Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Sam Darnold had the 13th worst QB win in NFL history if we measured passer rating


ENC Pantherfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

"Every conceivable metric" - except the ones from this season.

Yeah, so let's take his career year and extrapolate then.

He had a 58% completion percentage, 1,100 yards, 7 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, and 6 fumbles in 6 games.

So, Sam would have 3238 Yards, 20 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 17 fumbles in the now 17 game season.

Keep digging holes boys.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Krovvy said:

Yeah, so let's take his career year and extrapolate then.

He had a 58% completion percentage, 1,100 yards, 7 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, and 6 fumbles in 6 games.

So, Sam would have 3238 Yards, 20 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 17 fumbles in the now 17 game season.

Keep digging holes boys.

Uhh....those numbers (aside from the fumbles) aren't too bad.  

I don't think this is helping your argument much.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Krovvy said:

Yeah, so let's take his career year and extrapolate then.

He had a 58% completion percentage, 1,100 yards, 7 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, and 6 fumbles in 6 games.

So, Sam would have 3238 Yards, 20 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 17 fumbles in the now 17 game season.

Keep digging holes boys.

3238 Yards - 15th in the NFL

20 Pass TDs - 15th in the NFL

9 INTs - Tied at 15th worst in the NFL

YARN | I do not think it means what you think it means ...

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Krovvy said:

Yeah, so let's take his career year and extrapolate then.

He had a 58% completion percentage, 1,100 yards, 7 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, and 6 fumbles in 6 games.

So, Sam would have 3238 Yards, 20 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 17 fumbles in the now 17 game season.

Keep digging holes boys.

Seems a bit weird to throw in fumbles versus fumbles lost and exclude rushing TDs.  He's more like 9 TDs, 5 turnovers, 1250 total yards in 6 games. Still hardly impressive.

He's good for 3-4 "decent" games, at a backup level, before he falls flat on his face it seems. I guess that is why backups are backups and not starters.

Time to move on. Maybe he'll find success elsewhere. Maybe he'll be out of the league in a few years. But unless he's coming back for pennies as a backup / bridge for 4 weeks until we put our new rookie QB out there, I don't want him on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

And before yesterday he had a string of games that made him one of the best QBs in the league. People have bad games. He should not be our starter ... but damn, some of you just can't let it go. It's like you're trying to prove Sam is bad. We know he is. Or, you want to stand on your soap box and go, SEE I TOLD YOU! But you're speaking to like ... 1-3 guys on here lol.

 

There are ppl that would be ok with Sam as a bridge. In the right circumstances. But as a starter? Not many want to hitch their wagon to that particular choice.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

And before yesterday he had a string of games that made him one of the best QBs in the league. People have bad games. He should not be our starter ... but damn, some of you just can't let it go. It's like you're trying to prove Sam is bad. We know he is. Or, you want to stand on your soap box and go, SEE I TOLD YOU! But you're speaking to like ... 1-3 guys on here lol.

It almost seems like they are mad that he didn't just suck from the get-go as soon as he started his first game back from injury so the narrative can be resumed.  

11 minutes ago, KSpan said:

I couldn't watch yesterday. Did they win because of Sam, in spite of Sam, or a little bit of both at various times?

Both.  

Sam stunk but there were hardly any open receivers to throw to and he forced a couple which resulted (obviously) in INTs.  

Then, the Saints missed a FG late (some say they deliberately "tanked it" though I don't believe that as they are grown men trying to win a football game, too), Sam had a key Scramble/Run for a first down followed 2 plays later by a key throw to TMJ to set up the game-winner.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

Seems a bit weird to throw in fumbles versus fumbles lost and exclude rushing TDs.  He's more like 9 TDs, 5 turnovers, 1250 total yards in 6 games. Still hardly impressive.

He's good for 3-4 "decent" games, at a backup level, before he falls flat on his face it seems. I guess that is why backups are backups and not starters.

Time to move on. Maybe he'll find success elsewhere. Maybe he'll be out of the league in a few years. But unless he's coming back for pennies as a backup / bridge for 4 weeks until we put our new rookie QB out there, I don't want him on the team.

He played right around middle of the pack for starting QBs in the league during his 6 game stretch. Fortunately, we might be able to sign him to a cheap, back up level contract.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Krovvy said:

Yeah, so let's take his career year and extrapolate then.

He had a 58% completion percentage, 1,100 yards, 7 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, and 6 fumbles in 6 games.

So, Sam would have 3238 Yards, 20 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 17 fumbles in the now 17 game season.

Keep digging holes boys.

 

Um...  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ECHornet said:

He played right around middle of the pack for starting QBs in the league during his 6 game stretch. Fortunately, we might be able to sign him to a cheap, back up level contract.

Nah.  He's not being brought back.

mav said so, so that's that. 

So what else is on TV?  *click*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ECHornet said:

He played right around middle of the pack for starting QBs in the league during his 6 game stretch. Fortunately, we might be able to sign him to a cheap, back up level contract.

If Darnold had even had something close to a decent game yesterday I'd be more on board with that, but man, I just don't see the point. There are going to be other backups that have higher ceilings, lots of journeyman vets that could start the entire year without looking like garbage while AR or Levis develops behind them, etc.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...