The Rosen Problem

[Chris_Sanders]

So to recap since either you aren't reading the whole thread or just being deliberately obtuse

#1. I see a video stating Rosen projects to be an average QB at best

#2. I think said video is bullcrap so I look to refute it.

#3. I actually go out and try to find reasons to support Rosen. I go to 4 different analytics sites to find support

#4. I find none

#5. I post all the different statistics

#6. People try to defend Rosen. Much of the defense is refutable

#7. Final conclusion from my end is that Rosen is likely going to be someone we can win with if he has good talent. But yes, barring some giant statistical outlier (Goff level) he is likely an average QB at best.

 

[kerouac9]

So to recap since either you aren't reading the whole thread or just being deliberately obtuse

#1. I see a video stating Rosen projects to be an average QB at best

#2. I think said video is bullcrap so I look to refute it.

#3. I actually go out and try to find reasons to support Rosen. I go to 4 different analytics sites to find support

#4. I find none

#5. I post all the different statistics

#6. People try to defend Rosen. Much of the defense is refutable

#7. Final conclusion from my end is that Rosen is likely going to be someone we can win with if he has good talent. But yes, barring some giant statistical outlier (Goff level) he is likely an average QB at best.

I guess the problem with statistics over a small sample size is that they're not very predictive. If you say, "Show me the stats that tell me he can be good," there isn't anything to show, because all the stats are bad. You can't make bad stats look good.

I think the problem is using stats on a small sample size to predict anything. What that likely tells you is that Josh Rosen under Steve Wilks and Byron Leftwich is likely to continue to be bad.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

I guess the problem with statistics over a small sample size is that they're not very predictive. If you say, "Show me the stats that tell me he can be good," there isn't anything to show, because all the stats are bad. You can't make bad stats look good.

I think the problem is using stats on a small sample size to predict anything. What that likely tells you is that Josh Rosen under Steve Wilks and Byron Leftwich is likely to continue to be bad.

Yes I agree that being the worst starting QB in football last year falls heavily on the feet of Wilks and Leftwich.

How far can you climb from worse than Colt McCoy territory? I guess someone is finding out next year. Likely us.

 

[JeffGollin]

Rosen - Has shown he can zip it. But makes too many bad reads and embarrassing throws. Decent mobility. Shaky under pressure. How much are negatives due to youth and inexperience & can be coached out of him?

Murray - Short (blocked passes and throwing lanes). Throws smooth ball with good zip and accuracy. Can beat you with his feet. Sucked early in Ala game. Will generate fan excitement.

Comparison: Eggs to Golf Balls (i.e. impossible to compare).

 

[scandalous_b]

Fail again

Go read post 1. Is that link a PFF link? Gasp it isn't...

When I literally put "www.pro-football-reference.com"

In my instruction to read some advanced stats.

Was that PFF?

Gasp it isn't...

You mean I went to multiple sources AND they all say Rosen was the worst QB in football last year?

Why this poor guy needs some help

The only posts I've mentioned and responded to:

When I watched the PFF review of Rosen they basically said his ceiling is around QB 15.

Seemed crazy right? Best he can do...is that right?

That is an across the board in every measurable stat 20 QB improvement.

They are absolutely correct.

It's Pro Football Focus. Based on their analytical models they say that Rosen will end up as a middling QB at best.

He was ranked at QB 37 last year. I should have included that.

You cited and agreed with PFF's assessment that Rosen's ceiling is QB15.

To make a claim like that after just 13 games with his track record of college success is stupid and indefensible.

 

[scandalous_b]

So to recap since either you aren't reading the whole thread or just being deliberately obtuse

#1. I see a video stating Rosen projects to be an average QB at best

#2. I think said video is bullcrap so I look to refute it.

#3. I actually go out and try to find reasons to support Rosen. I go to 4 different analytics sites to find support

#4. I find none

#5. I post all the different statistics

#6. People try to defend Rosen. Much of the defense is refutable

#7. Final conclusion from my end is that Rosen is likely going to be someone we can win with if he has good talent. But yes, barring some giant statistical outlier (Goff level) he is likely an average QB at best.

I have no problem with anyone saying that it is likely Rosen will be an average NFL QB. That's not exactly a hot take.

What I have a problem with is you claiming that Rosen becoming a top QB would be some kind of miracle. Just because you keep quoting statistics that fit your narrative, doesn't mean that you are using them correctly.

Rosen becoming a quality NFL QB would be far from a "giant statistical outlier". He was a top 10 pick viewed as a potentially elite NFL QB less than a year ago. A 13 game sample size is not going to affect your future projection nearly as much as you think.

 

[Dr. Jones]

The only posts I've mentioned and responded to:





You cited and agreed with PFF's assessment that Rosen's ceiling is QB15.

To make a claim like that after just 13 games with his track record of college success is stupid and indefensible.

Wait.... He had college success now? When did we start using that argument?

Even the bad o line argument is somewhat overblown. He was under pressure 40% of the time which is higher than the NFL average of 34% but not crazy.

On 30 drop backs per game it equals roughly 2.5 extra pressures per game over the NFL average.

Not a monster number and not the highest pressure rate in the league.

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[scandalous_b]

Wait.... He had college success now? When did we start using that argument?

Even the bad o line argument is somewhat overblown. He was under pressure 40% of the time which is higher than the NFL average of 34% but not crazy.

On 30 drop backs per game it equals roughly 2.5 extra pressures per game over the NFL average.

Not a monster number and not the highest pressure rate in the league.

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You must be registered for see images attach

Is that sarcasm? Why would you not look at his college performance?

He's played in 13 NFL games. He played three years of college football, and graded out very favorably by your precious PFF. I guarantee you that there is a strong correlation between NFL success & college football success.

When projecting future performance - you have to look at the entire picture. Looking at a 13 game sample while ignoring what he did beforehand would be extremely stupid.

But I get it. You don't want to look at what he did in college because it doesn't support your narrative.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Is that sarcasm? Why would you not look at his college performance?

He's played in 13 NFL games. He played three years of college football, and graded out very favorably by your precious PFF. I guarantee you that there is a strong correlation between NFL success & college football success.

When projecting future performance - you have to look at the entire picture. Looking at a 13 game sample while ignoring what he did beforehand would be extremely stupid.

But I get it. You don't want to look at what he did in college because it doesn't support your narrative.

Others have mentioned that Kylers college dominance means nothing when you project him forward to the NFL.

Your comments are fair, just completely off from what others have said as I debate the merits of Murray at #1.

Nothing meant towards you.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[GuernseyCard]

Others have mentioned that Kylers college dominance means nothing when you project him forward to the NFL.

Your comments are fair, just completely off from what others have said as I debate the merits of Murray at #1.

Nothing meant towards you.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Johnny Football had good stats too.

Wowed some at his Pro Day; even a former President was in attendance.

Where's he?

 

[scandalous_b]

Others have mentioned that Kylers college dominance means nothing when you project him forward to the NFL.

Your comments are fair, just completely off from what others have said as I debate the merits of Murray at #1.

Nothing meant towards you.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Well whoever said that Kyler's dominance of college football means nothing is probably even more stupid.

College success does not mean that you will be successful in the NFL. That's obvious.

However - if you are not an elite performer at the college level, it is highly unlikely that you will be elite in the NFL. It's almost like a pre-requisite for NFL success. To say college doesn't matter is extremely misguided.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Johnny Football had good stats too.

Wowed some at his Pro Day; even a former President was in attendance.

Where's he?

What does this prove? Nothing.

It's just dismissive.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[scandalous_b]

Johnny Football had good stats too.

Wowed some at his Pro Day; even a former President was in attendance.

Where's he?

Okay. We can play that game.

Give me a list of all current NFL QBs that you would consider "good" that had bad stats in college.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Okay. We can play that game.

Give me a list of all current NFL QBs that you would consider "good" that had bad stats in college.

My point is that it doesn't necessarily add up to future success and there were more than a few ala Murray who were once hot for Manziel on this board.

 

[BigRedRage]

I'm surprised this is still going. Obviously everyone had their stance. I hope we go another year and give him a chance. Dude had poor blocking, poor running, poor playbook schemes, poor calling of poor playbook schemes, poor everything. I do not believe for one second that when the entire team is terrible, a quarterback can still be good. The team was so bad last year that I skipped a few late games. I never do that. It wasn't because of Rosen. Rosen is why I skipped less games that I did.

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

 

[AZCB34]

I saw Rosen make enough big boy throws to convince me that the analytics are dogshit. Dude had a number of passes that looked like Carson Palmer, where he threaded the needle. Oddly, most of those were to Ricky Seals-Jones, who dropped or misplayed most of those passes

John Skelton made big boy throws.

 

[HeHasRosen]

Smh people taking PFF as some kind of gospel. Lol they are good but they are not the end all be all. Nor is using only advanced analytics as your only determining factor. If that was the case it would be the only thing people looked at or that mattered. There is so much more that goes into determining if a guy will be good or not. The same PFF guys said Rosen had the most big time throws than any other rookie QB. You know the ones guys like Brady and Brees make. They also take into account his horrible team and also say they still think he can be a good QB. They are hedging their bets so either outcome they can say "well we said he could still be good." They do this crap all the time so I am pretty sure your new to the PFF group if you did not know this.

Kyler Murray is not Russel Wilson. Russel Wilson runs around to throw keeping his eyes down field. Murray runs to run. Looking for holes to run through, not to throw. Huge difference.

The comp is still and will be a better, yet smaller version of Johnny Manziel, like it or not. Does he have more of a desire to win? More devoted to the game? Id say yes.

Is he the generational, game changing talent some of you think? Not likely. Use advanced analytics as they are meant to be used. To add to the analysis. The eye test and tape will still do you more favors.

 

[SECTION 11]

This is absurd. 4300 passing yards from a guy who looks to run, and when he did take off, scored 12 times. Great points.

 

[SECTION 11]

For the record, I hate the Sooners. Granted, in a friendly rivalry football sense, but still.
And it’s not that I hate Josh Rosen, he’s just not as good as Murray. And, that’s ok.

 

[SECTION 11]

Use advanced analytics as they are meant to be used. To add to the analysis. The eye test and tape will still do you more favors.

This is the most intelligent thing you’ve said since claiming that Rosen and Hundley have similar skill sets, which was spot on my man, spot on.

 

[b8rtm8nn]

For the record, I hate the Sooners. Granted, in a friendly rivalry football sense, but still.
And it’s not that I hate Josh Rosen, he’s just not as good as Murray. And, that’s ok.

So, do you draft Murray, and if so, is it contingent on getting a return on trading Rosen?

 

[TJ]

John Skelton made big boy throws.

Bad comparison. Skelton had poor game prep habits and regressed over the course of his career. It was apparent after his third season that the Fordham product was not NFL material. Nice guy, though.

 

[Timm Rosenbach]

John Skelton made big boy throws.

Jamarcus Russell could kneel on the 20 yard line and throw the ball to the end zone. You saw how that worked out. I have a funny feeling that Rosen is studying tape and preparing while people are speculating about an absurd draft pick and trade

 

[HeHasRosen]

This is absurd. 4300 passing yards from a guy who looks to run, and when he did take off, scored 12 times. Great points.

Where's Ouchie when you need him. Words matter as he would say. Didn't say he always looks to run. When he tucks the football he looks to run. Also does not sense pressure well. Watch the tape.

This is the most intelligent thing you’ve said since claiming that Rosen and Hundley have similar skill sets, which was spot on my man, spot on.

Again do not put words in my mouth. More similar to Rosen than Murray is what i said. Sorry if you can't see that.

For the record, I hate the Sooners. Granted, in a friendly rivalry football sense, but still.
And it’s not that I hate Josh Rosen, he’s just not as good as Murray. And, that’s ok.

So you like a bunch of other people know for a fact Murray will be better than Rosen in the NFL. I've never said I know who will be better and am on record saying I think Murray can be great. Still haven't seen any intelligent opinions or analysis from you. Just Rosen hate every now and then.

 

[SECTION 11]

So, do you draft Murray, and if so, is it contingent on getting a return on trading Rosen?

I think they have to draft Murray. In a way the same way they had to draft Rosen last year. Seriously, no sane person was more excited for Josh Rosen than they were for simply drafting the position of quarterback.

For one, there is no market for a trade down. Zero. Any hope that teams are falling over themselves to trade up to #1 is not there. Right now there is no bidding war whatsoever. There’s one suitor, the Giants, who are just fine staying at six. That takes one of three scenarios off the table.

The other scenario is that they they stay put at #1 and select one of the three. No way you gamble on either of those guys. I like all of them, but at number one you might as well be betting on red, black, whatever. This does not jive with Bidwills’s clear hostility shown towards last year’s version of fiasco. This would be a gutless waste of opportunity.

So then what? Draft the best quarterback in the draft, and at the same time get whatever you can for Rosen. You’re still upgrading two positions in the process, and one is the most important on the team.