Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: No more Simms: Do you want to be let down again? « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 7 8 9

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#120 : November 15, 2006, 04:46:05 PM

TD/INT ratio is, IMO, one of the biggest stats to look at, then completion %. Simms is acutally at 54% and Grads is at 53%. Same difference but to have them even close look REALLY bad on Simms.

Comparing a 4yr NFL QB to a Rookie in 6 starts is laughable. To even think it would be this close is scary. Case closed.



Guest
#121 : November 15, 2006, 04:57:42 PM

TD/INT ratio is, IMO, one of the biggest stats to look at, then completion %. Simms is acutally at 54% and Grads is at 53%. Same difference but to have them even close look REALLY bad on Simms.

Comparing a 4yr NFL QB to a Rookie in 6 starts is laughable. To even think it would be this close is scary. Case closed.

Yes but then we get into the same argument Gruden uses..."Hells Bells we have a rookie Quarterback"
Statistically in 4 games Simms is a better Quarterback than Gradkowski in completed passes and Yards per game

There can be so many factors in Touchdowns like playcalling and dropped passes.

You have to ask yourself is this kid really better than numero doce? Or is it a smokescreen by Chucky to like Gradkowski and approve of the move.

Lets hope if  Simms leaves it doesnt come back to bite us in the @$$

DanTurksGhost

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19746
Offline
#122 : November 15, 2006, 04:59:33 PM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

DanTurksGhost

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19746
Offline
#123 : November 15, 2006, 05:05:26 PM

Yes but then we get into the same argument Gruden uses..."Hells Bells we have a rookie Quarterback"
Statistically in 4 games Simms is a better Quarterback than Gradkowski in completed passes and Yards per game

Ok, you're the head coach. Let's say just for argument's sake you have two healthy guys that can play QB. Make your choice:

QB1 throws on average for about 50 yards more per game than QB2.
QB1 and QB2 complete passes at a roughly similar percentage, within one or two percent of each other.
QB1 throws six times as many INTs per game as QB2.

Teams that win the turnover battle usually win the football game. Make your choice.

BucsAddict

****
Starter

Posts : 816
Offline
#124 : November 15, 2006, 05:27:22 PM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

yes the opposing teams attempted to NOT sack simms. That makes sense.

==================================================
Gruden: Simms is gonna be a helluva quaterback- unless I screw it up.



Guest
#125 : November 15, 2006, 10:10:57 PM

Yes but then we get into the same argument Gruden uses..."Hells Bells we have a rookie Quarterback"
Statistically in 4 games Simms is a better Quarterback than Gradkowski in completed passes and Yards per game

Ok, you're the head coach. Let's say just for argument's sake you have two healthy guys that can play QB. Make your choice:

QB1 throws on average for about 50 yards more per game than QB2.
QB1 and QB2 complete passes at a roughly similar percentage, within one or two percent of each other.
QB1 throws six times as many INTs per game as QB2.

Teams that win the turnover battle usually win the football game. Make your choice.

I think that a QB that can burn you deep will cause the defense to respect that. Right now they are stopping Cadillac and saying "Bruce beat me"

With Simms iI dont think they do that because the ability to hit Galloway on go routes. All in all I think Simms is a better overall QB...However I am not the HC

flyinbuc

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1737
Offline
#126 : November 15, 2006, 10:44:08 PM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

yes the opposing teams attempted to NOT sack simms. That makes sense.
am I missing something or was Chris not the QB until a season ending illness.

gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
#127 : November 15, 2006, 11:04:21 PM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

yes the opposing teams attempted to NOT sack simms. That makes sense.
Actually UT is right.  That was the book on simms, lots of people noted it.  If you didn't get immediate penetration, you stepped back and went for the bat.  That's not saying they would go for the sack at all, but if they didn't get that instant break they'd just disengage from the Lineman and play goalie...

Boid Fink

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 53768
Offline
#128 : November 15, 2006, 11:55:12 PM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

yes the opposing teams attempted to NOT sack simms. That makes sense.
am I missing something or was Chris not the QB until a season ending illness.
Exactly.  And that pretty much sums it all up.

Gruden went with Simms, despite his poor first two games.  The third one was a sign of better times to come, IMO.




Guest
#129 : November 16, 2006, 08:31:21 AM

Looking at my unoffical stats I see Simms is a better Statistical QB in 4/6 catagories

If you want to massage the numbers that way or just choose the stats that favor Simms, sure. However, a long pass of 55 vs a long pass of 52 is a nonsense statistic. 3 yards? Come on. How about batted balls? Who wins that one? And comparing 53% completions to 54% completions and trying to show that one is clearly superior to the other is stretch, especially when you consider one guy is a total rookie who took no reps with most of the first team before he was starting for the first time on Sunday.

And sacks? We all know the opposing defenses played Simms differently. Rather than penetrate into the backfield on passing downs the defensive linemen held back and batted balls down at the line. That was much more effective against Simms, because he did have a nice deep ball but had a very slow, whipping passing motion. No need to sack a guy or be too aggressive up front and risk getting burned deep when instead you can set up and get up and get his pass down.

The biggest number is 2.3 INTs per game versus .37 per game.

yes the opposing teams attempted to NOT sack simms. That makes sense.
am I missing something or was Chris not the QB until a season ending illness.
Exactly. And that pretty much sums it all up.

Gruden went with Simms, despite his poor first two games. The third one was a sign of better times to come, IMO.

We know what Chris Simms is capable of. I dont know if Bruce Gradkowski will ever be better than a good back up Quarterback

12-4Bucs

***
Second String

Posts : 102
Offline
#130 : November 16, 2006, 10:03:27 PM

Only if we have a coach who is going to use his strengths. ABuccsFan


well said
Page: 1 ... 7 8 9
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: No more Simms: Do you want to be let down again? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools