Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by biffle

I really can't think of a top QB who came into the draft with anything close to Griffin's character, work ethic and production who didn't work out. But again, people apparently want to cling to this notion that all QBs in the draft come out as some kind of dice roll, so I guess these are the "odds" we are supposed to make all our decisions by.




Frankly, yes you can. There is no single facet that comes anywhere close to predicting a team's success than the quality of their QB. In most divisions, you can rank the QBs and then go to the standings and find that you just ranked where they finished the season. If you can find a franchise QB for the next decade plus, you do it. To bypass it to draft a RT and MLB (to use the example of earlier) while farting around with the twilight of Peyton Manning's career would be the epitome of shortsightedness.



And again, that is just hogwash. There are always ways to spend your cap dollars. Just because that disputes your argument doesn't mean you can wish it away.

Yeah I think your first problem is that you seem to think Robert Griffin is God's gift. I don't see that. I see that in Luck, but not Griffin. You also seem to think Peyton is in some sort of decline. That's the biggest source of disagreement between the two of us.

As for cap space, no, not even close. There are not THAT many good ways to spend $35 - $45 friggin million in cap space. Nobody makes that many free agent acquisitions and lives to tell the tale. See: Cerrato, Vinny.

And yes, in the end Griffin is a dice roll. People have thought extremely highly of a lot of quarterbacks. Mark Sanchez and Matt Ryan were both extremely productive, highly regarded, and high character guys. One can't muster anything better than mediocre production, and the other disappears in road games and come playoff time. You just don't know.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Yeah I think your first problem is that you seem to think Robert Griffin is God's gift. I don't see that. I see that in Luck, but not Griffin.

I don't think anyone is "God's gift" and I'm not sure what the point of a lame comment like that is. If you don't like him as a prospect, that's fine. I do, as do plenty of other people. We can disagree, but rest assured, I don't need you to tell me what "my problem" is.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

You also seem to think Peyton is in some sort of decline. That's the biggest source of disagreement between the two of us.

Manning's passer ratings by age:
28- 121.1
29- 104.1
30- 101
31- 98
32- 95
33- 99.9
34- 91.9

A pretty clear downward trajectory there, and that number for his last year would have been good for only 7th best in the NFC this season.

People decline physically as they get older. It's not exactly controversial to say that. And taking a year off and having multiple surgeries aren't exactly elixirs for that.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

As for cap space, no, not even close. There are not THAT many good ways to spend $35 - $45 friggin million in cap space. Nobody makes that many free agent acquisitions and lives to tell the tale. See: Cerrato, Vinny.

Ah, so once there was a terrible GM who didn't know what he was doing, so all Free Agent spending is bad. Brilliant. Does that also apply to Gibbs' Washington-Springs-Griffin-Daniels-Moss spending spree that was the basis for two playoff runs? How about the Patriots first Super Bowl win after signing about 20 FAs? There are smart ways and dumb ways to spend money, just like there are dumb ways to do most anything.

For the record, why don't you look at GTripp's breakdown of our cap space. People keep throwing these numbers around and thinking that we are going to have trouble figuring out what to do with all the cap space. Once we re-sign our own and our draft picks, that space turns into a much more pedestrian number.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

And yes, in the end Griffin is a dice roll.

Thank goodness we don't have a FO that thinks of things so simplistically.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

People have thought extremely highly of a lot of quarterbacks. Mark Sanchez and Matt Ryan were both extremely productive, highly regarded, and high character guys. One can't muster anything better than mediocre production, and the other disappears in road games and come playoff time. You just don't know.

Yeah, I'll take Ryan and his future any day, thank you.

Sanchez had only one year of starting in college, which is a huge red flag. He also had an arrest on his record, and other maturity questions.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by biffle

I don't think anyone is "God's gift" and I'm not sure what the point of a lame comment like that is. If you don't like him as a prospect, that's fine. I do, as do plenty of other people. We can disagree, but rest assured, I don't need you to tell me what "my problem" is.



Manning's passer ratings by age:
28- 121.1
29- 104.1
30- 101
31- 98
32- 95
33- 99.9
34- 91.9

A pretty clear downward trajectory there, and that number for his last year would have been good for only 7th best in the NFC this season.

People decline physically as they get older. It's not exactly controversial to say that. And taking a year off and having multiple surgeries aren't exactly elixirs for that.



Ah, so once there was a terrible GM who didn't know what he was doing, so all Free Agent spending is bad. Brilliant. Does that also apply to Gibbs' Washington-Springs-Griffin-Daniels-Moss spending spree that was the basis for two playoff runs? How about the Patriots first Super Bowl win after signing about 20 FAs? There are smart ways and dumb ways to spend money, just like there are dumb ways to do most anything.

For the record, why don't you look at GTripp's breakdown of our cap space. People keep throwing these numbers around and thinking that we are going to have trouble figuring out what to do with all the cap space. Once we re-sign our own and our draft picks, that space turns into a much more pedestrian number.



Thank goodness we don't have a FO that thinks of things so simplistically.



Yeah, I'll take Ryan and his future any day, thank you.

Sanchez had only one year of starting in college, which is a huge red flag. He also had an arrest on his record, and other maturity questions.

Those are numbers we have never seen in D.C..

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Those are numbers we have never seen in D.C..

Even if he had a "steep decline" to 85, that's still pretty damn good. I just want a QB that doesn't force balls and either can a) throw the ball away or b) have enough strength to hang onto it if they're getting sacked.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Even if he had a "steep decline" to 85, that's still pretty damn good.

An 85 passer rating is basically what Campbell was doing here.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by biffle

An 85 passer rating is basically what Campbell was doing here.

I'd have been fine if he stayed too. He was behind what could have been considered one of the worst lines in Redskins history. All I ask for is an improvement in QB play. If it's Peyton, that's an improvement, even if he drops off. If it's Orton, Flynn, Hoyer, me, I don't care... my main thing is that I don't want to gift up draft picks.

[irish]

Originally Posted by biffle

An 85 passer rating is basically what Campbell was doing here.

Anything Campbell did for the good was done in garbage time after the game was essentially over.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by biffle

An 85 passer rating is basically what Campbell was doing here.

I could be way off in my thinking but I think your comparing a QB that probably threw a ton of balls and completed 85% (PM), compared to a QB who had more of a running game and was not asked to throw the ball as much but had close to an 85% rating for the few balls he did throw (JC). How does that matter? I don't think if JC had to throw as many balls his % would have been lower.

Again I could be wrong for all you stat driven people.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Those are numbers we have never seen in D.C..

No, but there's really no reason to believe we'd see them in DC from Manning, either.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by biffle

No, but there's really no reason to believe we'd see them in DC from Manning, either.

Why not? Let's assume that Peyton comes back healthy, maybe limited strength-wise, but still have that brain and leadership. We have a very similar receiving corps to the Colts. System might be very different, but I'd imagine Manning would have just a touch of autonomy in this offense.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Why not? Let's assume that Peyton comes back healthy, maybe limited strength-wise, but still have that brain and leadership. We have a very similar receiving corps to the Colts. System might be very different, but I'd imagine Manning would have just a touch of autonomy in this offense.

Why would you assume a player is going to be as good at 36 as he was at 34? And after a year off, multiple surgeries and a change of teams? And I wouldn't agree that our receivers, or pass protection for that matter, are as good as he had in Indy.

But even if he were to get back to that level, my point was more aimed at the totality of his numbers. As much as I think it is unwise to bet on him being as good as he was before the year off, I would say it's doubly or triply foolish to think he's going to go back to what he was in his prime years.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by biffle

Why would you assume a player is going to be as good at 36 as he was at 34? And after a year off, multiple surgeries and a change of teams? And I wouldn't agree that our receivers, or pass protection for that matter, are as good as he had in Indy.

But even if he were to get back to that level, my point was more aimed at the totality of his numbers. As much as I think it is unwise to bet on him being as good as he was before the year off, I would say it's doubly or triply foolish to think he's going to go back to what he was in his prime years.

I don't assume that. I DO assume he would be a significant upgrade from what we currently have AND that upgrade would come without giving up draft picks. If he's totally cleared medically to play, I would absolutely bet on him being significantly better than what we currently at QB. Manning from the past? Probably not. I just know that he'd be better than Flynn, Orton or whoever else we can pick up in FA.

NOW, if RGIII falls to us, that's who I want.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by biffle

Manning's passer ratings by age:
28- 121.1
29- 104.1
30- 101
31- 98
32- 95
33- 99.9
34- 91.9

A pretty clear downward trajectory there, and that number for his last year would have been good for only 7th best in the NFC this season.

Could you please provide RGIII's passer rating for comparison? Thanx.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by biffle

I don't think anyone is "God's gift" and I'm not sure what the point of a lame comment like that is. If you don't like him as a prospect, that's fine. I do, as do plenty of other people. We can disagree, but rest assured, I don't need you to tell me what "my problem" is..

Sheesh, touchy. God's Gift was just my term for someone you think extremely highly of. That must be the case, there's no way you'd ever trade so many picks to get someone you didn't think was God's Gift.

Originally Posted by biffle

Manning's passer ratings by age:
28- 121.1
29- 104.1
30- 101
31- 98
32- 95
33- 99.9
34- 91.9

A pretty clear downward trajectory there, and that number for his last year would have been good for only 7th best in the NFC this season.

People decline physically as they get older. It's not exactly controversial to say that. And taking a year off and having multiple surgeries aren't exactly elixirs for that.

From age 29 to age 33, those QB ratings are for all intents and purposes, the same. Nobody who watched Manning over that time would ever say that he fell off during that time. He was just as deadly. As for the 34 year old season, don't forget that was the year he played hurt the entire year with neck pain and numbness in his arm. Hence the neck surgeries and now the nerve regeneration.

People decline physically, yes. But it's typically fast twitch muscle that falls off as you age. RBs, WRs, and DBs are particularly prone to aging, they rely on agility and speed which requires fast twitch muscle. Arm strength can decline some, but that's typically more a function of mechanics. On Peyton's particular situation, spinal fusion surgery results in complete nerve regeneration over 90% of the time. It also results in vertebrae that are stronger and more resistant to injury than they were even before the surgery. Some range of motion can be lost, but this is insignificant to the sport of football. In other words, Manning is almost certain to be himself again. Those are just the medical facts.

Originally Posted by biffle

Ah, so once there was a terrible GM who didn't know what he was doing, so all Free Agent spending is bad. Brilliant. Does that also apply to Gibbs' Washington-Springs-Griffin-Daniels-Moss spending spree that was the basis for two playoff runs? How about the Patriots first Super Bowl win after signing about 20 FAs? There are smart ways and dumb ways to spend money, just like there are dumb ways to do most anything.

For the record, why don't you look at GTripp's breakdown of our cap space. People keep throwing these numbers around and thinking that we are going to have trouble figuring out what to do with all the cap space. Once we re-sign our own and our draft picks, that space turns into a much more pedestrian number.

Fair point. I will concede that I do believe free agency can still be successful in filling out a team. But successful forays into free agency do not include bringing in $35-$45 million worth of free agent talent. That's almost an entirely new starting lineup.

As for GTripp's breakdown, you probably don't realize it but you've stepped into my wheelhouse - salary cap analysis. GTripp's breakdown post is one I used to do for this site. He did it this year for whatever reason, I chose not to make an issue of it, but that doesn't mean I agree with the analysis. He's right in saying we need a portion of our cap space to resign our own players or replace them with other players. But I don't agree with the conclusion that there is only $15 million of flexibility. You may be able to assume same cap value when considering replacement cost of departing players, but that doesn't mean those replacements won't be talent upgrades.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

From age 29 to age 33, those QB ratings are for all intents and purposes, the same. Nobody who watched Manning over that time would ever say that he fell off during that time. He was just as deadly. As for the 34 year old season, don't forget that was the year he played hurt the entire year with neck pain and numbness in his arm. Hence the neck surgeries and now the nerve regeneration.

People decline physically, yes. But it's typically fast twitch muscle that falls off as you age. RBs, WRs, and DBs are particularly prone to aging, they rely on agility and speed which requires fast twitch muscle. Arm strength can decline some, but that's typically more a function of mechanics. On Peyton's particular situation, spinal fusion surgery results in complete nerve regeneration over 90% of the time. It also results in vertebrae that are stronger and more resistant to injury than they were even before the surgery. Some range of motion can be lost, but this is insignificant to the sport of football. In other words, Manning is almost certain to be himself again. Those are just the medical facts.

No, those numbers represent a consistent decline, with one outlier year. Because they aren't huge doesn't mean they are not happening. He has been slowly declining thru his 30s, which is hardly shocking.

Note my post above. QBs who had the same types of skills as Manning (Marino, Unitas, Fouts, Kelly) were falling off a cliff in performance after the age of 35. There is no basis for believing Manning will just chug along with no drop-off.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Fair point. I will concede that I do believe free agency can still be successful in filling out a team. But successful forays into free agency do not include bringing in $35-$45 million worth of free agent talent. That's almost an entirely new starting lineup.

As for GTripp's breakdown, you probably don't realize it but you've stepped into my wheelhouse - salary cap analysis. GTripp's breakdown post is one I used to do for this site. He did it this year for whatever reason, I chose not to make an issue of it, but that doesn't mean I agree with the analysis. He's right in saying we need a portion of our cap space to resign our own players or replace them with other players. But I don't agree with the conclusion that there is only $15 million of flexibility. You may be able to assume same cap value when considering replacement cost of departing players, but that doesn't mean those replacements won't be talent upgrades.

That's nice, and I'm not in total agreement with all his assumptions either, but it's a starting point. He also has us releasing players that I don't envision and doesn't seem to have outlayed cap space for draft picks. So, in those regards he is overestimating the cap space we will have. My own guesstimates had us at 16-18 mil in cap space after re-signings and draft picks, assuming none of the Snyder/Vinny era back loading of contracts. That is a fairly modest amount of money to spend.

And all of that is kind of moot anyway, as apparently the ability to rollover cap space form year to year holds throughout the CBA. So, the money you're advocating spending on Peyton doesn't have to go to a spending spree, some of it could just be saved for the future.