McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

[htownskinfan]

I cant decide if I like this trade or not.This smells of the Brunell signing.Does Mcnabb have to pass a physical? Just cant believe philly would trade Mcnabb to us unless they know something we dont.If Mcnabb is 100 percent healthy then its a good trade for both teams,I dont think we gave up to much for him

[Audi]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

I cant decide if I like this trade or not.This smells of the Brunell signing.Does Mcnabb have to pass a physical? Just cant believe philly would trade Mcnabb to us unless they know something we dont.If Mcnabb is 100 percent healthy then its a good trade for both teams,I dont think we gave up to much for him

Mark Brunell was already well into his decline when we traded for him. McNabb hasn't shown he's in decline yet, hopefully it's not this year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Audi

Mark Brunell was already well into his decline when we traded for him. McNabb hasn't shown he's in decline yet, hopefully it's not this year.

Look no further than the injury record for disproof of your statement.

All I'm saying is that the decline signs are readily available for anyone who's interested in looking at them. QB rating kind of obscures it a bit, but most other stats suggest that the decline phase for McNabb is entering year three now. Which means that the steady consistent production he's become known for is the next thing to go.

Again, you're not getting a prediction from me whether or not he will crash in 2010 or not. I have no ability to accurately tell you which players will have good years and which will not. I can tell you that the point at which McNabb can't even get an NFL job is fewer than three years away. He won't be in the league when he's 37, as he's just not that kind of player, physically.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Look no further than the injury record for disproof of your statement.

All I'm saying is that the decline signs are readily available for anyone who's interested in looking at them. QB rating kind of obscures it a bit, but most other stats suggest that the decline phase for McNabb is entering year three now. Which means that the steady consistent production he's become known for is the next thing to go.

Again, you're not getting a prediction from me whether or not he will crash in 2010 or not. I have no ability to accurately tell you which players will have good years and which will not. I can tell you that the point at which McNabb can't even get an NFL job is fewer than three years away. He won't be in the league when he's 37, as he's just not that kind of player, physically.

Obviously those injuries did not affect his QB play which is what we're talking about. We're talking about his ability as a quarterback in comparison to Mark Brunell.

And that never stopped you from making predictions such as Colt McCoy being better than McNabb in 2011, Vince Young being better than McNabb, that Brady Quinn was the next Peyton Manning, and so on.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Audi

Obviously those injuries did not affect his QB play which is what we're talking about. We're talking about his ability as a quarterback in comparison to Mark Brunell.

And that never stopped you from making predictions such as Colt McCoy being better than McNabb in 2011, Vince Young being better than McNabb, that Brady Quinn was the next Peyton Manning, and so on.

Or you know, that Jason Taylor wouldn't work out, the Bears overpaid preposterously for Cutler, neither Stafford or Sanchez was worth a top five pick, Orakpo would be a stud, Devin Thomas would stink, etc, Jamarcus Russell had no chance of success, etc.

Should I keep going? Or are you ready to drop this foolish charade.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Or you know, that Jason Taylor wouldn't work out, the Bears overpaid preposterously for Cutler, neither Stafford or Sanchez was worth a top five pick, Orakpo would be a stud, Devin Thomas would stink, etc, Jamarcus Russell had no chance of success, etc.

Should I keep going? Or are you ready to drop this foolish charade.

You can keep going, but it doesn't change the fact that you are often wrong despite the high horse you sit on.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Audi

You can keep going, but it doesn't change the fact that you are often wrong despite the high horse you sit on.

Well, no, you just made an ad-hoc attack to misrepresent what I predicted at the time to try to build a case that I don't know what I'm talking about here, EVEN THOUGH, my record gives me great credibility, no matter how good I thought Brady Quinn could be coming out of Notre Dame (update: quite good, not Manning good, he was not No. 1 on my board that year).

And once the argument leaves the point where you're debating the facts, it's clear you'd rather I be wrong than you be right.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Audi

Obviously those injuries did not affect his QB play which is what we're talking about. We're talking about his ability as a quarterback in comparison to Mark Brunell.

Paid more, got less.

Brunell was asked to come here, be smart with the football, and pretty much just go through the motions. McNabb will be asked to go out and win games for us. Completely different situations which will have very different results.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Paid more, got less.

Brunell was asked to come here, be smart with the football, and pretty much just go through the motions. McNabb will be asked to go out and win games for us. Completely different situations which will have very different results.

What are you rambling on about now?

The guy said he thought it might be similar to the Brunell situation. I said it's not. Now what is the point you are trying to make?

[Dirtbag59]

Hey guys, hey guys. Does anyone think the Eagles sent McNabb a "Dear Don" letter when they traded him. Jajajajaja

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Look no further than the injury record for disproof of your statement.

4 missed games in the last three years is hardly an "injury record for disproof of your statement". If anything McNabb is consciously scrambling less and avoiding unnecessary contact based on his run production and watching the guy play.

All I'm saying is that the decline signs are readily available for anyone who's interested in looking at them. QB rating kind of obscures it a bit, but most other stats suggest that the decline phase for McNabb is entering year three now. Which means that the steady consistent production he's become known for is the next thing to go.

What are these decline signs?

- His completion %? It's been the best 3 year span of his career 2007-09.
- Passing Yds? same as above.
- QB Rate? his career average is 86.5, 2007 = 89.9, 2008 = 86.4, 2009 = 92.9.
- TD % and INT % are consistent with his career averages over the last three years.
- Sack % is consistent with his career average, slightly higher in 2007 & 2009, but way down in 2008.
- Playoff appearances in 2008 (NFC Championship appearance) & 2009
- Team record 2007 - 8-8, 2008 - 9-6-1, 2009 - 11-5, trends upward.

I don't see any evidence of decline from the stats. The guy is 33, if he sticks around and gives us the level of production he has for 3-4 years, this deal is an absolute steal for us. With the advances in sports medicine over the last 10 years, who's to say he can't be prodcutive until he's 37-38?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

4 missed games in the last three years is hardly an "injury record for disproof of your statement". If anything McNabb is consciously scrambling less and avoiding unnecessary contact based on his run production and watching the guy play.

What are these decline signs?

- His completion %? It's been the best 3 year span of his career 2007-09.
- Passing Yds? same as above.
- QB Rate? his career average is 86.5, 2007 = 89.9, 2008 = 86.4, 2009 = 92.9.
- TD % and INT % are consistent with his career averages over the last three years.
- Sack % is consistent with his career average, slightly higher in 2007 & 2009, but way down in 2008.
- Playoff appearances in 2008 (NFC Championship appearance) & 2009
- Team record 2007 - 8-8, 2008 - 9-6-1, 2009 - 11-5, trends upward.

I don't see any evidence of decline from the stats. The guy is 33, if he sticks around and gives us the level of production he has for 3-4 years, this deal is an absolute steal for us. With the advances in sports medicine over the last 10 years, who's to say he can't be prodcutive until he's 37-38?

I've yet to see any proof of this so called decline either.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I've yet to see any proof of this so called decline either.

[sarcasm]Oh, it's just hidden. The talent around him was just that much better.[/sarcasm] Seriously, though McNabb would have been nearing 4000 yds last season if he didn't miss two games.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

[sarcasm]Oh, it's just hidden. The talent around him was just that much better.[/sarcasm] Seriously, though McNabb would have been nearing 4000 yds last season if he didn't miss two games.

Yeah, if only you add Kolb's passing games to Donovan's you get this monster known as Philadelphia quarterback, who is a 4,000 yd player.

But don't do that, because that would imply McNabb is a product of the system. You don't want to go there.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

4 missed games in the last three years is hardly an "injury record for disproof of your statement". If anything McNabb is consciously scrambling less and avoiding unnecessary contact based on his run production and watching the guy play.

What are these decline signs?

- His completion %? It's been the best 3 year span of his career 2007-09.
- Passing Yds? same as above.
- QB Rate? his career average is 86.5, 2007 = 89.9, 2008 = 86.4, 2009 = 92.9.
- TD % and INT % are consistent with his career averages over the last three years.
- Sack % is consistent with his career average, slightly higher in 2007 & 2009, but way down in 2008.
- Playoff appearances in 2008 (NFC Championship appearance) & 2009
- Team record 2007 - 8-8, 2008 - 9-6-1, 2009 - 11-5, trends upward.

I don't see any evidence of decline from the stats. The guy is 33, if he sticks around and gives us the level of production he has for 3-4 years, this deal is an absolute steal for us. With the advances in sports medicine over the last 10 years, who's to say he can't be prodcutive until he's 37-38?

Well, first, the age figure is what makes you look at it.

Is 2 out of 3 seasons where McNabb missed consecutive weeks with an injury FOLLOWING a torn ACL season not an injury history? He plays quarterback. Does he need to take the crutches onto the field with him?

McNabb's most recent 6 years, as a whole (2 pro bowls) have been better than his first five developmental years (3 pro bowls). That's the part that would classify as his prime.

You're mistaking the inflation of statistics in the last three years as an appreciation of the player. Take a look at the Indexes under advanced passing on his PFR page, as they adjust for the era. Then split his prime into 2004-06 and 2007-09. The decline is much more evident looking at the context-adjusted figures. Sack rate = down, yards per attempt = down, net yards per attempt = down, Td rate = down. INT rate is pretty constant.

The sabermetrics just see a passing offense in the 12-17 range each of the last 3 years and McNabb between 10-20. He was pretty good in both 2004 and 2006, and injured most of 2005 with that sports hernia, but since 2007, he's been less good. Now his age is a serious deterrent, which is the biggest difference. Other WCO quarterbacks haven't made it past this point, notably Hasselbeck.