Woody Paige has a crazy idea. I blame his idea on him having "Tebow Fever" personally. It's the only cause for this affliction that Woody currently has and why he thinks a roster of unproven quarterbacks is a good idea. Woody Paige thinks the Denver Broncos should trade Kyle Orton. Apparently he is the only one in the world fine with a depth chart of Brady Quinn, Tim Tebow, and Tom Brandstater. Kyle Orton is by no means a great quarterback, but he needs to stay on the roster because if the Broncos want to compete this year, he is their best chance to do so. Hell, it is a good idea to keep him on the roster even if he isn't the starter.
For the development of Brady Quinn, Tim Tebow and Tom Brandstater, for fairness to Kyle Orton, for the benefit of the other Broncos, for the future of the franchise, for the fans in Bronco Country, for goodness' sake, Orton must be traded.
For the love of God, you are wrong.
I don't like Kyle Orton, but he gives the Broncos the best chance, and perhaps the only chance, to make the playoffs this year. Sure, maybe Quinn or Tebow could start this year and make the playoffs, it is possible, but Orton gives them a better chance.
Orton is not a short-term fix or a long-range fit for the Broncos.
Actually, Orton IS a short-term fix for the Broncos. Trading him would serve no purpose except to get a draft pick back that won't be as good as Orton. The Broncos wouldn't get nearly enough compensation back for losing him and neither Quinn, Tebow, or Brandstater are ready to start for an NFL team. Maybe Quinn could do well, but I think he could use some time to recover from playing for the Browns. Now if the Broncos want to go 4-12 this year and have a good pick in next year's draft then they would trade Orton and give the starting quarterback job to any of the other quarterbacks currently on the roster.
A deal should be sought, in my opinion, before the team's voluntary minicamp May 17-19 — so the Broncos and Orton can move on now.
Also, so one of the three quarterbacks left over will have a fighting chance to actually succeed when the starting position is thrust upon him before he is potentially ready.
Josh McDaniels, it has been asserted, has been joined at one hip with Tebow and, to the other, with Quinn, but, truthfully, his coaching reign in Denver can't be tied to Orton.
This is a true statement. The problem is McDaniels can be joined at each hip by these two young quarterbacks, but only one can be the starter. So personally, if I were to trade a quarterback, I would trade Quinn or Tebow and keep Orton as a veteran backup. Simply because the Broncos don't have a future spot for Orton doesn't mean he can't start this year.
McDaniels is better off putting his trust in, and his teaching toward, Young QBT and QB3 — Quinn, Brandstater & Tebow.
He can still teach these quarterbacks and develop them without them actually playing in NFL games right now. What good is a 5th round draft pick (this is what they would get at best for Orton) going to do when the Broncos have three guys who aren't ready to be the starting quarterback, as the starting quarterback?
If the Broncos had been so enamored with Orton after the last so-so season, they wouldn't have first acquired Quinn and then drafted Tebow.
But he still is their best chance to win THIS SEASON.
History serves. In 1982, serviceable journeyman Steve DeBerg was the Broncos' starter, but John Elway and Gary Kubiak arrived the next year.
I hate to break it to Woody Paige, and it all really boils down to this, but there isn't a John Elway on the Bronco roster right now. This is true no matter how much he doesn't want to believe it. Tebow is the closest and he isn't ready to start this year. I think the "trade Orton" idea in Woody's head is a result of his Tebow Fever. He thinks Tebow can step in and start this year, which I just don't think is true. He may have a bright future in the NFL at quarterback, but I really don't believe he is ready to play this year.
Woody Paige is infatuated with Tim Tebow and I think him wanting to trade Orton is a reaction to how he is so blinded by his love for Tebow, and even his love for Brady Quinn (who I prefer over Tebow to start this year), he can't see this isn't a good idea. He likes Tebow, so he wants him to succeed, and then Quinn will be the previously unsuccessful quarterback that will end up being a great reliable backup to Tebow for the next decade. I think Woody is wrong. I would maybe start Brady Quinn this year if he beats out Kyle Orton for the job in training camp, but I would not trade Orton and rely on Quinn, Tebow and Brandstater to be the Broncos quarterbacks. Mostly I blame it on Woody's blinders to Tebow's current actual ability to be a quarterback in the NFL.
Quinn and Tebow can compete vigorously to become No. 1. McDaniels obviously believes both can be starters in the NFL. Why wait until after another 8-8 season with Orton?
Because it beats a 4-12 season with a quarterback who isn't ready. Quinn is already fragile and throwing him out there when he doesn't know the offense as well as Orton seems ill-advised. Also, why ruin what potential Tim Tebow has by putting him out to run the Broncos offense before he is ready to do so?
Kyle Orton is going to be a free agent after the 2011 season. He will be gone soon enough. I don't understand the need to trade him for a late-round pick and take away the quarterback who knows the offense best.
McDaniels made a bold, highly controversial decision to jettison Jay Cutler in 2009. The trading of Orton wouldn't be as difficult — or unpopular.
This isn't like trading Jay Cutler at all and just because it isn't an unpopular decision doesn't mean it is the right decision. It would be a controversial decision in retrospect when the Broncos go from a competitive near playoff team to a team picking in the Top 10 in the NFL Draft after trading Orton. Josh McDaniels has run off a few good players and made some controversial decisions since coming to Denver. I don't know if getting rid of a player who provides some short-term opportunity to win games is smart.
Orton didn't make a stand or a statement last season. The Broncos let it get away.
Orton is a merely mediocre quarterback, but I don't see how a 5th/6th round pick makes up for the fact he is the best chance for the Broncos to compete this year.
The Broncos lost eight of their final 10, and in those games Orton had 12 touchdown passes, 11 interceptions and 2,337 yards. In nine games last season, the Broncos' offense didn't score more than 20 points
Now the Broncos have traded their starting tight end and their best wide receiver, so the Broncos could have an even worse offense. Is this the best time to throw Quinn or Tebow out there?
Nobody, Cutler included, would say Cutler had a good season. But his last 10 games were comparable to Orton's — a 4-6 record, 16 touchdown passes, 16 interceptions and 2,214 yards.
No one is arguing Orton is a great quarterback. I am arguing he is the Broncos best chance to win now and it doesn't matter if he starts because none of the three guys behind him appear to be ready to start and win games. Say the Broncos trade Orton and get a late-round pick back for him. What purpose does that pick serve to them this year...or even next year? They don't need a late-round pick, they need a guy to hold the quarterback job down until when/if Tebow or Quinn are ready to start.
If there was ever a 1st round quarterback who could use a season in an offensive system and need some time to get used to the NFL, it is Tim Tebow. Give him that time and don't start Quinn and turn your team into the Cleveland Browns-West. Quinn could be a good quarterback, but he doesn't have that much to work with. He needs more confidence, not less.
Orton is described as "smart, a leader, an overachiever, a tireless worker."
All qualities you don't want in a quarterback. Nor are these qualities you want other quarterbacks to learn from.
Orton knows, in the aftermath of recent major events, he is a temp, at best, a reservist waiting to happen, at worst. He should welcome a change in venue — to where he has a chance to start over.
He is a temp at best, but there are other NFL teams that will need quarterbacks and if Orton plays well he can get a new contract with a new team after his time with the Broncos ends. If he plays well, he will have a chance to start over with a free agent contract. Not to mention Orton knows the Broncos offense so it gives him the best chance to succeed, so I don't know why he would welcome a trade and be forced to start over with a new team.
A dozen teams could use a veteran reserve, but the Broncos, honestly, wouldn't get much more than a mid- round draft pick in return.
The Broncos need a veteran starter and the mid-round draft pick is nearly worthless to them compared to having an experienced starter.
He's not a true leader. The Broncos had Champ Bailey, D.J. Williams and Brian Dawkins in leadership roles on defense, but nobody on offense.
Just a few paragraphs ago Woody was talking about how Orton has been described as a leader, yet now he says Orton isn't a "true" leader. I don't get it. He is either a leader or he isn't.
Orton was dumped as a starter late in his rookie season with the Bears, barely played the next two seasons, started in 2008, didn't reach the postseason and was traded to the Broncos last year, where, again he fell short of the playoffs.
Orton was dumped as a starter after going 10-5 for the Bears. This is important to know. Granted, the Bears defense had a lot to do with this record, but if we are going to blame Orton for the Broncos doing poorly the second half of last year we have to give him some (a little bit) credit for the Bears doing well.
Everybody knows Orton is immobile, doesn't possess a powerful arm, vacillates when making passing choices and doesn't read defenses extremely well. Like Brian Griese, Orton has to play a near-perfect game to win — and receive a lot of help from his defense.
What are the alternatives? Brady Quinn may still have potential, but I don't think he is ready to start and should be given one year in the system before being thrust into a starting role. Tebow is NOT ready to start this year. He could win a few games, but I think he is better served to learn for a year and adjust to the NFL speed of the game. Orton is the guy and starting any other guy is a probable step back that doesn't need to be taken for a team that is jettisoning the best players from two years ago.
Orton is an average quarterback who couldn't start for 21 other teams in the league.
The problem is that neither could any of the other three quarterbacks that are options for the Broncos right now. This Tebow love is a bit out of hand. That's what I blame the reason Woody Paige wants to trade Kyle Orton. He thinks Tebow can jump in, be Superman at quarterback, and start for the Broncos. It really can't be Quinn who Woody thinks can be the starter in the future because Woody has said several times Tebow is the future. We have seen Tebow will need some more time to become an NFL quarterback. Perhaps Quinn could start this year, but I think Orton would have more success.
According to reports out of Jacksonville, the Jaguars have asked about a deal for Quinn. But the Broncos have been impressed with Quinn in OTAs (organized team activities) and will not let him go.
But I thought McDaniels' future in Denver is tied to Tim Tebow also? Didn't Woody Paige say that earlier in this column? Let's see:
Josh McDaniels, it has been asserted, has been joined at one hip with Tebow and, to the other, with Quinn,
I guess one could be the backup, but Tebow wasn't drafted to be a backup. Why not trade Quinn and keep Orton as the starter/backup and then start Tebow? Since Woody wants to start Tebow/Quinn so badly, do it, but keep a veteran backup.
What about Orton in Jacksonville? He might push David Gerrard.
Yeah he might, but why would the Jaguars trade for Orton when they already have a starter? What's the point for them to do this? Barring that, why would the Broncos trade their only established starter? I don't get how Orton could push David Gerrard for the starting job in Jacksonville, but he is too mediocre to start for the Broncos this year and lead them to success.
Maybe the cross-state Bucs would be attracted to Orton, or the Bills, whose owner, Ralph Wilson, said the Broncos "panicked" by picking Tebow and that Buffalo had "no interest" in the QB.
How stupid for someone to disagree with Woody about Tebow's future NFL prospects! Why would any team want Orton after Woody has pointed out all the negative aspects of Orton? Would there even be a trade market for him if a person had read what Woody wrote here? Actually, will there be a trade market for Orton regardless?
If Orton were to be shipped out, the Broncos would save his $2.6 million contract and have Brandstater at $395,000, Tebow in the first year of an approximate five-year, $15 million to $18 million contract (about $8 million guaranteed) and Quinn in the odd position of receiving $700,000, with the chance to earn $5.9 million (if he takes 70 percent of the snaps).
So to save $2.6 million dollars the Broncos would get a 5th/6th round pick at best and then have a failed starter who needs some nuturing, a rookie who isn't ready to start this year, and a guy who is a 2nd quarterback at best (Brandstater) competing for the starting job. This doesn't include the fact if Quinn is the starter for most of the season they may end up paying more for him than they would for Orton (I don't know much about the salary cap situation here, but it doesn't make sense to trade Orton to save money and then spend more money because another quarterback got a bonus for taking 70% of the snaps).
In a matter of two years, Josh McDaniels would have taken the Broncos from a threat in the AFC West to a team that is picking in the Top 10 of the NFL Draft. I just don't think these other guys are ready to be starters in the NFL.
That triad is the Broncos' solid future investment at quarterback.
FUTURE investment. Not present investment.
And for the good of all, Orton has to be passed along.
That would be for the good all, except for the Denver Broncos. As average of a quarterback as Kyle Orton is, he is the Broncos best option for this year and any suggestion to the contrary is just plain wrong in my mind.
Showing posts with label Brady Quinn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brady Quinn. Show all posts
Friday, May 14, 2010
Thursday, November 12, 2009
6 comments Random Thoughts: Me Being Critical Edition
Sometimes there are articles I read which aren’t worthy of a full post but I still would like to talk about them on this blog. I can’t let even the smallest piece of bad journalism or journalism I disagree with go unnoticed. That’s un-American and should never happen. Hang on to your hats or any other article of clothing available because we are going all around sports for some random thoughts on topics that have interested me lately.
-I am sure a lot of you have seen Sammy Sosa’s Michael Jackson-esque skin transformation. It’s just classic and fantasticly awesome that his skin looks like it is slowly turning whiter. Why would anyone go out in public like that? Sosa claims the lights caused him to look whiter, which I don't believe at all. Of course I personally have never really liked Sammy Sosa for various reasons (yes, I realize I am probably the only person in the world who doesn't like Sosa), which I am going to list before I comment on the article:
1. I always hated how he ran out to right field at the beginning of the game for the Chicago Cubs. Yes, I know he pumped the Wrigley faithful up and I am sure millions of children were so inspired by his joy for the game while he sprinted out to right field that they immediately became involved in charities in their communities. I always found it to be a bit annoying because it just seemed so self-involved to me. He ran out there and I felt like it was less about him going to right field for the beginning of the game and more about him wanting to alert everyone in the crowd that he was currently appearing in right field and the time was right to cheer for him in a loud voice. Trot, skip or jog out to your position in right field, there is no need to draw more attention to your self by running. In a way it shows up his teammates in my mind. Of course from the stories I have heard about life in the Sosa-era Cubs clubhouse, he didn't give a crap about his teammates there either.
2. He cheated two ways. He corked his bat AND was a user of PEDs. Yes, I know a lot of people did it at the time and many still cheat. In fact, Robin Yount recently had one of his bats go on sale that was reportedly corked. So even the gritty, white, mullet wearing players were cheating before we all knew how bad the cheating really was. I am sure 50% of MLB was using what are now illegal PEDs or a corked bat at some point. My point is that I don’t know of a person who used a corked bat AND was found to have used PEDs…other than Sammy Sosa. I suspect Albert Belle, but he only has achieved half of this accomplishment so far. So that gives me permission to dislike Sosa for cheating in two different ways, so I will.
3. I just never liked Sammy Sosa. Sue me. He always annoyed me. I would worry about him reading what I have written here, but since in front of Congress when testifying about PED use in baseball he was having trouble speaking English, I will assume he isn’t so great at reading English either.
On to the article and the reasoning behind Sammy Sosa’s new whiter appearance:
Sammy Sosa says a cosmetic cream he uses to soften his skin is the reason for his lighter skin tone.
Is the purpose of this cosmetic cream to make a person’s skin look whiter over a period of time? I am not a huge buyer of skin creams but I have never heard of a skin cream that makes a person’s skin change four shades from light brown to ghost white. Maybe I just don’t know anyone who uses this cream. Though, from Sosa’s history with PEDs and any excuses he may make about how he didn’t know what he was using, is it safe to assume Sosa didn’t know what the cream would do to his face? He is like every other baseball player who gets handed ointments, creams or drugs and just immediately puts it into his system without thinking.
He looks creepy white. Look at the picture. He looks like Michael Jackson’s slightly overweight brother. I keep waiting to see the new white Sammy Sosa pop up out of a grey van and ask me if I want candy and then try to abduct me. Look at his hair color and the contrast to his face color. His hair looks like it used to be salt and pepper dark while his face was a light brown. Now that his face has gotten pale white, his hair has gone back to what looks to be a darker color. I don’t know, maybe it’s the light and how it is shining on him, but I find it funny his face skin color and hair keep changing colors inversely.
Sosa says he has been using the cream for a long time, and combined with bright TV lights, it made his face look whiter than it really is.
If we are being technical, he wasn’t really on television. He was in a line to have his picture taken. I know flashes can see through sheer black clothing on the red carpet, but I wasn’t aware that a lethal combination of skin cream and bright lights could cause someone’s skin to look whiter. As far as I know, this has never happened to any other celebrity or person on the red carpet.
Sosa says he is not trying to look like late pop star Michael Jackson and is not suffering from any skin illness.
Sammy Sosa wants to make it clear that he looks like a freak not because he idolized Michael Jackson and his look, nor is he sick because of any type of skin disease, but he looks like a freak because of his own doing. So if he knew he was going to the Latin Grammys (where the picture was taken) why didn’t he lay off the cream a little bit? I find it hard to believe this is the first time he has applied the cream and then gone out into public. How much of this cream exactly did he use? I can’t imagine just a little bit of the cream would cause him make this pale.
Sosa made his remarks on the Univision Spanish network. He declined to identify the cream.
Probably this is a good idea. You wouldn’t want sales to go through the roof when people who want to look like Michael Jackson find out they can expedite the process and skip all the surgery and skin whitening and just use a cream to bleach their skin.
-Hasheem Thabeet broke his jaw the other night in the Grizzlies game against the Trail Blazers. Thabeet was one of my favorite targets to mock for potentially being a bust in the NBA when I was talking about this last year’s NBA Draft. In fact I have given him a new nickname in honor of my feelings towards him. I will call him Hasheem “Thabust.” Very creative I know. The best part about how Thabeet broke his jaw is exactly how he broke his jaw. Was he going up for a rebound and took an elbow to the jaw, was he blocking a shot and got hit in the face or was he making a move to the basket in an attempt to score? Not exactly.
The 7-foot-3 center from UConn was injured late in the first quarter during a battle under the Memphis basket.
I wonder how the Grizzlies are going to manage to survive the next game or two when Thabust is unable to play? How will they manage to replace his 0.6 ppg, 1.6 rpg, 0.9 bpg, and 6 minutes per game? I know he is still young and hasn’t been playing basketball for that long, so we can't expect that much from him...but he plays for the Grizzlies. Even their fans know the team is hopeless. How does even a halfway competent big man not get 10-15 minutes per game just based on being tall and playing for Memphis? Just know that Thabust is already 22 years old and will be 23 years old by the end of the basketball year. It’s not like he is fresh out of high school or anything. I try really hard not to be critical of Thabust, but other than the fact he was tall and could block shots based on that fact, he never showed me that much in college that would make me think he can useful in the NBA.
I don’t dislike Thabust or anything, so I am willing to admit his 0.9 blocks per game isn’t too shabby and I don’t think he will ever have a hard time blocking shots in the NBA. He could probably block many just by accident. Of course Shawn Bradley didn’t have trouble blocking shots either and he has become a national punchline. I am still sticking to my claim that Hasheem Thabust was not even close to being worth the #2 pick in the draft and I know we haven’t had a lot to go on this year, but he is averaging very few minutes on a really crappy team. Let’s get to how Thabust broke his jaw:
Replays appeared to show Thabeet’s jaw colliding with forward Zach Randolph’s head.
Is Zach Randolph good for anything? If Thabust's jaw had gotten hit by any other part of Randolph he wouldn't have gotten hurt because the shock would have been absorbed by Randolph's doughy body. But now Randolph is injuring his own players with his head. So to recap, a fairly useless basketball player who has an enormous contract and zero motivation injured one of his teammates who was a highly drafted rookie struggling to earn minutes with a crappy team. This happened to the Grizzlies just a couple days after Allen Iverson decided that God did not want him to play for the Grizzlies anymore…just a few months after God announced to Iverson he should play for the Grizzlies. That God fellow sure does waffle a whole lot like Brett Favre. I wish he could make up his mind.
The conclusion we can draw is that the Grizzlies are still fucked.
-It’s free agent season in MLB, which means it is time for columnists to come out with lists of players who are good buys or bad buys. These lists have about as much relevance as a mock draft, yet we still read them and sportswriters still write them. Last time we heard from Bert Blyleven he was telling baseball players what it takes to succeed in the playoffs by bragging about all of his accomplishments in the postseason. Today, Bert Blyleven decides instead of making list, he is just going to list the pitchers who he thinks are good buys this offseason. I just want to warn everyone, Bert has not ever heard of a “contract year.”
Pitching undoubtedly will be a huge focus as teams look to shore up their staffs for 2010.
I don’t believe it. This may be the first time ever pitching has been actively searched for in free agency. Usually no one cares about pitching, which is why there have never been huge contracts given to pitchers who are free agents. Has there been an offseason in the past 10 years when pitching hasn't been a huge focus of teams?
I don’t think it’s a particularly strong market for pitching this winter.
No kidding. Take a look at this list and who do think is the second best pitcher behind John Lackey that is available through free agency? Could it be Rich Harden or Erik Bedard? The fact there is a legitimate debate answers the question.
Then what do you do in what is a thin pitching market? There are some interesting names out there with impressive track records: Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, Erik Bedard, Rich Harden, Brad Penny and Randy Wolf among them.
Not a single one of those pitchers deserve anything more than a two year deal. Now that is a thin pitching market. Still there are a couple of guys I would take a chance on in that list and I think four of these guys should be on a Top 10 list ranking of available free agent pitchers. Three of the pitchers that Bert puts on his list I am not sure if I would put in the Top 10 at all...but he thinks they are the top pitchers in this year's free agent class.
But in my mind, there are some better options than all of those names. Here are my top four starters, with one reliever thrown into the mix.
Here are Bert Blyleven’s top 4 starters and one reliever. These are the guys who he believes are pitchers #1-5 in the free agent market, not pitchers who are diamonds in the rough, but the best pitchers available through free agency this year.
JOHN LACKEY
No one in their right mind would argue with this. Clearly, Lackey is the #1 starter in this free agent class.
JASON MARQUIS (31) 15-13, 4.04 ERA in 2009 with the Rockies
Marquis will certainly be an afterthought this offseason, but he is a solid, consistent pitcher who is only 31, and could be a good bargain as a free agent.
There is a chance he is an afterthought because he isn’t that good of a pitcher. Now I do have to admit he is consistent. He is consistently just average to below average. Let’s take a look at his numbers since 2005:
2005: 13-14 4.13 ERA 1.329 WHIP
2006: 14-16 6.02 ERA 1.523 WHIP
2007: 12-9 4.60 ERA 1.388 WHIP
2008: 11-9 4.53 ERA 1.449 WHIP
2009: 15-13 4.04 ERA 1.380 WHIP
He is consistent in that he will always be a consistent #4 or #5 starter in a contender’s rotation at the very best. He pitches innings but he has never been more than a league average pitcher and he probably will never be more than that. Is it a coincidence he had his best year as a pro in a contract year? Probably not. Please remember these are all his numbers in the National League. In the American League it is possible he has no value. (I know, I am being harsh today)
JOEL PINIERO (31) 15-12, 3.49 ERA in 2009 with the Cardinals
Piniero is an awful lot like Marquis. A guy proven to be a winner when healthy, a solid No. 2 or 3 starter for any team.
First off, Marquis is not a proven winner nor is he or Piniero a solid #2 or #3 starter when healthy. Piniero has had some injury problems but he also hasn’t been an incredibly effective starter when he was healthy. I know injuries can hurt a pitcher's effectiveness, but I still don't think he is a #2 or #3 starter in MLB. You can judge for yourself.
Piniero had a career year this year, which also happened to coincide with his contract year. Again, what a coincidence! Nothing against Piniero because if my favorite team signed him I wouldn't be upset, but I would be upset if he was the #2 or #3 starter for them. He thrived under Dave Duncan and without him I would be concerned he would regress.
And if you’re worried that he simply found magic under the guiding hand of Cardinals pitching coach Dave Duncan, remember that Piniero also had success in Seattle, going 14-7 with a 3.24 ERA in 2002, and 16-11 with a 3.78 ERA in 2003.
I don't really care he had two good seasons 6 and 7 seasons ago! His bad, injury filled seasons still number more than his healthy, productive seasons. That's not a good risk in my opinion. The fact he had two straight good seasons 6 and 7 years ago respectively shouldn't completely override the fact that Piniero hasn’t been completely healthy or effective for every season since then, excluding 2009 of course. Isn’t that the type of pitcher every team wants? A perennially injured, average starter? What, that doesn’t sound like a #2 or #3 starter to you either?
Bert also wants you to know that Piniero is only 31 years old too! Please don’t worry about the fact he was injured a lot when he was younger, I am sure his body actually grows stronger and less injury prone as he gets older.
CARL PAVANO (33, turns 34 on Jan. 8) 14-12, 5.10 ERA with Indians and Twins in 2009
Somewhere every New York Yankees fan reading this is laughing. Even though I don’t know how much intelligence Bert has, he has to be smarter than to fall for Carl Pavano. He has had 1 good year of pitching while he was in the major leagues and 2 years that were passable as decent. That's it. It just so happens two of those years he pitched passably well were also his contract years. Shouldn't that concern Bert Blyleven a little bit when he was making his list? Forget Pavano's name, pretend his name is James Anthony, and take a look at these numbers. Tell me this is a good enough pitcher who you would think is a Top 5 starter in even the worst pitching free agent class. There is no way.
Pavano had four miserable seasons in New York, as everything went wrong and he just couldn’t stay healthy.
What Bert means by “miserable seasons” is “Pavano got minorly injured and then refused to pitch for the rest of the year for some unknown reason. What he means by “everything went wrong” is “he lied about how he got injured and pissed off all of his teammates by not rehabbing hard enough to contribute to the team.”
Hopefully the Twins will keep him in the fold. He was a good leader and a strong presence in the clubhouse, taking a lot of pressure off young pitchers like Nick Blackburn and Scott Baker. I was very impressed with his work ethic and the way he went about his business.
If Bert really was impressed with Pavano and his work ethic, then he would be the first person I have ever heard talk about Pavano in a favorable fashion. What kind of advice and counseling is he giving the young pitchers for the Twins?
"If you ever get injured away from the baseball field, immediately make up a lie about what happened and then sit out the the rest of the year."
"The key to alienating your teammates is to go to Tampa to rehab at the team's facility there instead of working hard and traveling with the team...this works especially well if the team you play for needs starting pitching help during the year and you aren't around."
Everyone should read “Living on the Black” by John Feinstein sometime to hear what Mike Mussina and the rest of the Yankees thought about Pavano and his work ethic. He is a risk at best and an absolutely mistake signing for more than a one year deal at worst.
The last guy Bert picked was JJ Putz and as far as relievers go, he may be a good risk for a team. He may not be a Top 5 pitcher in this free agent class, but he is better than the other guys Bert mentioned here. Apparently Bert Blyleven has never heard of a “contract year” and these three guys I talked about all are over the age of 31 and had their best years in contract years. It is not a coincidence.
-Our long national dream is over. The Browns have put Brady Quinn back in the starting lineup. Now we can’t see the epic depths that Derek Anderson is able to achieve. So it looks like JaMarcus Russell and Jake Delhomme can fight it out for the worst quarterback of the 2009 season. I wanted Brady Quinn in the lineup, but I thought it would never happen. I got what I wanted, but I still wanted to see how bad Derek Anderson can be. Of course in typical Browns fashion, they have chosen to start Quinn against the Ravens who are coming off a tough loss to the Bengals…and the game is on Monday Night Football. Just a brilliant move. This should keep the pressure off Quinn and put him in a position to succeed. The Browns un-bench Quinn for a game against a team with a good defense coming off a tough loss to a division rival and the game is on national television.
Browns coach Eric Mangini has decided to go back to Quinn after Anderson went 1-4 as a starter and posted the NFL's lowest quarterback rating (36.2). Mangini said he would like to stick with Quinn for the remainder of the season.
(A tear slowly falls down Bengoodfella’s face at what could have been with Derek Anderson starting for the Browns all year)
Mangini has been impressed with Quinn's work ethic since being demoted.
When the other quarterback on the roster has a QB rating of 36.2, do you really need to use the “work ethic” excuse to replace that quarterback? All you have to say is, "Derek Anderson sucks and we want to attempt to be competent and plan for next year. We need to know if Brady Quinn can be an NFL quarterback, so if he can't, we can draft a player who could be an NFL quarterback. Derek Anderson sucks."
The best part of the story is that Eric Mangini claims he didn’t know about the clause in Quinn’s contract that gave him salary escalators for 70% of the snaps this year.
Judge asked Mangini about the possibility that Quinn was benched due to the escalator clause. And here's what Mangini said."No, absolutely not. With all the different contracts. . . . I don't know what the incentives are. But that wouldn't make my decision [even if I did]."
Really? This is the point where Bill Simmons would write, “Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2009 Cleveland Browns!”
So the head coach of the Cleveland Browns did not know there were escalators in Brady Quinn’s contract that gave him more money for taking 70% of the snaps? If that is true, then Mangini was the only person who follows football closely who didn’t know about this. More than likely I think Mangini is outright lying here, which is typical in football, but if he isn't lying and really didn't know about the clause in Quinn's contract, he has reached new levels coaching ignorance.
I don’t see how Mangini lasts as Browns coach after this year. He is like Bill Belichick’s mentally handicapped younger brother (not to insult mentally handicapped people, I love them, and they can not help their fate in life. It is an insult to compare something out of a person’s control to the idiocy that is Eric Mangini…which is completely in his control). He is Bill Belichick if Bill Belichick decided he was going to do everything completely and utterly wrong in building a franchise. If Belichick felt a gut instinct and went the other way from it or did the exact opposite from how he would normally do it, that’s Eric Mangini.
-It took two losses but now Woody Paige is calling for Kyle Orton to be benched.
To give themselves a jump-start, the Broncos should give Chris Simms the start against Washington on Sunday.
He believes that Chris Simms is a better option for Denver. I admit I began the season thinking the Broncos should give Simms more of a shot to be the starting quarterback in Denver, but I was wrong. I’ll say it again, I was wrong. Orton was the right guy and I think he has proven that. The Broncos have lost to the Steelers and the Ravens. It’s not like they lost to two shitty teams who have yet to win a game. They lost to the two participants in last year’s AFC Championship Game. Don't hit the panic button at this point. The Broncos have no quarterback on the roster who can do better than Orton is doing right now.
Kyle Orton hasn't performed awfully (except for the three interceptions Monday night). Yes, the Broncos still have won six games — but he is what he is — the 18th-best quarterback in the NFL. And the Broncos are a reflection of that number. They are 22nd in scoring (18.8 points per game), just ahead of the Titans, and behind, ahem, the Bears. They are 19th overall in offense, 17th in passing, 18th in rushing.
Part of the reason the Broncos are playing well is because Orton isn’t trying to do too much and he is managing the game. Seriously, quarterback changes are a desperate move for a team and they are not a move that a 6-2 team generally makes unless that team’s coaching staff is a bunch of morons.
It has been suggested, wisely, by my columnist colleagues at Postmortem that the Broncos start Correll Buckhalter at running back, which they did against Pittsburgh, and open up the offense, which they didn't do. It doesn't matter who starts at running back, and McDaniels can't unleash the offense with Orton.
Yes, you can tell from Chris Simms’ career numbers that he isn’t exactly the type of quarterback who needs the offense unleashed with him at the helm. He is not exactly a horrible quarterback but he would basically end up being a left handed version of Kyle Orton for this year. Look at Orton’s career numbers and they are similar or exceed what Simms has done in his career. Both options aren’t fantastic, but 6-2 teams don’t change quarterbacks.
When I suggested this move to a rather large cheese at The Post, he said: "Simms hasn't played since early in the 2006 season."
Orton only played three games in 2006-07 after being benched, following 15 starts in 2005, before the Bears went on to the Super Bowl. Simms has started 15 NFL games.
So basically Orton has more starts in one year than Simms has for his career. Woody really has no point here.
Yeah, but Simms has a stronger arm. Orton's lack of arm strength was revealed twice against Pittsburgh when he tried to make throws off his back foot and couldn't get the ball to open receivers.
Chris Simms isn’t exactly the model of arm strength either. Really, Simms is a less experienced, more mobile version of Kyle Orton. Let's all recall how Chris Simms didn't start his entire senior year at Texas because Major Applewhite was beating him out for the starting quarterback position. Remember that? How come Woody doesn't? I am not down on Simms, in fact I thought he should get a chance to start this year, but the loss of two straight games to tough teams after a 6 game winning streak is not the reason to change quarterbacks.
McDaniels told me he doesn't care to switch quarterbacks in midgame or midseason, but, then, he had Tom Brady as his quarterback at New England, and who's going to remove him?
This has nothing to do with Tom Brady or who the backup in New England was or wasn’t, it has to do with the options available to the Denver Broncos, which aren’t vast. This has nothing to do with Tom Brady or when Josh McDaniels would or would not switch out a starting quarterback for the backup. What McDaniels should have said is that he doesn’t care to switch quarterbacks while the team has a 6-2 record. Maybe Woody Paige is hitting the panic button a bit too early here?
-I am sure a lot of you have seen Sammy Sosa’s Michael Jackson-esque skin transformation. It’s just classic and fantasticly awesome that his skin looks like it is slowly turning whiter. Why would anyone go out in public like that? Sosa claims the lights caused him to look whiter, which I don't believe at all. Of course I personally have never really liked Sammy Sosa for various reasons (yes, I realize I am probably the only person in the world who doesn't like Sosa), which I am going to list before I comment on the article:
1. I always hated how he ran out to right field at the beginning of the game for the Chicago Cubs. Yes, I know he pumped the Wrigley faithful up and I am sure millions of children were so inspired by his joy for the game while he sprinted out to right field that they immediately became involved in charities in their communities. I always found it to be a bit annoying because it just seemed so self-involved to me. He ran out there and I felt like it was less about him going to right field for the beginning of the game and more about him wanting to alert everyone in the crowd that he was currently appearing in right field and the time was right to cheer for him in a loud voice. Trot, skip or jog out to your position in right field, there is no need to draw more attention to your self by running. In a way it shows up his teammates in my mind. Of course from the stories I have heard about life in the Sosa-era Cubs clubhouse, he didn't give a crap about his teammates there either.
2. He cheated two ways. He corked his bat AND was a user of PEDs. Yes, I know a lot of people did it at the time and many still cheat. In fact, Robin Yount recently had one of his bats go on sale that was reportedly corked. So even the gritty, white, mullet wearing players were cheating before we all knew how bad the cheating really was. I am sure 50% of MLB was using what are now illegal PEDs or a corked bat at some point. My point is that I don’t know of a person who used a corked bat AND was found to have used PEDs…other than Sammy Sosa. I suspect Albert Belle, but he only has achieved half of this accomplishment so far. So that gives me permission to dislike Sosa for cheating in two different ways, so I will.
3. I just never liked Sammy Sosa. Sue me. He always annoyed me. I would worry about him reading what I have written here, but since in front of Congress when testifying about PED use in baseball he was having trouble speaking English, I will assume he isn’t so great at reading English either.
On to the article and the reasoning behind Sammy Sosa’s new whiter appearance:
Sammy Sosa says a cosmetic cream he uses to soften his skin is the reason for his lighter skin tone.
Is the purpose of this cosmetic cream to make a person’s skin look whiter over a period of time? I am not a huge buyer of skin creams but I have never heard of a skin cream that makes a person’s skin change four shades from light brown to ghost white. Maybe I just don’t know anyone who uses this cream. Though, from Sosa’s history with PEDs and any excuses he may make about how he didn’t know what he was using, is it safe to assume Sosa didn’t know what the cream would do to his face? He is like every other baseball player who gets handed ointments, creams or drugs and just immediately puts it into his system without thinking.
He looks creepy white. Look at the picture. He looks like Michael Jackson’s slightly overweight brother. I keep waiting to see the new white Sammy Sosa pop up out of a grey van and ask me if I want candy and then try to abduct me. Look at his hair color and the contrast to his face color. His hair looks like it used to be salt and pepper dark while his face was a light brown. Now that his face has gotten pale white, his hair has gone back to what looks to be a darker color. I don’t know, maybe it’s the light and how it is shining on him, but I find it funny his face skin color and hair keep changing colors inversely.
Sosa says he has been using the cream for a long time, and combined with bright TV lights, it made his face look whiter than it really is.
If we are being technical, he wasn’t really on television. He was in a line to have his picture taken. I know flashes can see through sheer black clothing on the red carpet, but I wasn’t aware that a lethal combination of skin cream and bright lights could cause someone’s skin to look whiter. As far as I know, this has never happened to any other celebrity or person on the red carpet.
Sosa says he is not trying to look like late pop star Michael Jackson and is not suffering from any skin illness.
Sammy Sosa wants to make it clear that he looks like a freak not because he idolized Michael Jackson and his look, nor is he sick because of any type of skin disease, but he looks like a freak because of his own doing. So if he knew he was going to the Latin Grammys (where the picture was taken) why didn’t he lay off the cream a little bit? I find it hard to believe this is the first time he has applied the cream and then gone out into public. How much of this cream exactly did he use? I can’t imagine just a little bit of the cream would cause him make this pale.
Sosa made his remarks on the Univision Spanish network. He declined to identify the cream.
Probably this is a good idea. You wouldn’t want sales to go through the roof when people who want to look like Michael Jackson find out they can expedite the process and skip all the surgery and skin whitening and just use a cream to bleach their skin.
-Hasheem Thabeet broke his jaw the other night in the Grizzlies game against the Trail Blazers. Thabeet was one of my favorite targets to mock for potentially being a bust in the NBA when I was talking about this last year’s NBA Draft. In fact I have given him a new nickname in honor of my feelings towards him. I will call him Hasheem “Thabust.” Very creative I know. The best part about how Thabeet broke his jaw is exactly how he broke his jaw. Was he going up for a rebound and took an elbow to the jaw, was he blocking a shot and got hit in the face or was he making a move to the basket in an attempt to score? Not exactly.
The 7-foot-3 center from UConn was injured late in the first quarter during a battle under the Memphis basket.
I wonder how the Grizzlies are going to manage to survive the next game or two when Thabust is unable to play? How will they manage to replace his 0.6 ppg, 1.6 rpg, 0.9 bpg, and 6 minutes per game? I know he is still young and hasn’t been playing basketball for that long, so we can't expect that much from him...but he plays for the Grizzlies. Even their fans know the team is hopeless. How does even a halfway competent big man not get 10-15 minutes per game just based on being tall and playing for Memphis? Just know that Thabust is already 22 years old and will be 23 years old by the end of the basketball year. It’s not like he is fresh out of high school or anything. I try really hard not to be critical of Thabust, but other than the fact he was tall and could block shots based on that fact, he never showed me that much in college that would make me think he can useful in the NBA.
I don’t dislike Thabust or anything, so I am willing to admit his 0.9 blocks per game isn’t too shabby and I don’t think he will ever have a hard time blocking shots in the NBA. He could probably block many just by accident. Of course Shawn Bradley didn’t have trouble blocking shots either and he has become a national punchline. I am still sticking to my claim that Hasheem Thabust was not even close to being worth the #2 pick in the draft and I know we haven’t had a lot to go on this year, but he is averaging very few minutes on a really crappy team. Let’s get to how Thabust broke his jaw:
Replays appeared to show Thabeet’s jaw colliding with forward Zach Randolph’s head.
Is Zach Randolph good for anything? If Thabust's jaw had gotten hit by any other part of Randolph he wouldn't have gotten hurt because the shock would have been absorbed by Randolph's doughy body. But now Randolph is injuring his own players with his head. So to recap, a fairly useless basketball player who has an enormous contract and zero motivation injured one of his teammates who was a highly drafted rookie struggling to earn minutes with a crappy team. This happened to the Grizzlies just a couple days after Allen Iverson decided that God did not want him to play for the Grizzlies anymore…just a few months after God announced to Iverson he should play for the Grizzlies. That God fellow sure does waffle a whole lot like Brett Favre. I wish he could make up his mind.
The conclusion we can draw is that the Grizzlies are still fucked.
-It’s free agent season in MLB, which means it is time for columnists to come out with lists of players who are good buys or bad buys. These lists have about as much relevance as a mock draft, yet we still read them and sportswriters still write them. Last time we heard from Bert Blyleven he was telling baseball players what it takes to succeed in the playoffs by bragging about all of his accomplishments in the postseason. Today, Bert Blyleven decides instead of making list, he is just going to list the pitchers who he thinks are good buys this offseason. I just want to warn everyone, Bert has not ever heard of a “contract year.”
Pitching undoubtedly will be a huge focus as teams look to shore up their staffs for 2010.
I don’t believe it. This may be the first time ever pitching has been actively searched for in free agency. Usually no one cares about pitching, which is why there have never been huge contracts given to pitchers who are free agents. Has there been an offseason in the past 10 years when pitching hasn't been a huge focus of teams?
I don’t think it’s a particularly strong market for pitching this winter.
No kidding. Take a look at this list and who do think is the second best pitcher behind John Lackey that is available through free agency? Could it be Rich Harden or Erik Bedard? The fact there is a legitimate debate answers the question.
Then what do you do in what is a thin pitching market? There are some interesting names out there with impressive track records: Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, Erik Bedard, Rich Harden, Brad Penny and Randy Wolf among them.
Not a single one of those pitchers deserve anything more than a two year deal. Now that is a thin pitching market. Still there are a couple of guys I would take a chance on in that list and I think four of these guys should be on a Top 10 list ranking of available free agent pitchers. Three of the pitchers that Bert puts on his list I am not sure if I would put in the Top 10 at all...but he thinks they are the top pitchers in this year's free agent class.
But in my mind, there are some better options than all of those names. Here are my top four starters, with one reliever thrown into the mix.
Here are Bert Blyleven’s top 4 starters and one reliever. These are the guys who he believes are pitchers #1-5 in the free agent market, not pitchers who are diamonds in the rough, but the best pitchers available through free agency this year.
JOHN LACKEY
No one in their right mind would argue with this. Clearly, Lackey is the #1 starter in this free agent class.
JASON MARQUIS (31) 15-13, 4.04 ERA in 2009 with the Rockies
Marquis will certainly be an afterthought this offseason, but he is a solid, consistent pitcher who is only 31, and could be a good bargain as a free agent.
There is a chance he is an afterthought because he isn’t that good of a pitcher. Now I do have to admit he is consistent. He is consistently just average to below average. Let’s take a look at his numbers since 2005:
2005: 13-14 4.13 ERA 1.329 WHIP
2006: 14-16 6.02 ERA 1.523 WHIP
2007: 12-9 4.60 ERA 1.388 WHIP
2008: 11-9 4.53 ERA 1.449 WHIP
2009: 15-13 4.04 ERA 1.380 WHIP
He is consistent in that he will always be a consistent #4 or #5 starter in a contender’s rotation at the very best. He pitches innings but he has never been more than a league average pitcher and he probably will never be more than that. Is it a coincidence he had his best year as a pro in a contract year? Probably not. Please remember these are all his numbers in the National League. In the American League it is possible he has no value. (I know, I am being harsh today)
JOEL PINIERO (31) 15-12, 3.49 ERA in 2009 with the Cardinals
Piniero is an awful lot like Marquis. A guy proven to be a winner when healthy, a solid No. 2 or 3 starter for any team.
First off, Marquis is not a proven winner nor is he or Piniero a solid #2 or #3 starter when healthy. Piniero has had some injury problems but he also hasn’t been an incredibly effective starter when he was healthy. I know injuries can hurt a pitcher's effectiveness, but I still don't think he is a #2 or #3 starter in MLB. You can judge for yourself.
Piniero had a career year this year, which also happened to coincide with his contract year. Again, what a coincidence! Nothing against Piniero because if my favorite team signed him I wouldn't be upset, but I would be upset if he was the #2 or #3 starter for them. He thrived under Dave Duncan and without him I would be concerned he would regress.
And if you’re worried that he simply found magic under the guiding hand of Cardinals pitching coach Dave Duncan, remember that Piniero also had success in Seattle, going 14-7 with a 3.24 ERA in 2002, and 16-11 with a 3.78 ERA in 2003.
I don't really care he had two good seasons 6 and 7 seasons ago! His bad, injury filled seasons still number more than his healthy, productive seasons. That's not a good risk in my opinion. The fact he had two straight good seasons 6 and 7 years ago respectively shouldn't completely override the fact that Piniero hasn’t been completely healthy or effective for every season since then, excluding 2009 of course. Isn’t that the type of pitcher every team wants? A perennially injured, average starter? What, that doesn’t sound like a #2 or #3 starter to you either?
Bert also wants you to know that Piniero is only 31 years old too! Please don’t worry about the fact he was injured a lot when he was younger, I am sure his body actually grows stronger and less injury prone as he gets older.
CARL PAVANO (33, turns 34 on Jan. 8) 14-12, 5.10 ERA with Indians and Twins in 2009
Somewhere every New York Yankees fan reading this is laughing. Even though I don’t know how much intelligence Bert has, he has to be smarter than to fall for Carl Pavano. He has had 1 good year of pitching while he was in the major leagues and 2 years that were passable as decent. That's it. It just so happens two of those years he pitched passably well were also his contract years. Shouldn't that concern Bert Blyleven a little bit when he was making his list? Forget Pavano's name, pretend his name is James Anthony, and take a look at these numbers. Tell me this is a good enough pitcher who you would think is a Top 5 starter in even the worst pitching free agent class. There is no way.
Pavano had four miserable seasons in New York, as everything went wrong and he just couldn’t stay healthy.
What Bert means by “miserable seasons” is “Pavano got minorly injured and then refused to pitch for the rest of the year for some unknown reason. What he means by “everything went wrong” is “he lied about how he got injured and pissed off all of his teammates by not rehabbing hard enough to contribute to the team.”
Hopefully the Twins will keep him in the fold. He was a good leader and a strong presence in the clubhouse, taking a lot of pressure off young pitchers like Nick Blackburn and Scott Baker. I was very impressed with his work ethic and the way he went about his business.
If Bert really was impressed with Pavano and his work ethic, then he would be the first person I have ever heard talk about Pavano in a favorable fashion. What kind of advice and counseling is he giving the young pitchers for the Twins?
"If you ever get injured away from the baseball field, immediately make up a lie about what happened and then sit out the the rest of the year."
"The key to alienating your teammates is to go to Tampa to rehab at the team's facility there instead of working hard and traveling with the team...this works especially well if the team you play for needs starting pitching help during the year and you aren't around."
Everyone should read “Living on the Black” by John Feinstein sometime to hear what Mike Mussina and the rest of the Yankees thought about Pavano and his work ethic. He is a risk at best and an absolutely mistake signing for more than a one year deal at worst.
The last guy Bert picked was JJ Putz and as far as relievers go, he may be a good risk for a team. He may not be a Top 5 pitcher in this free agent class, but he is better than the other guys Bert mentioned here. Apparently Bert Blyleven has never heard of a “contract year” and these three guys I talked about all are over the age of 31 and had their best years in contract years. It is not a coincidence.
-Our long national dream is over. The Browns have put Brady Quinn back in the starting lineup. Now we can’t see the epic depths that Derek Anderson is able to achieve. So it looks like JaMarcus Russell and Jake Delhomme can fight it out for the worst quarterback of the 2009 season. I wanted Brady Quinn in the lineup, but I thought it would never happen. I got what I wanted, but I still wanted to see how bad Derek Anderson can be. Of course in typical Browns fashion, they have chosen to start Quinn against the Ravens who are coming off a tough loss to the Bengals…and the game is on Monday Night Football. Just a brilliant move. This should keep the pressure off Quinn and put him in a position to succeed. The Browns un-bench Quinn for a game against a team with a good defense coming off a tough loss to a division rival and the game is on national television.
Browns coach Eric Mangini has decided to go back to Quinn after Anderson went 1-4 as a starter and posted the NFL's lowest quarterback rating (36.2). Mangini said he would like to stick with Quinn for the remainder of the season.
(A tear slowly falls down Bengoodfella’s face at what could have been with Derek Anderson starting for the Browns all year)
Mangini has been impressed with Quinn's work ethic since being demoted.
When the other quarterback on the roster has a QB rating of 36.2, do you really need to use the “work ethic” excuse to replace that quarterback? All you have to say is, "Derek Anderson sucks and we want to attempt to be competent and plan for next year. We need to know if Brady Quinn can be an NFL quarterback, so if he can't, we can draft a player who could be an NFL quarterback. Derek Anderson sucks."
The best part of the story is that Eric Mangini claims he didn’t know about the clause in Quinn’s contract that gave him salary escalators for 70% of the snaps this year.
Judge asked Mangini about the possibility that Quinn was benched due to the escalator clause. And here's what Mangini said."No, absolutely not. With all the different contracts. . . . I don't know what the incentives are. But that wouldn't make my decision [even if I did]."
Really? This is the point where Bill Simmons would write, “Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2009 Cleveland Browns!”
So the head coach of the Cleveland Browns did not know there were escalators in Brady Quinn’s contract that gave him more money for taking 70% of the snaps? If that is true, then Mangini was the only person who follows football closely who didn’t know about this. More than likely I think Mangini is outright lying here, which is typical in football, but if he isn't lying and really didn't know about the clause in Quinn's contract, he has reached new levels coaching ignorance.
I don’t see how Mangini lasts as Browns coach after this year. He is like Bill Belichick’s mentally handicapped younger brother (not to insult mentally handicapped people, I love them, and they can not help their fate in life. It is an insult to compare something out of a person’s control to the idiocy that is Eric Mangini…which is completely in his control). He is Bill Belichick if Bill Belichick decided he was going to do everything completely and utterly wrong in building a franchise. If Belichick felt a gut instinct and went the other way from it or did the exact opposite from how he would normally do it, that’s Eric Mangini.
-It took two losses but now Woody Paige is calling for Kyle Orton to be benched.
To give themselves a jump-start, the Broncos should give Chris Simms the start against Washington on Sunday.
He believes that Chris Simms is a better option for Denver. I admit I began the season thinking the Broncos should give Simms more of a shot to be the starting quarterback in Denver, but I was wrong. I’ll say it again, I was wrong. Orton was the right guy and I think he has proven that. The Broncos have lost to the Steelers and the Ravens. It’s not like they lost to two shitty teams who have yet to win a game. They lost to the two participants in last year’s AFC Championship Game. Don't hit the panic button at this point. The Broncos have no quarterback on the roster who can do better than Orton is doing right now.
Kyle Orton hasn't performed awfully (except for the three interceptions Monday night). Yes, the Broncos still have won six games — but he is what he is — the 18th-best quarterback in the NFL. And the Broncos are a reflection of that number. They are 22nd in scoring (18.8 points per game), just ahead of the Titans, and behind, ahem, the Bears. They are 19th overall in offense, 17th in passing, 18th in rushing.
Part of the reason the Broncos are playing well is because Orton isn’t trying to do too much and he is managing the game. Seriously, quarterback changes are a desperate move for a team and they are not a move that a 6-2 team generally makes unless that team’s coaching staff is a bunch of morons.
It has been suggested, wisely, by my columnist colleagues at Postmortem that the Broncos start Correll Buckhalter at running back, which they did against Pittsburgh, and open up the offense, which they didn't do. It doesn't matter who starts at running back, and McDaniels can't unleash the offense with Orton.
Yes, you can tell from Chris Simms’ career numbers that he isn’t exactly the type of quarterback who needs the offense unleashed with him at the helm. He is not exactly a horrible quarterback but he would basically end up being a left handed version of Kyle Orton for this year. Look at Orton’s career numbers and they are similar or exceed what Simms has done in his career. Both options aren’t fantastic, but 6-2 teams don’t change quarterbacks.
When I suggested this move to a rather large cheese at The Post, he said: "Simms hasn't played since early in the 2006 season."
Orton only played three games in 2006-07 after being benched, following 15 starts in 2005, before the Bears went on to the Super Bowl. Simms has started 15 NFL games.
So basically Orton has more starts in one year than Simms has for his career. Woody really has no point here.
Yeah, but Simms has a stronger arm. Orton's lack of arm strength was revealed twice against Pittsburgh when he tried to make throws off his back foot and couldn't get the ball to open receivers.
Chris Simms isn’t exactly the model of arm strength either. Really, Simms is a less experienced, more mobile version of Kyle Orton. Let's all recall how Chris Simms didn't start his entire senior year at Texas because Major Applewhite was beating him out for the starting quarterback position. Remember that? How come Woody doesn't? I am not down on Simms, in fact I thought he should get a chance to start this year, but the loss of two straight games to tough teams after a 6 game winning streak is not the reason to change quarterbacks.
McDaniels told me he doesn't care to switch quarterbacks in midgame or midseason, but, then, he had Tom Brady as his quarterback at New England, and who's going to remove him?
This has nothing to do with Tom Brady or who the backup in New England was or wasn’t, it has to do with the options available to the Denver Broncos, which aren’t vast. This has nothing to do with Tom Brady or when Josh McDaniels would or would not switch out a starting quarterback for the backup. What McDaniels should have said is that he doesn’t care to switch quarterbacks while the team has a 6-2 record. Maybe Woody Paige is hitting the panic button a bit too early here?
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
19 comments JaMarcus Russell Explained
Not even I thought Clark Judge would go this far. I have stared into the face of someone sort of in a roundabout way defending JaMarcus Russell and have returned to tell the harrowing tale. Gather round friends.
Which of the NFL's many bad teams has the worst QB situation?
wow, talk about lobbing softballs. There is only one right answer here, Prisco, go!
It has to be the Oakland Raiders. They used the first overall pick in 2007 to take JaMarcus Russell with the idea he would be the franchise quarterback for years. He's been a major bust. Why? He doesn't seem to care. The word is he doesn't put in the work that he should. That's a recipe for failure. There isn't much behind him either. Bruce Gradkowski? Please. The Browns and the Titans don't have great quarterback situations either, but it's not as bad as Oakland. Would you rather have Kerry Collins and Vince Young or Russell and Gradkowski? Thought so. How about the Oakland duo or Cleveland's Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn? That one is close, but I'll go with the Browns situation as being a tad better. So Oakland it is.
JaMarcus Russell is an artist of being terrible. The football field is his canvas. Fumbles, interceptions and incompletions are the brushstrokes. There's never been anyone in my lifetime in professional sports who has been given this much opportunity to showcase his utter and complete lack of ability to play the game he is paid to play. I mean, this is largely self evident, but to fill in the gaps.
Russell was taken #1 overall in the 2007 NFL Draft. Other players from the first round Oakland could have had instead. WR - Calvin Johnson or Dwayne Bowe. OL - Joe Thomas, Ben Grubbs or Levi Brown. DB - LaRon Landry, Darrelle Revis (current trendy "best DB" pick), Michael Griffin, Brandon Meriweather and Leon Hall. LB Jon Beason or Patrick Willis (IMO the best defensive player in football). And we haven't even mentioned Adrian Peterson, the best player in football. Maybe if Peterson and Russell are in the same room, it will cause a rip in the space time continuum. A kind of ying and yang of football ability. Anyway, that, is the opportunity cost of the Russell selection.
Then there are the numbers.
Russell's current QB rating this year is 47.2. How bad is that? In the last eight years, only two years have ever been within 10 of that bad. The next closest is 55.8. And yes, Derek Anderson is at 40.8, but he's taken less sacks and thrown less interceptions in a similar number of attempts. After the first game of the season, here are Oakland's point totals; 13, 3, 6, 7, 13, 0. Derek Anderson's teams have eclipsed 13 twice in the same span. He also has a history of some (limited) success.
Ultimately, the Browns have a QB who was once kinda good, led a 10-6 team that was dominant offensively in the first ten weeks or so of the 2007 season, and a high draft pick who, unlike Russell, has not really been given a great deal of time to show his (likely terrible but not definately so, wares). The Raiders have the embodiment of disappointment and fail. They aren't in the same dimension. Clark Judge, I'm sure you have something wrong to say about this...
Cleveland. Because there's a conviction about nobody
in nearly every Judge column there's a WTF moment. Three weeks ago it was "what if Mark Sanchez is injured, what will the NFL do???". Then we had "I think Ronnie Brown might be better than Michael Vick out of the wildcat". This week it's "certainty in promoting a terrible player is better than uncertainty regarding two poor players". Someone make sense of this for me. Cleveland are aware they need a quarterback, they are also cognizant of the fact that both of these players kind of suck. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery. I'm not even sure Oakland have an inkling of just how bad JaMarcus Russell is.
The Browns tried Brady Quinn, a quarterback they traded away a first-round draft pick to acquire, but jettisoned him to move on to ... Derek Anderson? OK, but Anderson has been dreadful. Yet Eric Mangini won't budge on him, and don't ask me why.
because he's a bad coach? But at any rate, weren't you just criticising a lack of conviction in Cleveland's organisation about their QB situation? You totally were! Like three sentences ago! And now, here is Mangini, being wrong but staunch about Derek Anderson, exactly what you just demanded of Cleveland (and, apparently incorrectly said was not present in Cleveland) and you criticise them. What do you want Judge? Do you even know at this point? We're not even halfway through your first answer and already you are incoherant. Jesus H. Christ.
And what about Brett Ratliff? Mangini wanted him in the Mark Sanchez deal, but why? Beats me. He can't get a sniff. When you stink, I believe in playing young guys to get experience.
not Vince Young, apparently.
Which of the NFL's many bad teams has the worst QB situation?
wow, talk about lobbing softballs. There is only one right answer here, Prisco, go!
It has to be the Oakland Raiders. They used the first overall pick in 2007 to take JaMarcus Russell with the idea he would be the franchise quarterback for years. He's been a major bust. Why? He doesn't seem to care. The word is he doesn't put in the work that he should. That's a recipe for failure. There isn't much behind him either. Bruce Gradkowski? Please. The Browns and the Titans don't have great quarterback situations either, but it's not as bad as Oakland. Would you rather have Kerry Collins and Vince Young or Russell and Gradkowski? Thought so. How about the Oakland duo or Cleveland's Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn? That one is close, but I'll go with the Browns situation as being a tad better. So Oakland it is.
JaMarcus Russell is an artist of being terrible. The football field is his canvas. Fumbles, interceptions and incompletions are the brushstrokes. There's never been anyone in my lifetime in professional sports who has been given this much opportunity to showcase his utter and complete lack of ability to play the game he is paid to play. I mean, this is largely self evident, but to fill in the gaps.
Russell was taken #1 overall in the 2007 NFL Draft. Other players from the first round Oakland could have had instead. WR - Calvin Johnson or Dwayne Bowe. OL - Joe Thomas, Ben Grubbs or Levi Brown. DB - LaRon Landry, Darrelle Revis (current trendy "best DB" pick), Michael Griffin, Brandon Meriweather and Leon Hall. LB Jon Beason or Patrick Willis (IMO the best defensive player in football). And we haven't even mentioned Adrian Peterson, the best player in football. Maybe if Peterson and Russell are in the same room, it will cause a rip in the space time continuum. A kind of ying and yang of football ability. Anyway, that, is the opportunity cost of the Russell selection.
Then there are the numbers.
Russell's current QB rating this year is 47.2. How bad is that? In the last eight years, only two years have ever been within 10 of that bad. The next closest is 55.8. And yes, Derek Anderson is at 40.8, but he's taken less sacks and thrown less interceptions in a similar number of attempts. After the first game of the season, here are Oakland's point totals; 13, 3, 6, 7, 13, 0. Derek Anderson's teams have eclipsed 13 twice in the same span. He also has a history of some (limited) success.
Ultimately, the Browns have a QB who was once kinda good, led a 10-6 team that was dominant offensively in the first ten weeks or so of the 2007 season, and a high draft pick who, unlike Russell, has not really been given a great deal of time to show his (likely terrible but not definately so, wares). The Raiders have the embodiment of disappointment and fail. They aren't in the same dimension. Clark Judge, I'm sure you have something wrong to say about this...
Cleveland. Because there's a conviction about nobody
in nearly every Judge column there's a WTF moment. Three weeks ago it was "what if Mark Sanchez is injured, what will the NFL do???". Then we had "I think Ronnie Brown might be better than Michael Vick out of the wildcat". This week it's "certainty in promoting a terrible player is better than uncertainty regarding two poor players". Someone make sense of this for me. Cleveland are aware they need a quarterback, they are also cognizant of the fact that both of these players kind of suck. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery. I'm not even sure Oakland have an inkling of just how bad JaMarcus Russell is.
The Browns tried Brady Quinn, a quarterback they traded away a first-round draft pick to acquire, but jettisoned him to move on to ... Derek Anderson? OK, but Anderson has been dreadful. Yet Eric Mangini won't budge on him, and don't ask me why.
because he's a bad coach? But at any rate, weren't you just criticising a lack of conviction in Cleveland's organisation about their QB situation? You totally were! Like three sentences ago! And now, here is Mangini, being wrong but staunch about Derek Anderson, exactly what you just demanded of Cleveland (and, apparently incorrectly said was not present in Cleveland) and you criticise them. What do you want Judge? Do you even know at this point? We're not even halfway through your first answer and already you are incoherant. Jesus H. Christ.
And what about Brett Ratliff? Mangini wanted him in the Mark Sanchez deal, but why? Beats me. He can't get a sniff. When you stink, I believe in playing young guys to get experience.
not Vince Young, apparently.
But that's not happening here. Worse, the Browns invested two first-round draft picks in Quinn and a ton of money in him and Anderson, yet they aren't sold on either.
They aren't sold, Clark, because they aren't fucking good. They shouldn't be sold. These are not good football players. If you were sold on players of this caliber you'd be fucking insane...or Oakland. How can you not see this?
"When you miss on a quarterback in the first round," Jets coach Rex Ryan once said, "you ruin the franchise." The Browns qualify. Three quarterbacks, no future? Yeah, Cleveland has my vote.
and what happens when you miss with the first pick? This is just utter nonsense.
Is starting an NFL franchise in London a good idea?
God, what a dumb question. Travel, local interest, just, a hundred thousand reasons why this is a dumb idea. What about if San Francisco has to travel to London? It's a thirteen hour flight. That's two and a half times longer than San Francisco to New York.
Prisco: Not right now. But down the road, I would understand. The NFL wants to go global, but in this economy the NFL needs to put a team in Los Angeles first. Keep it home. If the L.A. market gets going and another franchise is ripe for moving, then look at London. I think it's doable. The travel would be tough, but there are ways to work around it. The NFL will figure it out. By going to London, it would help bring more fans to the game and generate more revenue. Is seeing half-empty stadiums better than seeing a team in London? I think not. Roger Goodell is big on one day going to England. It will happen. It's only a matter of time, and I, for one, understand why. It's about money. It always is.
where's the infrastructure here to support this? There's a circus and a circus, and this really is a bridge too far. I will never ever understand the no LA team thing, no matter how in depth someone tries to explain it to me. No point wasting more time on this ridiculous question. It's really amazing how little depth the questions have in Faceoff but whatever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)