Jump to content

MAROTH4MVP

Lions @ Ravens 1pm (est) FOX

Recommended Posts

More from PFF

Decker has been better than Greg Robinson and co, but not up to par by any means. 

Glasgow is now 18th overall at G

Ansah isn't worth the contract he'll want probably, but not having him hurts. Not so much true for Tavon Wilson though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

But good god he's still better than Geno

He's better than are guy too over the long-haul. Not saying I would want Eli over Stafford now, I wouldn't. But comparing careers, absolutely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the game comes down to two things: turnovers and how are offense performs in the first half. As was mentioned prior, Baltimore's defense creates points and if Stafford or Abdullah develop a case of fumbliitis, intermixed with another slow start on offense, we're going to be toast. If we can manage to protect the football and come out with an offense that doesn't resemble a person with narcolepsy and I think we can win. It was cute (for a while) watching this team stage late game rally after rally to coax out a win. Now these slow starts on offense are catching up and killing us. Cooter, Caldwell, Stafford need to get it together offensively in the first half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

He's better than are guy too over the long-haul. Not saying I would want Eli over Stafford now, I wouldn't. But comparing careers, absolutely!

I'll take Stafford over the long haul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I'll take Stafford over the long haul.

I'll take a QB who gets hot at the right time and wins Super Bowls over a guy who chokes in Dallas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

He's better than are guy too over the long-haul. Not saying I would want Eli over Stafford now, I wouldn't. But comparing careers, absolutely!

I see no evidence for that fwiw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

I see no evidence for that fwiw

Stafford has a slightly higher career completion %, career QBR and career TD/INT ratio. So if that's your only measure, he wins the argument. However, Eli Manning's teams have won the division and thanks to him getting hot at the right time, won two Super Bowls. I'll take Manning's career over Stafford's if it means I get two championships and a division title over someone else being slightly better statistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Last data point
The Lions have gone from 22nd in offensive DVOA to 14th since the bye. 

Still not good enough with the highest paid player in the league. I like Stafford, but he can’t be leading the league in fumbles and missing receivers who are wide open for touchdowns. He is too inconsistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Shelton said:

At the very least, if the lions lose this one and then win the next four to finish 10-6 and make the playoffs (75% chance if this happens), they won’t be accused of “backing in.”

Just curious, where did you get the 75% chance number from?  I'd say there's a slim chance even if they finish 10-6 because that will be require either Carolina or Atlanta to finish 9-7 or worse and that's assuming that the west runner up finishes 10-6 or worse as well.  Because they lose all the tiebreakers, 11-5 will likely be required to get in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NYLion said:

Hi

Would you trade Eli Manning's Super Bowl wins for Stafford's marginally better stats? Would you trade those two seasons in which Manning was solid at the right time, helped his team win playoff games, and win two championships for the seven full, healthy seasons of Stafford?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Would you trade Eli Manning's Super Bowl wins for Stafford's marginally better stats? Would you trade those two seasons in which Manning was solid at the right time, helped his team win playoff games, and win two championships for the seven full, healthy seasons of Stafford?

Super Bowl wins are a team accomplishment.  I'm sure Stafford would have won a couple of Super Bowls as well if he had that supporting cast.

Would you cast Marino aside because he never won a Super Bowl?  Of course Stafford is no Marino but you get my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

I'll take Manning's career over Stafford's if it means I get two championships and a division title over someone else being slightly better statistically.

Why would having Manning necessarily mean you get two championships?

I wasn't aware taking Eli or Stafford meant I also get the Giants along with Eli.  Sure, I'll take the Giants of the last 15 years over the Lions over Matt's tenure to date and the future.

All we know is Eli won two with the Giants and Matt has won zero with the Lions.  There is nothing that says Matt wouldn't have won with the Giants or Eli would have won with the Lions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nastradamus said:

More from PFF

Decker has been better than Greg Robinson and co, but not up to par by any means. 

Glasgow is now 18th overall at G

Ansah isn't worth the contract he'll want probably, but not having him hurts. Not so much true for Tavon Wilson though.

 

PFF is by no means perfect. Even the people who work for PFF state that their are major flaws. Things like PFF having no way to know what the player assignment was during their grading are huge issues. At CB wasn't Lawson rated the best CB for half a season a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Stafford has a slightly higher career completion %, career QBR and career TD/INT ratio. So if that's your only measure, he wins the argument. However, Eli Manning's teams have won the division and thanks to him getting hot at the right time, won two Super Bowls. I'll take Manning's career over Stafford's if it means I get two championships and a division title over someone else being slightly better statistically.

I'd take his career too. That isn't the same as better. Lets not pretend Manning was carrying scrub supporting casts though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jason_R said:


Still not good enough with the highest paid player in the league. I like Stafford, but he can’t be leading the league in fumbles and missing receivers who are wide open for touchdowns. He is too inconsistent.

True, but to move up, that means they've been likely performing better than 14th, likely top 10. With the worst rushing attack in the league, not sure how much more you could ask to be honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAROTH4MVP said:

PFF is by no means perfect. Even the people who work for PFF state that their are major flaws. Things like PFF having no way to know what the player assignment was during their grading are huge issues. At CB wasn't Lawson rated the best CB for half a season a few years ago.

The post had nothing to do with PFF being perfect. No stat is perfect. Just like looking at yards, touchdowns, wins, etc. PFF is undoubtedly one of the best available measures though and a very good reference point to add to the conversation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NYLion said:

Just curious, where did you get the 75% chance number from?  I'd say there's a slim chance even if they finish 10-6 because that will be require either Carolina or Atlanta to finish 9-7 or worse and that's assuming that the west runner up finishes 10-6 or worse as well.  Because they lose all the tiebreakers, 11-5 will likely be required to get in.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/upshot/detroit-lions-nfl-playoff-picture.html?_r=0#bal-det-13=win&tb-det-14=loss&det-chi-15=win&cin-det-16=loss&det-gb-17=win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nastradamus said:

The post had nothing to do with PFF being perfect. No stat is perfect. Just like looking at yards, touchdowns, wins, etc. PFF is undoubtedly one of the best available measures though and a very good reference point to add to the conversation. 

I disagree. Especially when it comes to OL rankings.

Things like having Diggs listed as a top corner should be red flags. They are fun to look at but it's garbage ultimately. Look at defensive grades. If a corner allows a big play in garbage time is grade will plummet. 

Jeff Risdon is a guy who used to work for them. He is actually pretty darn knowledgeable when it comes to football. He pretty much agrees that PFF rankings are not a good measurement. There are to many variables it fails to account for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×