Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: T200 on November 11, 2024, 01:36:53 PMCan you elaborate on #1?

For #2, he only played 6 games before he got hurt, coming off his best season and a playoff win. His protection has been much better this year than even his 2022 version. What do you attribute his being broken to?

Daboll isn't doing a very good job calling plays, nor is his scheme a good fit for his QB.


As for number 2 a couple of thoughts.  First, Jones is near the top in terms of sacks and hits endured compared to other QBs over the same time frame, which isn't good for any QB (Derek Carr is the poster boy for that issue).  In 2023 he got the crap kicked out of him in some of those games, especially the Dallas game.  Worse, he suffered a 2nd major neck injury and then an ACL injury.

As for your comments about better protection this year, that's true. However, the damage is done in terms of his confidence, and better safety now doesn't fix that problem. Frankly, I was impressed that DJ was able to regain his confidence by the end of the 2022 season. I am not optimistic that he can regain it again after losing it in 2023.

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 11, 2024, 01:37:32 PMNeither I nor knowledgeable NFL people agree with that assertion. It's become conventional wisdom that a QB's performance is significantly impacted by the three pillars of support-  coaching/scheme, protection, and receivers.

Ah, the classic appeal to authority fallacy. While you and the "knowledgeable NFL people" you listen to, projected Daniel Jones as a franchise quarterback, attributing his development to Coach Daboll, I took a different stance, challenging both assertions at the time. Given our contrasting track records, it appears that your critique is somewhat misdirected. 

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 01:45:42 PMAh, the classic appeal to authority fallacy. While you and the "knowledgeable NFL people" you listen to, projected Daniel Jones as a franchise quarterback, attributing his development to Coach Daboll, I took a different stance, challenging both assertions at the time. Given our contrasting track records, it appears that your critique is somewhat misdirected. 

Analytics also supports these positions, which is why we all hold them.  We don't just make up positions and then look for stats to support them; we look at the study and the stats and then reach our conclusions

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 11, 2024, 01:42:36 PMDaboll isn't doing a very good job calling plays, nor is his scheme a good fit for his QB.


As for number 2 a couple of thoughts.  First, Jones is near the top in terms of sacks and hits endured compared to other QBs over the same time frame, which isn't good for any QB (Derek Carr is the poster boy for that issue).  In 2023 he got the crap kicked out of him in some of those games, especially the Dallas game.  Worse, he suffered a 2nd major neck injury and then an ACL injury.

This notion precludes the reality that the QB is shares culpability for sacks. 

From PFF:
One important factor is a quarterback's ability to read the defense, make quick decisions, and release the ball efficiently. For instance, some quarterbacks avoid sacks by quickly getting rid of the ball in response to pressure, leveraging their understanding of defensive schemes and their pocket presence. Players like Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are examples of quarterbacks who consistently avoided sacks not because of superior mobility, but due to their quick decision-making and ability to read defenses�.  In contrast, DJ is terrible at both.

Form SHARP FOOTBALL ANALYSIS:
In addition, the time it takes a quarterback to release the ball is a critical factor. Research indicates that quarterbacks with quicker "snap-to-throw" times tend to avoid sacks more effectively. For example, quarterbacks such as Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes, who have relatively fast release times, are generally better at avoiding sacks compared to others who hold onto the ball longer�

FROM HUDL STATSBOMB | DATA CHAMPIONS:�
Metrics like sack avoidance and scramble rates also highlight how quarterbacks manage pressure. While some quarterbacks, like Justin Fields, tend to scramble more and risk being sacked more often, others such as Justin Herbert and Kirk Cousins exhibit strong sack avoidance while maintaining high performance�


While offensive line play certainly plays a major role in sack statistics, a quarterback's decision-making, time-to-throw, and ability to handle pressure are significant contributors to whether or not they are sacked.  DJ struggles in this area; thus, it's not a surprised he's sacked at a higher rate.

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 01:50:54 PMThis notion precludes the reality that the QB is shares culpability for sacks. 

From PFF:
One important factor is a quarterback's ability to read the defense, make quick decisions, and release the ball efficiently. For instance, some quarterbacks avoid sacks by quickly getting rid of the ball in response to pressure, leveraging their understanding of defensive schemes and their pocket presence. Players like Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are examples of quarterbacks who consistently avoided sacks not because of superior mobility, but due to their quick decision-making and ability to read defenses�.  In contrast, DJ is terrible at both.

Form SHARP FOOTBALL ANALYSIS:
In addition, the time it takes a quarterback to release the ball is a critical factor. Research indicates that quarterbacks with quicker "snap-to-throw" times tend to avoid sacks more effectively. For example, quarterbacks such as Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes, who have relatively fast release times, are generally better at avoiding sacks compared to others who hold onto the ball longer�

FROM HUDL STATSBOMB | DATA CHAMPIONS:�
Metrics like sack avoidance and scramble rates also highlight how quarterbacks manage pressure. While some quarterbacks, like Justin Fields, tend to scramble more and risk being sacked more often, others such as Justin Herbert and Kirk Cousins exhibit strong sack avoidance while maintaining high performance�


While offensive line play certainly plays a major role in sack statistics, a quarterback's decision-making, time-to-throw, and ability to handle pressure are significant contributors to whether or not they are sacked.  DJ struggles in this area; thus, it's not a surprised he's sacked at a higher rate.

This doesn't dispute the reality that a QB's performance is dependent on coaching/scheme, protection, and receivers.  Nor are any of the men you quoted people who work in the NFL

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 11, 2024, 01:47:42 PMAnalytics also supports these positions, which is why we all hold them.  We don't just make up positions and then look for stats to support them; we look at the study and the stats and then reach our conclusions

Once again, you are critiquing my methodology, which produced an accurate analysis, while advocating for your own approach, which yielded incorrect results.

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 01:55:03 PMOnce again, you are critiquing my methodology, which produced an accurate analysis, while advocating for your own approach, which yielded incorrect results.

Your studies tend to product results you like.  From what I have witnessed over the years, there are usually serious errors in omissions/inclusions as well as assumptions in your studies.  Look at the care I put into my studies.  I develop the methodology before finding out what results will be produced.  I provide careful reasoning as to why I include or omit data, what assumptions I am making, and how I justify those assumptions.

I take that care because I have limitless intellectual curiosity, and I am devoted to a lifetime of learning.

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 11, 2024, 01:58:30 PMI take that care because I have limitless intellectual curiosity, and I am devoted to a lifetime of learning.

It appears that we have transitioned from an appeal to authority to an appeal to ego fallacy. Given your previous stance on Daniel Jones and Brian Daboll just 18 months ago, I struggle to reconcile your current positions, which seem to be more focused on protecting your football acumen than on objective analysis.  It's not lost on me that your aggression is directed at those posters proven correct about DJ and Daboll's trajectory...

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 02:07:28 PMIt appears that we have transitioned from an appeal to authority to an appeal to ego fallacy. Given your previous stance on Daniel Jones and Brian Daboll just 18 months ago, I struggle to reconcile your current positions, which seem to be more focused on protecting your football acumen than on objective analysis.  It's not lost on me that your aggression is directed at those posters proven correct about DJ and Daboll's trajectory...

You can falsely accuse me of all sorts of nonsense.  None of it will change the reality that your methodology is almost always flawed, and your "studies" appear to be created after the fact to support one of your established beliefs rather than careful efforts to study the data to learn from the studies.

Edit to add-  I have seen you mock me and others you believe to be wrong in the past.  You seem more focused on proving yourself right and others wrong than trying to learn and identify what's really going on.

Quote from: Gmo11 on November 11, 2024, 09:47:19 AMIf Tracy is running to the right of the screen (towards the defender) then that's a drop.  If he's running full speed in the other direction and has to turn backwards to attempt to make that catch it becomes a hell of a lot more difficult.  Should he have caught it anyway?  Maybe, but even if he does he's getting tackled immediately whereas if the ball is put where it should be put he catches it in stride without a challenge and also as an added bonus is running away from the guy that's trying to tackle him so there could be yards after the catch too.

And which ever it was, it doesn't change the evaluation of Jones one whit.  It's like arguing if the ankle is sprained or broken while blood gushes out of an artery.

Quote from: babywhales on November 11, 2024, 10:53:20 AMNon of this is new, he is the same guy he always was

And that is exactly the basis for those like me, who have given up on him, to continue to believe he might have been much more if the Giants hadn't had their heads up their butts.  The fact that he is the same guy he always was is a damning indictment of the teams inability to provide a reasonable develop environment and provide even the bare minimum of what it takes for a QB to thrive.  Even Eli couldn't overcome the Giants' incompetence as he went from a QB with a 60% winning percentage to one with a 40% winning percentage.

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 11:24:50 AMExactly.  Daball didn't break DJ; he's is who he's proven to be for 8 years now.  The narrative is pressed by a few fans who simply don't want to admit they were been wrong about Jones for 3+ years. 

No, the breaking was done by Gettleman, Pat Schurmer, Joe Judge, and a plethora of OCs and QB coaches.

Quote from: AZGiantFan on November 11, 2024, 02:27:18 PMNo, the breaking was done by Gettleman, Pat Schurmer, Joe Judge, and a plethora of OCs and QB coaches.

I have often wondered if the Giants had somehow been able to keep Schurmer as his OC after his rookie season and if DJ would have turned out much better since Shurmer was the HC who drafted him.

Quote from: AZGiantFan on November 11, 2024, 02:23:53 PMAnd that is exactly the basis for those like me, who have given up on him, to continue to believe he might have been much more if the Giants hadn't had their heads up their butts.  The fact that he is the same guy he always was is a damning indictment of the teams inability to provide a reasonable develop environment and provide even the bare minimum of what it takes for a QB to thrive.  Even Eli couldn't overcome the Giants' incompetence as he went from a QB with a 60% winning percentage to one with a 40% winning percentage.

Excellent point; there is an argument to be made that Eli Manning is HOF worthy.  Yet even his considerable talents couldn't overcome the Giants dysfunction that marked the team after the miracle 2011 SB run.

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 11, 2024, 02:10:11 PMYou can falsely accuse me of all sorts of nonsense.  None of it will change the reality that your methodology is almost always flawed, and your "studies" appear to be created after the fact to support one of your established beliefs rather than careful efforts to study the data to learn from the studies.

Edit to add-  I have seen you mock me and others you believe to be wrong in the past.  You seem more focused on proving yourself right and others wrong than trying to learn and identify what's really going on.

First, what credentials do you have to declare anyone's methodologies as flawed? Additionally, how do you reconcile the fact that your 'superior' methodologies have yielded widely inaccurate results, while others have correctly assessed Daniel Jones and Brian Daboll? One would think that someone with 'endless curiosity' might consider whether the methodology that produced more accurate results might, in fact, be superior to their own.

As for the claim that the analysis was done 'after the fact,' that is simply false, and you know it.

After you declared that Daniel Jones was a franchise quarterback, you sent me the following direct message to take a victory lap:

When you talked about the same old discussions, I went back to look at your older posts.  This was the one that struck me:

Quote from: kingm56 on November 03, 2020, 11:17:41 AM
I completely agree, Kat!  I think the best we can hope for is a middle of the pack QB; in fact, I just completed an analysis of all 1st round QBs taken post 2013.  None of those QBs matured into anything more than they demonstrated after their first 20 games.  Those waiting for Jones to become something he's incapable of are going to be disappointed; after all, Jones was the SAME QB at Duke.  He was hardly a proficient passer; only amassing a handful of 300+ yard games, while still turning the ball over at a high rate.  Jones was a bad pick, which I hope our next GM corrects this Spring.


One of the defining attributes of someone who claims to "possess limitless intellectual curiosity" is the ability to admit when they are wrong. This, however, seems to be beyond your capacity. Instead, you appear more focused on defending your previous analysis rather than reassessing it in light of new information. 

Finally, stop conflating challenging your football acumen as an "attack."

Quote from: kingm56 on November 11, 2024, 02:57:48 PMFirst, what credentials do you have to declare anyone's methodologies as flawed? Additionally, how do you reconcile the fact that your 'superior' methodologies have yielded widely inaccurate results, while others have correctly assessed Daniel Jones and Brian Daboll? One would think that someone with 'endless curiosity' might consider whether the methodology that produced more accurate results might, in fact, be superior to their own.

As for the claim that the analysis was done 'after the fact,' that is simply false, and you know it.

After you declared that Daniel Jones was a franchise quarterback, you sent me the following direct message to take a victory lap:

When you talked about the same old discussions, I went back to look at your older posts.  This was the one that struck me:

Quote from: kingm56 on November 03, 2020, 11:17:41 AM
I completely agree, Kat!  I think the best we can hope for is a middle of the pack QB; in fact, I just completed an analysis of all 1st round QBs taken post 2013.  None of those QBs matured into anything more than they demonstrated after their first 20 games.  Those waiting for Jones to become something he's incapable of are going to be disappointed; after all, Jones was the SAME QB at Duke.  He was hardly a proficient passer; only amassing a handful of 300+ yard games, while still turning the ball over at a high rate.  Jones was a bad pick, which I hope our next GM corrects this Spring.


One of the defining attributes of someone who claims to possess limitless intellectual curiosity is the ability to admit when they are wrong. This, however, seems to be beyond your capacity. Instead, you appear more focused on defending your previous analysis rather than reassessing it in light of new information. 

Finally, stop conflating challenging your football acumen as an "attack."

First, my math skills were good enough to be tapped for the math team in high school.  I have a degree in engineering from an elite college and engineering is the art of converting the real world into numbers.

Second my football knowledge

Years ago, I made sure I wasn't missing any information by starting with Football for Dummies by Howie Long and Football Guide for Idiots by Joe Theismann

Having ensured, I had the vocabulary and the all the basics covered, I dived into many books over the years

I have read all three books by Tom Coughlin

I have read the book written by Ernie Accorsi

I have read the two books written by Bill Polian

I have read the book written by Phil Simms about football

I have read the advanced book by Pat Kirwan about football

Football is a numbers game by Matt Coller

I have read the two books written by Mike Lombardi on football

I read the book written about scouting by former Giants Scout Steve Verdosa

I read The Art of Smart Football by Chris Bown

The book written by Bruce Arians

The Draft a year inside the NFL draft by Pete Williams

Ron Jaworski-  Games That Have Changed the Game

Bill Parcells-  A Football Life

A book about PFF

The physics of football by Timmothy Gay PHD

Scout Speak: thinking and talking about being an NFL evaluator by Neil Stratton

The Big Book of Bill Belichick by Alex Kirby

I am sure I have forgotten to list a few others


I also purchased a dozen coaching DVDs to learn more about the game

I have listened to countless hours of Podcasts from former NFL People like

Bill Polian
Mike Lombardi
Randy Mueller
Bucky Brooks and Daniel Jeremiah
Ross Tucker
Pat Kirwan (via NFL radio)
Phil Simms (and his sons)
Carl Banks
Howard Cross
Johnathon Cassius
Mike Tanebuem
Greg Gabriel
Greg Cossell (technically not NFL, but NFL adjacent)
again, I am sure I am missing a few other NFL people I have listened to and learned from

I also took an online scouting class given by Greg Gabriel.


As for occasionally being wrong, I am not like you; I don't mock people who are wrong. I am not so conceited as to believe I am not like the rest of mankind, that I am perfect, and that I never make a mistake.


So I am more than comfortable with my credentials, and I don't pretend to be perfect nor do I think the occasional mistake is worthy of mocking or belittling people (and you clearly believe) nor do I think mistakes negate the credentials or the hard work and time (and money) it took to earn that knowledge.