
They have finished strong going 8-1 and 5-1 to end the 2012 and 2013 seasons, respectively.

That is a combined 13-2 in the second half plus of 2012 and 2013. Sure, they may have beat some bad teams, but if it was that easy, there would be a lot more teams out there with a combined 13-2 record over a comparable time frame. It doesn't seem like the team quit on him much going 13-2 to finish the 2012-2013 regular season.
I said they quit at the end of the season? They quit during last year's playoff game, not in the lead up.

The team around him is great. Dalton puts up numbers against lousy defenses. That nets regular season wins against average or worse teams. It does not net wins in January.
"Is it an excuse for the defense to give up? No, but it happened because they quit on their QB. Championship ball clubs have to believe in their QB. This team does not."

In the above quote, the first two sentences refer to the playoff loss. The second two sentences could be interpreted as going beyond that and phrased more generally.

There are other teams with QBs that also A) have a good supporting cast and surrounding talent, and B) that didn't go 8-1 to end 2012 and 5-1 to end 2013 in the regular season.

So again, if it was that easy to just beat up on bad teams and pad stats, there would have been more teams stringing together the kind of strong closes that CIN did in the last two years.

I'm trying to get this straight. If they lose, it is because of him, as he isn't that good (which is why the team doesn't believe in him). But if they win, it is in spite of him. Because he isn't good. So no matter what, you are right, and he isn't that good. That thought process seems familiarly circular. Trying to extend this line of thinking out, another way to break it down would be to not only look for instances in which Dalton "only" won in low scoring games against good opponents, but games in which he was productive in losses, as well (if you restrict your method to only looking for the negative, predictably you will find what you were looking for). Assuming we aren't simplistically attributing 100% of the failure to one player and 0% to his teammates, that is. To even wrap your mind around that, you would have to be able, at a root level, to conceive of the possibility that he could play good while some of his teammates don't. It doesn't seem too controversial to suggest there are multiple possibilities in wins and losses. There are times when Dalton and the team both play well, neither play well, Dalton plays well and the team doesn't, and vice verce.

But if you decide, by fiat, that Dalton isn't good and the team is great (and ANY success enjoyed by the team has NOTHING to do with Dalton, and ALL failure by the team has EVERYTHING to do with Dalton), than there would be no need to look at things from the direction of were there instances in which he did well in losses. Since we already know he isn't very good and the team around him is great, whatever good performances he had even in defeat must be illusions, shouldn't count and and can safely be ignored. It would just have to be chalked up as a fluke or accident related to him being propped up by his great teammates that week.

Getting 33 TDs, as has been pointed out, isn't trivial. A lot of other QBs that had good players didn't reach that level. Seemingly, he contributed to some degree to the team finishing well.

But this seems to be dismissed by you because they merely exploited "bad" teams. But other, "better" QBs have played bad teams before, too (Dalton is far from having a monopoly on that), and yet it is rare to be as productive. How do you account for that?

* You have presented some facts (looking at scores), but in saying the team doesn't believe in him, you are exceeding the scope of that and inserting your subjective opinion. Which is fine, generally when people aren't talking about raw, contextless stats but how they are interpreting them, they are also speaking from a place of subjective opinion themselves. Though if you are in a conversation with somebody who's subjective opinions are buttressed by circular logic constructed in such a way that they can't possibly be wrong no matter what (if CIN was bad, it was because of Dalton, and if CIN was good, it was because of his teammates), that does tend to lead to beating one's head against a brick wall-type exchanges. Which isn't an exchange in the usual sense, just insular, hermetically sealed retrenching.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please point me to some games against above average opponents they won in large part because of him.

Good qbs dont need to wine very game for their team, but they need to put them on their back for some.

The only ones is ee are teams with awful defenses.

Not any losses against strong opponents in which he played well and the team just came up short either.

Not looking at just stats either. Not really looking at the stats much at all. Looking at the context of each game.

That is not going to win titles.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can't convince you to consider the possibility that there may have been more than ZERO times in three years where Dalton may have been involved in a loss in which he played well, or that maybe not EVERY TIME in three years he was was involved in a win it was due to being propped up by his teammates. Nothing about your answer, though, was inconsistent with, or could be distinguished from the position of a fanatic and true believer that is determined to be 100% right and reject and dismiss any alternate interpretation as 100% wrong.

Your use of the words like only and not any in this context leave not even the possibility of a nuanced view. Just digging in the heels and even more strident, resolute pounding heads against the brick wall rhetoric.

It's not like we are talking about Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf where the answers really are that black and white. I can conceive of the possibility I'm wrong about your portrayal about Dalton, but when you use extremist language like EVERY TIME and NO TIMES, it not only makes it hard to agree with, but difficult to see how any kind of partial, more delimited agreement could even start from or be possible. There is just no other other possibility but that you are 100% right, and anybody that thinks differently is 100% wrong.

Any answer to a question about a player like Dalton (that isn't as unambiguous in either direction as Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf) is unlikely to be as simplistic as you are making it. His overall record is mixed, with success in the regular season but not in the playoffs, both contributing to the team making the playoffs but also losing all three years he has been in the league. It seems arbitrary to say he is "really" the choker that lost in the playoffs, any more than he is "really" the winner in the regular season that helped them get to the playoffs in the first place.

It might be better if you tried to answer for yourself some of the questions already asked above but remain unanswered.

If your position is as airtight as you are making it out to be, it should be capable of withstanding the acid test and bear up under the scrutiny of those questions.

If Dalton is in fact a shlub that lucked into 33 TDs this year and a combined 13-2 finish (8-1 in 2012 + 5-1 in 2013) the past two years, merely because he is lucky enough to be on a great team and/or fattened up on bad teams...

Aren't there non-shlub QBs, similarly with the advantage of supporting cast and surrounding talent, also with soft schedules at times, that have neither produced at the level of a 33 TD season personally, or been part of a team that finished with a combined 13-2 record over the same time frame as discussed above. Why wouldn't there be more QBs like Dalton (with his individual production and team record) if it was as easy and simple as you are making it?

* My favorite threads involve participants and contributions using a collaborative framework and language calculated to enable multiple people to work together in a common cause to find a solution (as much as that is possible and we can "know" about things from the past that are very complex and inter-related, or haven't happened yet). In this case, an answer to the question, who is Andy Dalton?

Dialogues that exist for the sole purpose of showing that one side is 100% right and the other 100% wrong are just stale exercises in predictable rigidity and inflexibility.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you keep focusing on the 33 tds?

I must not focus on stats as much as you. I prefer the actual play on the field. He senses ghosts in the pocket that aren't there. Knock on him coming into the league and if anything it has gotten worse. Those ghosts cause at least a couple of awful decisions per game, back breaking ones. He sees things that aren't there. His accuracy is baffling too. He will nail it through a window one throw then miss by ten feet on the next one. The ghosts problem is bigger thoug. Can't win in this league if you can't handle the rush.

Kinda likeStafford with Calvin,take away Dalton and he is a backup caliber qb. I'd rather be too early with calling it quits on a guy than too late. In the end, play better and more consistently on the field and I don't have this opinion. I'll put my stock in players I believe in.

 
If you are interested in understanding Dalton in a different way than you have, try to answer why if he is able to put up an exceptional number (33 TDs) despite being ordinary himself, why lots of other ordinary (or better than ordinary, for that matter) QBs in similar situations haven't also done it. It should happen a lot, if it is as simple as you are making it. It isn't just the TDs, you are leaving out the team's record. You should try and explain that also. If you can't, that is fine, but just admit you got nothing on that.

You use stats when it suits your purposes, but maybe when they don't conform to your narrative, it is easier to dismiss them.

The onus is still on you to explain Dalton's 33 TDs and 13-2 record in the last nine games of 2012 and 6 games of 2013. Saying he sees ghosts and is wildly inaccurate still doesn't explain what you think it does, when other QBs in similar situations (propped up by good teams, fattening up by beating bad teams), both those that see ghosts and are wildly inaccurate, and those don't/aren't, haven't put up comparable numbers.

Again, if you don't have an answer, just say so, instead of transparent deflection tactics, such as answering a question with a question, changing the subject, or, at last resort, saying the subject isn't important.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you keep focusing on the 33 tds?

.
Because it's valuable information. Average QBs don't put up those kinds of numbers even in optimum situations.Here's the list of QBs who have thrown for 33 or more TDs in NFL history

Player (age), + - HOFer, Bold - Active TD Year Teams

1. Peyton Manning (37) 55 2013 DEN

2. Tom Brady (30) 50 2007 NWE

3. Peyton Manning (28) 49 2004 IND

4. Dan Marino+ (23) 48 1984 MIA

5. Drew Brees (32) 46 2011 NOR

6. Aaron Rodgers (28) 45 2011 GNB

7. Dan Marino+ (25) 44 1986 MIA

8. Drew Brees (33) 43 2012 NOR

9. Matthew Stafford (23) 41 2011 DET

Kurt Warner (28) 41 1999 STL

11. Drew Brees (34) 39 2013 NOR

Aaron Rodgers (29) 39 2012 GNB

Tom Brady (34) 39 2011 NWE

Brett Favre (27) 39 1996 GNB

Daunte Culpepper (27) 39 2004 MIN

16. Brett Favre (26) 38 1995 GNB

17. Peyton Manning (36) 37 2012 DEN

18. Y.A. Tittle+ (37) 36 1963 NYG

Steve Young+ (37) 36 1998 SFO

Kurt Warner (30) 36 2001 STL

Tony Romo (27) 36 2007 DAL

Steve Beuerlein (34) 36 1999 CAR

Tom Brady (33) 36 2010 NWE

George Blanda+ (34) 36 1961 HOU

25. Steve Young+ (33) 35 1994 SFO

Brett Favre (28) 35 1997 GNB

27. Randall Cunningham (35) 34 1998 MIN

Daryle Lamonica (28) 34 1969 OAK

Tom Brady (35) 34 2012 NWE

Drew Brees (30) 34 2009 NOR

Philip Rivers (27) 34 2008 SDG

Drew Brees (29) 34 2008 NOR

33. Brett Favre (25) 33 1994 GNB

Jim Kelly+ (31) 33 1991 BUF

Warren Moon+ (39) 33 1995 MIN

Daunte Culpepper (23) 33 2000 MIN

Peyton Manning (24) 33 2000 IND

Andy Dalton (26) 33 2013 CIN

Y.A. Tittle+ (36) 33 1962 NYG

Dan Fouts+ (30) 33 1981 SDG

Drew Brees (31) 33 2010 NOR

Peyton Manning (34) 33 2010 IND

Vinny Testaverde (33) 33 1996 BAL

Warren Moon+ (34) 33 1990 HOU

Brett Favre (40) 33 2009 MIN

Peyton Manning (33)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Curious that I get questioned about fitting stats to my narrative while you isolate the last nine games of one year and six games of another. Be consistent. Oh wait, it doesn't fit your narrative.

I cited 22 qb's earlier I'd prefer to him right now. Tell me why I am wrong.

 
Why do you keep focusing on the 33 tds?

.
Because it's valuable information. Average QBs don't put up those kinds of numbers even in optimum situations.Here's the list of QBs who have thrown for 33 or more TDs in NFL history

Player (age), + - HOFer, Bold - Active TD Year Teams

1. Peyton Manning (37) 55 2013 DEN

2. Tom Brady (30) 50 2007 NWE

3. Peyton Manning (28) 49 2004 IND

4. Dan Marino+ (23) 48 1984 MIA

5. Drew Brees (32) 46 2011 NOR

6. Aaron Rodgers (28) 45 2011 GNB

7. Dan Marino+ (25) 44 1986 MIA

8. Drew Brees (33) 43 2012 NOR

9. Matthew Stafford (23) 41 2011 DET

Kurt Warner (28) 41 1999 STL

11. Drew Brees (34) 39 2013 NOR

Aaron Rodgers (29) 39 2012 GNB

Tom Brady (34) 39 2011 NWE

Brett Favre (27) 39 1996 GNB

Daunte Culpepper (27) 39 2004 MIN

16. Brett Favre (26) 38 1995 GNB

17. Peyton Manning (36) 37 2012 DEN

18. Y.A. Tittle+ (37) 36 1963 NYG

Steve Young+ (37) 36 1998 SFO

Kurt Warner (30) 36 2001 STL

Tony Romo (27) 36 2007 DAL

Steve Beuerlein (34) 36 1999 CAR

Tom Brady (33) 36 2010 NWE

George Blanda+ (34) 36 1961 HOU

25. Steve Young+ (33) 35 1994 SFO

Brett Favre (28) 35 1997 GNB

27. Randall Cunningham (35) 34 1998 MIN

Daryle Lamonica (28) 34 1969 OAK

Tom Brady (35) 34 2012 NWE

Drew Brees (30) 34 2009 NOR

Philip Rivers (27) 34 2008 SDG

Drew Brees (29) 34 2008 NOR

33. Brett Favre (25) 33 1994 GNB

Jim Kelly+ (31) 33 1991 BUF

Warren Moon+ (39) 33 1995 MIN

Daunte Culpepper (23) 33 2000 MIN

Peyton Manning (24) 33 2000 IND

Andy Dalton (26) 33 2013 CIN

Y.A. Tittle+ (36) 33 1962 NYG

Dan Fouts+ (30) 33 1981 SDG

Drew Brees (31) 33 2010 NOR

Peyton Manning (34) 33 2010 IND

Vinny Testaverde (33) 33 1996 BAL

Warren Moon+ (34) 33 1990 HOU

Brett Favre (40) 33 2009 MIN

Peyton Manning (33)
CHERRY PICKER! :)

I was about to put up something similar.

The four QBs (and six seasons), other than Dalton in 2014, with a 33+ TD season at 26 or younger:

Dan Marino - twice (23 & 25)

Brett Favre - twice (25 & 26)

Peyton Manning - once (24)

Daunte Culpepper - once (23)

That's it. Obviously a bunch of lucky hobokens. :)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes and the nfl is exactly the same now as it was in 1986.
So where are all the average guys posting 33 TD seasons.

You're contrarian just for the sake of being so - and in a relentlessly adamant way. Why?
if you are going to be wrong about a player be wrong about them on someone else's team. Do not be wrong about the guys on your own team. You will neve get very player right, but if you get the players on your team right then you will be successful.His games do not match the stats. It will catch up to him unless his play improves. I expect progress after three years and I have not seen that in the twenty or so times I have watched Dalton. He is the same guy now that he was in 2011. Assuming he will improve at this point is not a good bet.

 
Yes and the nfl is exactly the same now as it was in 1986.
So where are all the average guys posting 33 TD seasons. You're contrarian just for the sake of being so - and in a relentlessly adamant way. Why?
if you are going to be wrong about a player be wrong about them on someone else's team. Do not be wrong about the guys on your own team. You will neve get very player right, but if you get the players on your team right then you will be successful.His games do not match the stats. It will catch up to him unless his play improves. I expect progress after three years and I have not seen that in the twenty or so times I have watched Dalton. He is the same guy now that he was in 2011. Assuming he will improve at this point is not a good bet.
So now after all this back and forth you finally concede that he can grow. I think there's no question he's shown progress - you can disagree. But to put forth as your position that a third year QB has reached his maximum potential and that there is no possibility for further growth quite frankly just isn't rational or reasonable. That's been your position. If you're as savvy at this as you seem to think you are, you certainly should know better. Yet you paint yourself into a corner and give yourself no out. I'd offer that you find a way to use your knowledge constructively. I think you'll enjoy the discussions more. Or just continue to get into pissing contests. Personally I think you're better than that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes and the nfl is exactly the same now as it was in 1986.
So there should be myriad QBs 26 or younger that have had 33+ TD seasons in more recent history. If a shlub like Dalton can do it, anybody can do it, right? That's the narrative. Except it doesn't explain the data any better.

With efforts like this, I can see the reason for avoiding attempting an answer earlier.

Next deflection tactic on deck.

 
Curious that I get questioned about fitting stats to my narrative while you isolate the last nine games of one year and six games of another. Be consistent. Oh wait, it doesn't fit your narrative.

I cited 22 qb's earlier I'd prefer to him right now. Tell me why I am wrong.
Just to review the actual sequence, you dismissed stats in the 33 TD season example (another deflect and absorb tactic, rather than either attempting to explain it or simply admitting you have no explanation).You substituted a subjective take about Dalton seeing ghosts and being wildly inaccurate. If not everybody sees what you see, than numbers are at least a neutral framework that can be agreed on as a starting point, if not always how to explain or interpret them.

You shouldn't ignore what you see, but you should be able to make some kind of sense of the numbers and have some form of explanation for them within the framework of your position. It should line up and be in accord.

It so happens, that it is indisputably rare to have a 33 TD season at 26 or younger (an age like 26 is another number, like 33 TDs, so when sorting all QBs with 33+ TDs that are 26 or younger, that is a consistent use of numbers, the opposite of subjective ghost stories).

It is a short list, in which three of the four QBs (and five of the six seasons) other than Dalton that populate it are among the greatest QBs in league history. Dudes we don't tend to think of as seeing ghosts and being wildly inaccurate.

If the actual numbers can't be reconciled with your take (why don't we have dozens of shlubs getting 33 or more TDs at 26 or younger if a shlub like Dalton can do it?), than something is wrong. Since the 33 TDs can't be "wrong" in the same way as a subjective impression, that again still seems to leave the splainin onus on the subjective impression.

We all have narratives. Mine, that 33+ TDs (especially at his age) is rare, is supported by the stats and history. Your narrative is tied to subjective impressions (sees ghosts, wildly inaccurate), makes no attempt to reconcile them with stats or history and leads to bizarre, inexplicable statements like his games don't fit the stats. What does that even mean, did he get lucky 33 times? Is he throwing the ball wildly and inaccurately through three sets of inept DBs hands that should have been an INT as they collide with each other and fall down like a Three Stooges movie, as a snickering WR high steps a Deion impersonation into the end zone? Is he using miraculous Flubber technology so when a ball is about to be picked off, at the last second it rises above the outstretched arms of the baffled defender and nestles gently into the awaiting hands of a giggling A.J. Green? :)

W-L records are stats, that isn't being inconsistent, they aren't ghost stories. I noticed they finished strong at least the past two years (and made the playoffs three years in a row, but didn't look at the breakdown in his rookie season), so looked at the end of the season, not the beginning. It was hard to not notice they only lost once in the last month and half in 2012 and the last two months plus in 2013. I wasn't seeking out an ideal cutoff point or threshold to make him look better than he is relative to other QBs, I didn't even look at other QBs records. But if he is a shlub as you say, it would seem we should be able to find other shlubs that did as well in a comparable time frame. Unless he was lucky. Like he was lucky with the 33 TDs. Luck seems to be a recurring theme, since the numbers are stubbornly refractory to your interpretation.

But in that case, when the numbers aren't lining up or matching your expectations based on subjective impressions, clearly the only possible rational response and sensible thing to do is to dismiss the numbers and say things like his games don't match the stats. Anybody that is clinging to those pesky, stubborn objective stats and numbers obviously isn't looking at things right.

* A, typically, predictable, smashing heads against a brick wall exercise in futility with one QB is one thing.

Typically, predictable, smashing heads against a brick wall exercises in futility X 22?

Yeah, no.

It's part and parcel of the whole framing of the dialogue in such a way that you are 100% right and the other person is 100% wrong ethos to arbitrarily ignore stats and fall back onto an insular, subjective impression world when it suits your purpose, and not do that when it doesn't. If the numbers and stats are supportive, than incorporate them, and you are right. If they are at odds with your position, than they must be wrong and your personal impressions and subjective opinions must take primacy in a command override of the stats and numbers. Handily and conveniently, than regardless of whether the stats match your impressions/opinions or not, it further perpetuates thinkng you always remain 100% right and the other person 100% wrong no matter what.

At what point would common sense render you unable to any longer divorce stats from your impressions. How many TDs by Dalton would it take where you might check yourself and say, maybe he isn't seeing as many ghosts or as wildly inaccurate as I thought?

34? 40? 50?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you keep focusing on the 33 tds?

I must not focus on stats as much as you. I prefer the actual play on the field. He senses ghosts in the pocket that aren't there. Knock on him coming into the league and if anything it has gotten worse. Those ghosts cause at least a couple of awful decisions per game, back breaking ones. He sees things that aren't there. His accuracy is baffling too. He will nail it through a window one throw then miss by ten feet on the next one. The ghosts problem is bigger thoug. Can't win in this league if you can't handle the rush.

Kinda likeStafford with Calvin,take away Dalton and he is a backup caliber qb. I'd rather be too early with calling it quits on a guy than too late. In the end, play better and more consistently on the field and I don't have this opinion. I'll put my stock in players I believe in.
I'll give you this; he has not been good when the rush is getting to him. In all his three years he has had one of the cleanest pockets with pressure on around 25% of his dropbacks. His accuracy when pressured is one of the worst in the league. Bottom five. Does that mean that he is seeing ghosts? I would pretty much categorically say no. By PFF ratings he was the best QB in 2013 against traditional pressure with no blitz. Against blitz pressure he was the third worst. Are you suggesting that the blitz rushes are imaginary...?! Or do you think it is more likely that it is his decision making against the blitz that is sub-par? And even if you want to slaughter him for ranking low against pressure, Andrew Luck has also been in the bottom five in this statistic both his years in the league, and you'll find guys like Tom Brady and Tony Romo down there, so it is not like this is an area that single-handedly spells doom for a QB.

I know that you don't believe in stats, but one of your biggest drawbacks on him is his accuracy, and accuracy is clearly something that is very much measurable so maybe you'll trust stats in this area? These stats are all filtered to only show QBs that played at least 50% of the snaps so that we're only looking at starters.

- In completion percentage he has ranked 18th, 12th and 11th in his three years.

- When you remove drops, spiked balls and throwaways his accuracy percentage has been 15th, 15th and 11th.

- His accuracy percentage on 20+ yard passes has been 8th, 20th and 8th.

They're not elite numbers, but when you take into account that Dalton had the 11th highest average depth of target and that the Gruden system demands a lot of difficult technical throws, it's certainly not as bad as you make it out to be. His average depth of target is quite much higher than guys like Ryan, Rivers, Romo, Peyton, Brees and Luck so it is in some ways unfair to measure his completion percentage against those guys.

Another point of yours is that he is bad against good teams. How do you decide what constitutes a good team? Should we look at teams that made the playoffs that year? In that case he averaged a 69% completion rate, 228 yds and a 2:1 TD to turnover ratio against "good" teams in 2013. Against bad teams he had a 60% completion rate, 281 yds and a 1.6:1 TD to turnover ratio. They went 4-0 against good teams.

Hmm...that was weird? Maybe 2013 was a bit fluky. Let's do 2012 instead. Against good teams he had a 64% completion rate, 232 yds and a 1.68:1 TD to turnover ratio. Against bad teams he had a 62% completion rate, 228 yds and a 1.69:1 TD to turnover rate. They went 2-2 versus good teams.

But yes, I know, I know. You don't believe in numbers. Your totally objective and accurate way of evaluating a player by the eye test trumps all. :wall:

 
Why would you go and intrude common sense, logic and reason into a perfectly self consistent, tautologically insular, impenatrably circular, subjective impression world capable of command overrides contravening superficial irrelevancies like stats and history?

Numbers, shnumbers. :)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But to put forth as your position that a third year QB has reached his maximum potential and that there is no possibility for further growth quite frankly just isn't rational or reasonable.
when you start quoting things I actually say I will respond to you.
 
Why would you go and intrude common sense, logic and reason into a perfectly self consistent, tautologically insular, impenatrably circular, subjective impression world capable of command overrides contravening superficial irrelevancies like stats and history?

Numbers, shnumbers. :)
baseball and football are my two favorite sports. They couldn't be much different though. Football is by nature a subjective sport. Based on what I have seen of Dalton, which is a lot, I think the numbers lie about who he really is. It. Will catch up to him if he doesn't make corrections and expecting him to make them at this point is setting yourself up for disappointment.
 
I know that you don't believe in stats, but one of your biggest drawbacks on him is his accuracy, and accuracy is clearly something that is very much measurable so maybe you'll trust stats in this area? These stats are all filtered to on show QBs that played at least 50% of the snaps so that we're only looking at starters.

- In completion percentage he has ranked 18th, 12th and 11th in his three years.

- When you remove drops, spiked balls and throwaways his accuracy percentage has been 15th, 15th and 11th.

- His accuracy percentage on 20+ yard passes has been 8th, 20th and 8th.

They're not elite numbers, but when you take into account that Dalton had the 11th highest average depth of target and that the Gruden system demands a lot of difficult technical throws, it's certainly not as bad as you make it out to be. His average depth of target is quite much higher than guys like Ryan, Rivers, Romo, Peyton, Brees and Luck so it is in some ways unfair to measure his completion percentage against those guys.
another case in which the numbers don't match the eyes. When I watch Dalton stand in the pocket, cleanly, and make an on point throw one snap then the exact same thing the nexus nap and miss a guy by ten feet I am staring at my tv asking, why? One thing he does well to mask his Inaccuracy though- he knows he has two receivers prone to making circus catches. He will throw it to a spot that only Jomes or Green may catch it but most normal relievers don't have a shot. Somehow they pull those in. It's fun to watch, but says a lot more about them than Dalton.

If he would control the WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING plays the above could work, but they happen far too frequently, especially in big games.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top