Wednesday, September 30, 2009

9 comments Three For Wednesday

I did not mean to bury The Professor's response (the gentleman who wrote the original article) to what Fred wrote yesterday but didn't see he had responded until I had posted this. Look below in the comments to see The Professor's response to Fred.

Sorry for the fairly uncreative title today, I didn't know what else to call it. I had originally started working on a post for today concerning a JoeChat. I felt really good about it and as usual it was very lengthy and wordy. Long story short, my computer crashed and the document never saved. I am actually too pissed off to even start typing again about the JoeChat and I am certainly not going to fucking retype everything I just typed. This is the one time when I really, really could have used a damn typewriter because then my masterpiece would not be gone into the middle of nowhere. I know there is no proof of how awesome it was because I didn't post it, but this was probably my favorite JoeChat of the ones I have done.

Because I am pissed off and don’t feel like doing an entire JoeChat today because of my bitterness, I am forced to sum it up very briefly. These are from the September 15 chat and the September chat.

Real quick note before we get to the chat. The Atlanta Braves have the worst fans in the major leagues. The team has been begging and imploring fans to come to the games to cheer the team as they try and get the Wild Card, even offering $1 dollar tickets...and no one comes to the games. I wish I lived in Atlanta, I would be there. I wish the fans would just come to the ballpark.

(Joe talking about the Oakland A’s and why they have struggled)

Sometimes, when I look at the A's players, I think they're playing softball. They have some big guys who try to hit the ball out of the ballpark. They strike out a lot.
Absolutely wrong. The A’s are 27th in Major League Baseball in home runs hit and are 23rd in strikeouts. The A’s players may try to hit home runs (and fail) but they certainly don’t strike out that much if you compare them to every other team in the major leagues right now. Joe is completely wrong about this.

They've never really been a team to run or steal bases, bunt guys over or hit and run…You have to be more athletic, steal some bases in order to be a well rounded team.

I like how Joe Morgan has his perception of the Oakland A’s COMPLETELY wrong. The A’s are 4th in the major leagues in stolen bases this year. So I guess they may not be athletic, which his weird since the team name is the Athletics, but they are stealing bases exactly like Joe Morgan wants them to do. Why doesn’t Joe know this information you may ask? Because he is not a good analyst and is afraid of numbers. He just has it in his head they don't steal bases, which is factually incorrect.

You don't have to steal a lot of bases, but you have to have the threat there.

How can you threaten to steal bases if there isn’t on the team who can actually steal bases? This must be why the A’s struggled this year, though they were 4th in the majors in stolen bases they were 29th in the SBTTS (Stolen Bases Threatened to Steal) category. They need to threaten to get more stolen bases and then their team athleticism would greatly increase according to Joe. I am not sure the most effective way to threaten to steal a base without actually doing it, but I am sure that is a question Joe can address/avoid in a later chat.

(Joe on which team Milton Bradley fits in with)

Well, what it really tells me that Ron Washington is a better manager than I thought he was. That was the only place in the last few years where he didn't have any major incidents.

That is true, unless you want to count the time in Texas where he attempted to attack an announcer for the Kansas City Royals. Who really counts the incident where Bradley attempted to make his way into the press box and attack an announcer though?

Also, I don’t know if it makes Ron Washington a good manager that he was able to keep Milton Bradley (fairly well) in check during his time with Texas. This may make him a good personality manager but not necessarily a good baseball manager.

(Joe on whether who he would rather have leading off, a speedy guy who doesn’t get on base a lot or a slow guy who gets on a base a lot)

I would rather have a speedy player. I'll give you a great example. Wade Boggs hit lead off most of his career, had 200 hits a lot, high batting average, high OBP, but couldn't run. His OBP was higher than Rickey Henderson's but who would you rather have leading off?

That is a bad example. You take the greatest leadoff hitter ever and compare another player to him. That sounds like the least fair way to determine the answer to this question I have ever heard of, taking a Hall of Fame player, who still had a high OBP and comparing to one of the slowest leadoff hitters ever to him.

Using this same idea I guess you could say the ability to shoot free throws in the NBA is overrated. Would rather have Robert Parish who could shoot free throws or Shaquille O’Neal who wasn’t a great free throw shooter? Who would you rather have as your center? (That too me like 5 minutes to put together…using Joe’s logic is harder than I originally thought)

A good real life example would be comparing a lead off hitter like Juan Pierre who doesn’t have a great OBP and is not a Hall of Fame player, with a hitter, which I can’t think of one right now, but one who is slow but gets on base a lot. Joe's example only works because he uses the greatest lead off hitter ever who still had a high OBP. The end result is that you don’t want a lead off hitter with a low OBP and that’s the bottom line. Joe’s example isn’t “great.”

A guy that can run sets the table, sets the tone, puts pressure on the other team right away. A guy who gets on base and can't run isn't as valuable as one who can.

A guy who gets on base and can’t run is not as valuable as a guy who gets on base less often but puts “pressure” on the other team? Wow, I would love to argue this if I my enraged mind could think of an example right now. I want guys who can get on base, pressure is nice but it’s hard for a player to put pressure on the pitcher if he can’t get on base.

-Tom Curran has some thoughts about this past weekend in the NFL and shockingly I don’t agree with several of them.

On a day when the Detroit Lions finally shed their label as the NFL’s Biggest Loser, a stampede of teams — led by the shocking Denver Broncos— edged closer to the quarter-pole with perfect records.

I am no English teacher but I am pretty sure there should be commas there instead of hyphens. I guess hyphens are more dramatic.

By winning one game against the Washington Redskins, the Lions have not shed their label as the NFL’s Biggest Loser at all. The Rams have still lost 13 games in a row and are currently in first (last?) place for consecutive losses in a row, but the Lions still hold the season long record for mediocrity and the team hasn’t become good by winning one game this year.

But the three that are perfect so far after missing the playoffs last year — Denver, New Orleans and the Jets — have passed the point where we should reserve judgment. They are good, no questions asked.

Hmmm…no questions asked? I can accept that with the Saints and the Jets, but I am still having a problem not asking questions about the Broncos. They have beaten Oakland, Cleveland and Cincinnati, not exactly a murderer’s row of teams.

The Broncos are the most surprising. After an 8-8 2008 in which they crawled across the finish line, Denver went through the NFL’s most tumultuous offseason.

I am telling you, sportswriters absolutely love making conclusions based on small sample sizes. This statement really has nothing to do with what Curran wrote here but it doesn't make it less true.

But aside from the fantastic finishes, the big takeaway is that, the there could be some major changes at the top of a few divisions in 2009.

BIG changes huh?

Let’s look at each divisions leader and how that team played last year in the division:

AFC East: New York Jets (missed playoffs last year in the last week of the season)

AFC North: Baltimore (made the AFC Championship Game last year and was 2nd in the division last year to the Super Bowl Champs)

AFC South: Indianapolis (2nd in the division last year and has pretty won this division a good portion of this decade)

AFC West: Denver (missed playoffs, this is a big change)

NFC East: New York Giants (won the division last year)

NFC North: Minnesota Vikings (won division last year)

NFC South: New Orleans Saints (missed playoffs, this is a big change)

NFC West: San Francisco (missed playoffs, this is a semi-big change because all the teams suck in their own little way)

Hence, you can see there aren’t as many BIG changes after three weeks of football as advertised.

No use arguing that Brett Favre wasn’t worth the headache.

I am not backing down, we’ll see if he is worth $12 million this year come November.

Had San Francisco’s Dre Bly come up with the pick on Favre’s poorly thrown fourth-down toss with 1:55 remaining, he would have cruised in for the winning touchdown.

Really the Minnesota Vikings defense helped win this game by forcing the 49ers to give the ball back to the Vikings offense. I hate “what-if” scenarios but suffice to say this Brett Favre poorly thrown pass isn’t the only one Vikings fans will see this year…and the corner will not always miss coming up with the interception. Even though Favre's last pass was fantastic, and I won't disagree with that even though I do believe the catch was even better, he still almost threw the game away prior to that throw and the defense sort of saved him.

Meanwhile, Matt Stafford continues to defy those who think it was a bad move for a team as bad as Detroit to take a quarterback with the No. 1 pick (like me).

I would be in this crowd as well.

Here’s a quick question that may explain the amount of quarterbacks over the past 3 years that have come out of college and played well in the NFL quickly and there are three options to choose from to help explain: Has the NFL either (A) figured out how to properly scout good college quarterbacks, (B) learned when the proper time to play a rookie quarterback is, or (C) it just so happens good college quarterbacks have come out over the past several years and they would be good no matter what?

I vote for A. I think guys like Graham Harrell would have been taken high in the draft based on his previous college numbers but NFL scouts are getting better at looking at characteristics that make a college QB better as an NFL QB. They are not as enamored now with good numbers in college and are better able to identify signal callers who will be to adjust to the NFL. Of course, quarterbacks being drafted by teams that were already pretty good may have something to do with it as well.

Now to Zorn. It couldn’t have gone any worse for him after spending a week under siege by the D.C.-area media. First, he went for it on fourth-and-1 at the end of the first drive (it failed).

Jim Zorn showed some guts and Gregg Easterbrook would be proud. Unfortunately, this is one of the many situations were going for it on fourth down did not work. These are the situations Gregg ignores generally or thinks of an excuse for why it didn't work.

On a different note, Haynesworth left the Redskins game with a strained butt. Seriously.

Kolb went 24 for 34 for 324 with two touchdowns. It’s not likely that McNabb’s going to lose his job to Kolb — or Vick — this season. But going forward, the Eagles are creating options for themselves.

I am sure Donovan McNabb is perfectly fine with Kevin Kolb playing well in his absence, I mean he didn’t mind Mike Vick being signed by the Eagles according to Peter King, so I am sure he is fine with this development. For a quarterback who misses a lot of regular season games, McNabb sure has whined a lot in the past about the Eagles bringing other guys in to take his job. I have always thought this and am glad I can say it now and not feel stupid about saying it.

He whined when they drafted Kolb and he whined that the Eagles did not respect him enough, but then he tends to get injured and can’t play. You don’t see Brian Westbrook whining when the Eagles draft a guy like LeSean McCoy do you? McNabb hasn’t whined this year, but you know he wants to. There is just so much he could whine about…kudos to him for holding back this year.

Who had the Steelers looking up at the Bengals in the standings after three weeks? Not many.

For the 900th time, it is Week 4 of the NFL season next week. Three total games have been played for every team. There is plenty of time left for this to change.

Terrell Owens had a nice little streak going — receptions in 185 straight games. Not anymore. The Saints held him without a catch in a 27-7 beatdown of the Bills.

I know Terrell Owens is certifiably insane, so I don’t expect anything rational to come out of his mouth, but he has been incredibly spoiled to play with Pro Bowl quarterbacks for nearly his entire career. Now he is playing with Trent Edwards, who no matter what anyone tries to tell you, isn’t a Pro Bowl quarterback. When will he blow up this year? I say by Week 8 he will be either calling Edwards gay or questioning Edwards’ manhood in front of the press. It’s going to happen, but I just don’t want to have to wait too long.

Know how many touchdowns the Broncos defense has allowed this season? One. Last year, they usually allowed their first touchdown sometime on Saturday night they were so bad.

I am pretty much repeating myself now, but they did a good job on defense against the Bengals, but outside of that, who was going to score a touchdown on them who was on the Raiders or Browns roster? When the three game stretch of Dallas, New England, and San Diego is over I think we will have a better idea of who the real Broncos team is…and I am betting that team doesn’t look as good as the one we are currently seeing.

But a parade of three-and-outs and Kerry Collins ending the game with an 0-for-13 passing streak doomed them.

Kerry Collins ended the game on a 0-13 passing streak? Not Kerry Collins, quarterback extraordinaire! Not the guy whose numbers this year look like this:

55.2% completion percentage, 4 TD, 4 INT, 69.9 rating.

He’s better than that right? Actually he is not, because his career numbers are:

55.7% completion percentage, 190 TD, 183 INT, 73.7 rating. So he is actually pretty close to his career rating.

With the 32-year-old Bulger seemingly at the end of the line and Boller pretty well established as an average player, you wonder if the Rams would like to have their selection of offensive tackle Jason Smith back.

Let me guess and then they would take Mark Sanchez. I am close to admitting I am wrong about Sanchez but he would not be nearly as successful in St. Louis as he has been in New York with the Jets. The Jets have a much better defense and this clearly helps Sanchez succeed.

You know what the relative success of Sanchez, Stafford, Ryan and Flacco is going to do? It’s going to cause General Managers and head coaches to look for their own Flacco or Stafford and pick a quarterback in the next coming years a round or two too early in an effort to get their own good young quarterback. It’s going to happen because it’s the NFL and teams sometimes only see what they want to see in prospects.

the Rams wouldn’t be able to take care of him like the Jets have and, there is no comparison between the two teams' defenses.

Exactly. It helps Mark Sanchez immensely that the Jets have a great defense behind him. It takes the pressure off him to have to come back or win games by himself.

-I haven't covered Peter King's MMQB-Tuesday mail bag edition in a few weeks, so I figure today may be the best time to do so.

Big win for the Lions. Maybe bigger for Detroit, in a couple of ways.

Oh great, let me guess...the entire city of Detroit was feeling the pain of the Lions because they had lost so many games and it means so much to the city to have a team that has finally won a football game?

As if there is a huge difference in going 1-19 and 0-20...

We need to get this win behind us and get ready to play a great game every week. We need to expect to win every week, not just hope to win. Hope is not a good strategy.''

I believe President Obama would disagree with Jim Schwartz here. Having some hope to win a game is a lot better than having no hope to win a game.

I see what he is saying overall, I am just a little chippy today.

Getting it done there includes playing for a depressed city and region.

I know the city appreciates a winner but the jobs aren't coming back even if the Lions win the Super Bowl this year.

Schwartz took his top three draft picks -- Sanchez, Louis Delmas and Pettigrew -- to a Ford plant after a mini-camp practice to get his new cornerstone players used to their hardscrabble fan base, and to communicate to this fan base that the team knew the hard time of the auto industry.

(Schwartz) "See guys these are the employees of Ford that haven't been fired yet. You are playing for them."

(All three look up from texting on their phones...Pettigrew speaks and points to a car on the assembly line) "Is there a way you could special design a car for me, maybe with a some racing stripes, custom rims, perhaps a system in it and paint the initials 'BP' on the side of everything? That would be pretty sweet. I bet you specially design of the cars for youself, don't you?"

(Stafford high fives Pettigrew and goes back to texting)

(Ford employee) "I can't really do that, not to mention I can't really afford it, because times are so tough around here. I know a lot of guys who have lost their jobs..."(He notices Delmas, Pettigrew and Stafford are not paying attention) "We don't do things like that here, but I can show you the specs for what the final product of the car is going to look like if that interests you."
(Delmas) "Man, I went to college here, I know all about that shit. What new cars you guys got coming out this year?"

(Ford employee) "I am not really privy to that infor---"

(Schwartz) "Guys I just wanted you to see who you were playing for, they still have to do their job today, so we may want to le---"

(Pettigrew) "You can't afford to buy a car that you made yourself? What's up with that? I got 4 cars right now...no three cars, well and a motorcycle, I just gave my buddy one of my cars, but each of them are hooked up inside with custom leather seats and all kinds of shit like that. I bet you live in a big house working at this place don't you. Where the hell are all your co-workers?"

(Delmas) "Man, it's loud as shit in here. How you guys do this all day?"

(Stafford showing Delmas and Pettigrew a picture on his phone) "Do my girlfriend's new boobs look fake?"

(Ford employee throws himself into the gears of the assembly line. Schwartz looks on horrified while Stafford, Delmas, and Pettigrew go back to texting)

"It was not a made-for-TV moment, '' said Schwartz. "I just wanted to make sure those guys knew where they were playing -- and how important they are to this community.''

So my fake conversation containing potentially harmful stereotypes for the way Brandon Pettigrew, Matt Stafford, and Louis Delmas talk may have actually occurred! I wish I could have been there for this.

Carolina fans shouldn't fixate on whether Jake Delhomme ought to be benched. He shouldn't. He's played passably well two straight weeks. They should be more concerned, much more, about the defense. Julius Peppers continues to be the most overrated player in football. And the run defense allowed 212 rushing yards to a Dallas team playing without bashing lead back Marion Barber. That should be a bigger concern.

4 turnovers in the past 2 weeks now passes for "passably well" for Jake Delhomme. Is this rock bottom? If not, tell me when we get there please.

As I have alluded to on several different occasions, Peter is absolutely right about Peppers. He is overrated and he has one sack through the first 3 games this year and that was a 4th quarter sack in the Eagles game. The Panthers can't give him away right now and he has pretty much ruined his value as a free agent. In less than 8 months he has gone from a guy who HAD to be franchised because he is so valuable, to a player most fans just want off the team. The only thing he has going for him is that he is from North Carolina and went to UNC, so fans are still blindly loyal to him.

I couldn't agree more with the comment this morning by Mike Greenberg on ESPN Radio: Week 4 is too early to have a bye. Byes should be scattered between Weeks 6 to 12, not Weeks 4 to 10.

I agree with Peter but I have to say for my favorite team this bye week comes at the perfect opportunity. Half the defense is injured and the team needs a couple of weeks to regroup and really focus on playing good football. Overall I agree but the Panthers literally pulled a guy off the waiver wire this week and put him in as the #3 DT against Dallas, so they need guys to get rest and heal up. It would also help if every team ahead of them in the NFC South would disband, that could help them get a playoff spot as well.

So overall the early bye week is a waste in the long term, but in the short term it certainly helps some teams.

Todd Schuiteman of Omaha, Neb.: "First, I love the column. Thanks for all you do to keep the masses informed on all things NFL (along with your own unique blend of other topics). My question: Regarding the Vikings, does Brad Childress have the coaching skills (and imagination) to take this team deep into the playoffs?

Deep into the playoffs? I don't know, I guess it all depends on how well Sage Rosenfels is playing at the time. I am kidding Vikings fans..........no I'm not.

The 49ers front seven is underrated, and remember that Childress understands very well who he has at quarterback. He doesn't want Brett Favre to go back to pass 35 times, because that's 35 times he's going to be put in harms way.

Is Brett Favre made of glass? I understand he is old and probably can't withstand hits that well anymore but part of the requirements of the quarterback position is to get hit. That's a fact, so King and Childress sound pretty stupid to be all worried about poor little Brett Favre being in harm's way. Peter talks about how Brett can't get hit too much every week, I don't know why it annoys me.

Remember, Favre admitted in July he didn't think he could make it through a season unharmed. So every decision Childress makes, he does so with the health of his quarterback in mind.

Every time I hear more about this Favre guy, I can't help but think he is absolutely worth the $12 million he is being paid. Not only can he probably not play a full season (admittedly) or get hit too often, the entire gameplan has to be planned around making sure he doesn't get tired or hurt since both of these are a likely possibility. I guess Favre wouldn't want it any other way, he wants his needs and wants to be everyone's #1 priority.

Mark Schiff of Denver: "Much of the media, including your FootballNight in America colleague Bob Costas, played up the feel-good angle of the Lions' first win since 2007. But no one seems to want to acknowledge the elephant in the room: the game was blacked out locally, yet another indignity for a franchise and city that's already had far too many of them.

There's one problem with your case, which I agree is compelling and I have much empathy with: Once you let the genie out of the bottle, how are you going to put it back in? If unemployment in Detroit is 29 percent this year and you show the games locally, there are two problems. If it's still 29 percent next year, how do you black out the games again, and how do you sell tickets to a struggling fan base when the fans know the games are going to be on local TV?

I like how we need to empathetic to the Detroit Lions' fans, or what is left of them, and the Lions are supposed to be playing this year for the fans...until the topic of money comes up, in which case the NFL wants to have the city of Detroit get inspired by the team while following their games on the Internet. We can't let the empathy for Detroit get in the way of making money for the NFL.

I may have the energy to tackle TMQ tomorrow. I feel confident about this.

9 comments:

The Casey said...

By winning one game against the Washington Redskins, the Lions have not shed their label as the NFL’s Biggest Loser at all. The Rams have still lost 13 games in a row and are currently in first (last?) place for consecutive losses in a row, but the Lions still hold the season long record for mediocrity and the team hasn’t become good by winning one game this year.


The Lions hold the season long record for mediocrity? Since when is 0-16 mediocre? It's terrible.


Also, it's Altanta fans in general, not just Braves fans. I went to two of the Hawks playoffs games in 08 when they were playing the Celtics in the first round, and there were times early in game 3 that I was the only one in my section standing or cheering. It wears on you. I wish I had the extra money right now to go to Atlanta for the weekend and catch some games.

Bengoodfella said...

Yeah, 0-16 is absolutely horrible, it's way below mediocre. You actually can't get any worse.

I hate dumping on Atlanta fans but if I could get off work I would be there. The apathy is embarrassing. I still can't believe how pro-Red Sox the crowd was when I went to the Braves-BoSox game. I say with sadness and no shame I wish Braves fans were more like Yankees fans...without the extreme anxiety of course.

It does wear on you when you watch a game and see the Braves are voted the #3 most popular team in the country in MLB.

My fiance actually had a great point though when I complained about this to her. She believes it is similar to why Charlotte has a lot of Steelers, Cowboys, and Redskins fans in that Atlanta, like Charlotte, is a banking city where a lot of people are not actually from the area so they end up not cheering for the local team. I don't know if that is right or not but I know several friends of mine not Braves fans or from Atlanta who live in Atlanta. So the fans of the Braves are more spread out in the South and not necessarily predominantly in Atlanta.

KentAllard said...

It's hard to believe anyone still holds to that "speed is more important at the top of the lineup than OBP" crap. As evidence for the prosecution, I give you Omar (The Outmaker) Moreno, whose career high OBP was .339, and who batted leadoff part of the time for Chuck Tanner in his last season with an OBP of .276. He was fast, he terrorized other teams with his speed, and the only three years where he scored any where near a respectable amount of runs was for the 78-80 Pirates, an offensive powerhouse for whom Charlie Brown could have scored 90 leading off.

I loved your "Lions tour the Ford plant" bit, and I believe it is absolutely true.

Bengoodfella said...

I think speed is great at the top of the lineup but unfortunately there are those that value it over OBP, which is just absurd in my opinion. You have to get on base at the top of the lineup to even have a chance of stealing. I like how Joe chooses the best leadoff hitter ever to prove his point, as if it actually proves his point. Compared to Ricky Henderson, nearly every other leadoff hitter is inferior.

That's the thing, if a guy is not on base how can he terrorize anyone with his speed?

Glad you liked the bit and I like how Schwartz said it wasn't a made for tv moment so I would not doubt something similar to that actually happened. You are bringing newly minted millionaires into a plant where there have probably been massive job losses, I can't imagine it was the best scene ever. One group is enjoying its new money and the other group........not doing so well.

Martin said...

I've been drinking Smithwicks all night, so lets hope this makes sense.

Compared to Wade Boggs, I know someone who played at roughly the same time who could fly, and sucked as a lead off man. Tom Goodwin. Guy had speed to make Rickey weep, and he couldn't get on base. Speed in the dugout intimidates nobody except Joe Morgan.

You know who looks good as a lead off batter compared to Rickey? Ty freaking Cobb, and that's about it. So one of the possibly ten greatest players is the only decent comparison to possibly one of the ten greatest players (not to go all Peter King on ya'll). There's your god damned comparison Joe Morgan you uneducated, prideful, fuckwad.

As to Joe and the A's....he's lying from the first sentence. He's never watched the A's this year, except maybe when a highlight of one striking out to Grienke flashes on Sportscenter. He did watch them lose to the Yankees in 2000 though, and his hazy memory seems to indicate they didn't steal bases back then.

I hate to break the news to folks...but Stafford hasn't done very good this year. 2 td's, 5 ints, rating below 50, and his yds per att is below 6. He pretty much has been as crappy as one would expect a first year QB to be. I think he and Jamarcus are QB's that show teams still fall in love with the big arm, and I don't think that he'll be much more then a journeyman qb in the league. Better then Harrington, worse then Pennington.

Sanchez is smart, like Flacco and Ryan. Let the team carry you that first season, and minimize your mistakes, and you'll be ok. Joe was sheltered more his first year then Matt, but the games I've seen him this year (small sample size alert) he's looked much more confident, and the team seems to be letting the reigns loose on the play calling for him. NFL teams might be smarter about picking QB's now, but I still wouldn't put them in the "above average" category yet for how they are doing.

So yea I'm in the bad idea to take Stafford crowd. I would have signed a vet (not Culpepper for god sakes) and then drafted someone in the 2010 draft. The team isn't going to be ready to be good till 2011 anyway, so I'm not sure Stafford (or Sanchez, or any other QB) getting his ass kicked an extra year is gonna make much difference. Call me olkd fashioned, but to rebuild a team I start at O-Line, linebacker, then D-line. After that we can see what kind of team we have.

The Casey said...

Ohh, I remember Tom Goodwin. Yeah, that guy was fast as hell.

How exactly is Stafford going to let the team carry him his first year? He plays for the Lions. I think that's more a product of the Jets, an already decent team, trading up to get Sanchez than anything either Stafford or Sanchez has done.

And I agree about building a team from the lines outward most of the time. I was upset when the Falcons drafted Matt Ryan a couple of years ago, because I thought they were still a couple of years away and would have been better off with a D-lineman. Obviously, I was wrong and they were right. I think the Lions needed too much for any one player to turn them around anyway.

Bengoodfella said...

Martin, nothing wrong with a little drunken typing debauchery. Compared to Rickey Henderson, nearly everyone looks like a crappy leadoff hitter and that's the bottom line. There is not but maybe 5-6 players who can hit leadoff like Rickey Henderson hit leadoff. That was a horrible comparison.

I was surprised to see the A's stats when I looked them up, I knew they weren't the 3 outcomes fiends that Joe wants to paint them as being but I didn't know how many stolen bases they actually had.

I am not going to try and be as hard on Stafford this year since he doesn't have a whole lot around him, but I didn't see a whole lot at Georgia to be honest but I am also not an NFL scout. I think he will end up being better than Russell but I do wonder what will happen once he gets a decent team around him...if that ever happens. I think his 2nd and 3rd year are the years we will be able to better judge him. I would have brought in a veteran to at least teach him a little bit about the position and mentor him.

Stafford doesn't really have the opportunity to let the team carry him, which sucks for him, but Sanchez is doing a good job of that. What is going to happen is that he is going to be given more responsibility at some point and he has to show he can handle it and possibly carry the team himself at times. We'll see if he can do that.

The way to build a team in my opinion is inside out. I agree with that wholeheartedly. It's not sexy but it's the way good teams seem to do it.

Tom Goodwin was fast but he couldn't get on base. Therein lies the problem I have with what Joe is saying. You can't steal a base if you aren't on base.

Atlanta had such a tough year two years ago nobody really paid attention to the fact there was some talent on that roster. They drafted and developed a decent O-line and also had focused a little bit on the d-line as well, so Ryan was a puzzle piece that fit in well there.

Martin said...

Oh I'm not saying Stafford can let the Lions carry him, just that Sanchez is smart in not trying to do to much and let the Jets D and running game carry him. That's where I was trying to go with why they shouldn't have drafted him, not because he was Matt Stafford, but that there is no team around him. It's him and Calvin Johnson. Having Stafford, or any otehr 1st year QB, is doing them no good when he's jsut getting his ass kicked every week. He's liable to become shell shocked and never recover.

Bengoodfella said...

Martin, I would love to argue with you and say Stafford could recover from being pelted by defenders by a bad offensive line but I lived through David Carr when he was behind a good offensive line and I can see how a QB gets timid.

Your concern was my concern before the year that they were putting a QB out to the wolves for his first year when there wasn't much of a team around him. I think by the end of the year will tell whether this is the case or not.