Re: Post game Packers
 

Man ... it's just nice basking in the glow of Redskins win and a Cowboys loss ... the second time in this young season that that has happened.

HTTR

FTMFC

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Chico23231;1201217][url]http://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr/_/week/1[/url]

Im into some stats today...total QBR for the season:

Alex at a very respectable 10

Cousins 14

Eli 19

Dak at a very garbage 28

Jimmy G was terrible before his injury ranking 30 in the league right behind Bradford who was ranked 29.

You know whats crazy?

Baker Mayfield had the second highest QBR performance of the year with his comeback vs the Jets. had a 95.5 QBR for his play in that game.[/quote]
LOL, so that is how you judge a QB, no wonder.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201224]LOL, so that is how you judge a QB, no wonder.[/quote]

QBR is by far the best metric of QB performance available. I can explain how it's calculated but you wouldn't get it - the Giant in your name has never referred to your brain, we all know that.

It's your prostate. We all knew that too.

That said, QBR isn't very meaningful after only three games. Give it half a season and we'll have a pretty good picture taking shape.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201224]LOL, so that is how you judge a QB, no wonder.[/quote]

G1 you really gotten sensitive about your lil Eli...

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Pervis_Griffith;1201223]Man ... it's just nice basking in the glow of Redskins win and a Cowboys loss ... the second time in this young season that that has happened.

HTTR

FTMFC[/quote]

no shit.

HTTR

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Chico23231;1201227]G1 you really gotten sensitive about your lil Eli...[/quote]
.........how so? Please ,proof?

Re: Post game Packers
 

[QUOTE=jamf;1201220]How about some love for Bergstrom?
No botched snaps and didn't get exposed out there.[/QUOTE]On Redskins Talk podcast JP Finlay asks Gruden about how well Bergstrom and Roullier did and if they can replicate it and he said, "we'll try, I think when Saun comes back we'll address the issue then, but I think they did a good job, Tony did a an excellent job."

It sounds very much like these guys may play Lavauo out of his job!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Re: Post game Packers
 

[QUOTE=WillH;1201233]On Redskins Talk podcast JP Finlay asks Gruden about how well Bergstrom and Roullier did and if they can replicate it and he said, "we'll try, I think when Saun comes back we'll address the issue then, but I think they did a good job, Tony did a an excellent job."

It sounds very much like these guys may play Lavauo out of his job!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]BTW I called that shit. Lol

"Anyways, I say this because the during times they've been good, I've always noticed that if they had an injury it didn't drastically effect the play of the unit as a whole. Guys like Tony Bergstrom have come in and looked like competant backups and had good games. Sometimes this is when we'd find our future starters. I think everyone needs to chill. Last year the whole line was injured, that hasn't happened yet, and hopefully won't, and maybe the line will be ok."

[url]https://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?p=1200880[/url]

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Schneed10;1201166][B]Your edge rushing post annoyed me enough as it was. And now this. [/B] Roullier played Guard yesterday.

:doh:

I think your point still stands that he has become a valuable piece but it's just funny [B]how wrong you are so often[/B].

Kerrigan has been very effective in all three games this year (check the pressures on PFF). Preston Smith definitely needs to step it up though. He has a way of being streaky, hopefully he goes on a hot streak soon.[/quote]

I've read your posts for years now and on countless occasions you come across as a [B]know-it-all[/B] and repeatedly put people down as if everyone but [B]you[/B] is an idiot. I seldom post and typically come to this site as a simple Redskin fan just trying to enjoy all other fan's viewpoints but your frequent arrogance ruins the experience. You've clearly been hurt somewhere in life with a resulting insecurity that motivates you to talk to others like shit in order to make yourself feel better. Sitting in front of a keyboard makes it far to easy for you to get away with your smug comments and I'm surprised more people on this site haven't called you out. Who are you anyway? [B]What makes you an "expert"[/B] in all things football and Redskins related? Doesn't really matter as whoever you are doesn't excuse such condescending behavior. Douche.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Dlyne8r;1201240]I've read your posts for years now and on countless occasions you come across as a [B]know-it-all[/B] and repeatedly put people down as if everyone but [B]you[/B] is an idiot. I seldom post and typically come to this site as a simple Redskin fan just trying to enjoy all other fan's viewpoints but your frequent arrogance ruins the experience. You've clearly been hurt somewhere in life with a resulting insecurity that motivates you to talk to others like shit in order to make yourself feel better. Sitting in front of a keyboard makes it far to easy for you to get away with your smug comments and I'm surprised more people on this site haven't called you out. Who are you anyway? [B]What makes you an "expert"[/B] in all things football and Redskins related? Doesn't really matter as whoever you are doesn't excuse such condescending behavior. Douche.[/quote]

Yes. That’s me. Minus the traumatic event in my life. I’m just the smartest and most arrogant troll you’ve ever met.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=WillH;1201233]On Redskins Talk podcast JP Finlay asks Gruden about how well Bergstrom and Roullier did and if they can replicate it and he said, "we'll try, I think when Saun comes back we'll address the issue then, but I think they did a good job, Tony did a an excellent job."

It sounds very much like these guys may play Lavauo out of his job!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk[/quote]

We've been waiting for someone to push Luvao out of a job for years. This would be a great thing, and then next year draft a young center or LG. Needs next year are: (1) WR, (2) OLB, (3) C vs LG, (4) CB, (5) QB, (6) MLB

Re: Post game Packers
 

[QUOTE=ethat001;1201245]We've been waiting for someone to push Luvao out of a job for years. This would be a great thing, and then next year draft a young center or LG. Needs next year are: (1) WR, (2) OLB, (3) C vs LG, (4) CB, (5) QB, (6) MLB[/QUOTE]

I'd probably put TE in there ahead of QB, but that list looks about right. I like our young MLBs though. I might put safety in there instead.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Re: Post game Packers
 

This post is dedicated to Schneed:

The following is from a statistical analysis done by Eric Eager of PFF published on February 22, 2018:

[I]"Using our Expected Points Added (EPA) model, we know [B]exactly[/B] how much each impact play by a defender affects opposing offenses, with a positive EPA implying a successful play by an offense and a negative EPA a successful play by the defense.

EPA on all passing plays: 0.025
EPA on all non-sack passing plays: 0.145
EPA on passing plays without pressure: 0.233
EPA on passing plays with pressure (incl. sacks): -0.397
EPA on passing plays with pressure but no sack: -0.074
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hurried: 0.019
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hit: -0.161
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hit and hurried: -0.323
[B]EPA on passing plays that result in sacks: -1.856[/B]

Notice that, on average, passing plays are a net positive for an offense, and passing plays that do not result in pressure are even more so. Once pressure is applied to a quarterback, passing plays become a negative proposition for an offense, but are an [B]order-of-magnitude[/B] worse when they result in sacks."[/I]

So, to those of you who think I don't know what I'm talking about when I say we need more sacks rather than just pressures or hurries from our Edge Rushers, I'm pretty sure I do know what I'm talking about.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Schneed10;1201152]Nobody cares.[/quote]

I´m okay with that.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Schneed10;1201241]Yes. That’s me. Minus the traumatic event in my life. I’m just the smartest and most arrogant troll you’ve ever met.[/quote]

Not everyone has the tools to deal with this shit. They not ready! We ready!

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Schneed10;1201226]QBR is by far the best metric of QB performance available. I can explain how it's calculated but you wouldn't get it - the Giant in your name has never referred to your brain, we all know that.

It's your prostate. We all knew that too.

That said, QBR isn't very meaningful after only three games. Give it half a season and we'll have a pretty good picture taking shape.[/quote]

Silly me, I thought the good measure of a QB was winning games/ championships.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201251]Silly me, I thought the good measure of a QB was winning games/ championships.[/quote]

:oink:

Yup none of your last 10 post aren’t proof enough.

It’s all good..denial is the first step

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201251]Silly me, I thought the good measure of a QB was winning games/ championships.[/quote]

well in that case he hasn't done a good job of that lately (43-56 record since that last SB)

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Schneed10;1201226]QBR is by far the best metric of QB performance available. I can explain how it's calculated but you wouldn't get it - the Giant in your name has never referred to your brain, we all know that.

It's your prostate. We all knew that too.

That said, QBR isn't very meaningful after only three games. Give it half a season and we'll have a pretty good picture taking shape.[/quote]

Our grades are better at PFF but I'm biased...

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=MTK;1201253]well in that case he hasn't done a good job of that lately (43-56 record since that last SB)[/quote]

..............considering during that time he has had three head coach's and three different OC and no O line to speak of,I'll take that. He does need to play better and I can see the team moving on after this year if they don't play well but seriously that QBR stuff is BS. It is what happens on the field at the end of the day .

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201259]..............considering during that time he has had three head coach's and three different OC and no O line to speak of,I'll take that. He does need to play better and I can see the team moving on after this year if they don't play well but seriously that QBR stuff is BS. It is what happens on the field at the end of the day .[/quote]

So your just presenting alternative facts...hey I get it.

Re: Post game Packers
 

Let's not get too geeked up,yes a victory is good of course,but we still got[Brees]coming up and he ain't hurt.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Burgold;1201262]Let's not get too geeked up,yes a victory is good of course,but we still got[Brees]coming up and he ain't hurt.[/quote]

Best Offense we will see all yr , in the dome. But we get 2 weeks to prepare

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201259]..............considering during that time he has had three head coach's and three different OC and no O line to speak of,I'll take that. He does need to play better and I can see the team moving on after this year if they don't play well but seriously that QBR stuff is BS. It is what happens on the field at the end of the day .[/quote]

I don't know how QBR works but it definitely should give some extra weight to how well a QB plays in the last 5 minutes of tight games and in their final drives of the first halves of games when trailing. I think Eli isn't nearly the QB he once was but he has made some HUGE plays when the chips were down in past seasons.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1201265]Best Offense we will see all yr , in the dome. But we get 2 weeks to prepare[/quote]

Well you have to remember, Saints will be coming off a blowout win and psyched to be home on Monday night.

Re: Post game Packers
 

The Saints are definitely beatable even at home

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Chico23231;1201267]Well you have to remember, Saints will be coming off a blowout win and psyched to be home on Monday night.[/quote]

Possibly but you need to remember that it is possible that the Saints may be resting on their laurels after such an easy win and take the Skins lightly, assuming that we're just another weak NFC East team like the two teams that wear blue.

Re: Post game Packers
 

Last years loss to them should be motivation, since we let them off the hook

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=Giantone;1201259]..............considering during that time he has had three head coach's and three different OC and no O line to speak of,I'll take that. He does need to play better and I can see the team moving on after this year if they don't play well but seriously that QBR stuff is BS. It is what happens on the field at the end of the day .[/quote]
summarizing eli debate in this thread

Eli is in decline

-- don't judge my eli!!!

don't be so sensitive
-- show me proof, don't judge my eli!!!

qbr bad
-- it's about wins losses don't judge my eli!!!

wins/losses bad
-- it's a team sport, it's about what happens on the field - don't judge my eli!!!


lol I kinda thought wins/losses and qbr defined what is happening on the field

Re: Post game Packers
 

Eli is like Joe Flacco, except he did it twice with a way better defense. The dude is just OK, but he got hot twice when it counted (arguably once if you factor in that defense they had when they beat the Patriots).

Speaking of people who got hot that were mediocre QBs... how about Todd Collins as a blast from the past?!

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1201248]This post is dedicated to Schneed:

The following is from a statistical analysis done by Eric Eager of PFF published on February 22, 2018:

[I]"Using our Expected Points Added (EPA) model, we know [B]exactly[/B] how much each impact play by a defender affects opposing offenses, with a positive EPA implying a successful play by an offense and a negative EPA a successful play by the defense.

EPA on all passing plays: 0.025
EPA on all non-sack passing plays: 0.145
EPA on passing plays without pressure: 0.233
EPA on passing plays with pressure (incl. sacks): -0.397
EPA on passing plays with pressure but no sack: -0.074
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hurried: 0.019
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hit: -0.161
EPA on passing plays where the quarterback is only hit and hurried: -0.323
[B]EPA on passing plays that result in sacks: -1.856[/B]

Notice that, on average, passing plays are a net positive for an offense, and passing plays that do not result in pressure are even more so. Once pressure is applied to a quarterback, passing plays become a negative proposition for an offense, but are an [B]order-of-magnitude[/B] worse when they result in sacks."[/I]

So, to those of you who think I don't know what I'm talking about when I say we need more sacks rather than just pressures or hurries from our Edge Rushers, I'm pretty sure I do know what I'm talking about.[/quote]

Nobody was trying to say that hurries or pressures are just as good as sacks. We were saying that sacks correlate to hurries and pressures, so as long as Kerrigan is getting hurries and pressures, the sacks will come.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1201291]Nobody was trying to say that hurries or pressures are just as good as sacks. We were saying that sacks correlate to hurries and pressures, so as long as Kerrigan is getting hurries and pressures, the sacks will come.[/QUOTE]What is the correlation?

All hurries and pressures aren't equal with many being expected and accounted for depending on how a play progresses. They may be a near miss sack, they may not be.

If a qb takes a five step drop and doesn't throw it for another second or two and Kerrigan gets a "pressure" and forces the qb to throw the ball out of bounds, how valuable is that?

Not nearly as valuable as beating the blocker and forcing the qb out of the schedule of the play.

Those two things may both be hurries or pressures but one is a lot closer to a sack than the other.

Kerrigan can lead the league in hurries and pressures and may or may not have any sacks. There isn't necessarily a correlation and definitely not a causation.

Generic statements with undefined terms don't really contribute meaningfully to the conversation.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1201281]summarizing eli debate in this thread

Eli is in decline

-- don't judge my eli!!!

don't be so sensitive
-- show me proof, don't judge my eli!!!

qbr bad
-- it's about wins losses don't judge my eli!!!

wins/losses bad
-- it's a team sport, it's about what happens on the field - don't judge my eli!!!


lol I kinda thought wins/losses and qbr defined what is happening on the field[/quote]

Pretty much this....

G1's slurpin and burp'in on Eli's dick...and don't dare suggest Darnold was the right draft pick.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1201295]What is the correlation?

All hurries and pressures aren't equal with many being expected and accounted for depending on how a play progresses. They may be a near miss sack, they may not be.

If a qb takes a five step drop and doesn't throw it for another second or two and Kerrigan gets a "pressure" and forces the qb to throw the ball out of bounds, how valuable is that?

Not nearly as valuable as beating the blocker and forcing the qb out of the schedule of the play.

Those two things may both be hurries or pressures but one is a lot closer to a sack than the other.

Kerrigan can lead the league in hurries and pressures and may or may not have any sacks. There isn't necessarily a correlation and definitely not a causation.

Generic statements with undefined terms don't really contribute meaningfully to the conversation.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk[/quote]

I can tell you're statistically challenged. A correlation means that the more pressures you get, the more sacks you'll get. Pressures indicate you're getting close, sacks indicate you got there.

What I'm saying - and let me dumb it down so you can understand it - is that if Kerrigan weren't registering pressures, it would indicate a serious problem. It would mean he's not beating his man, he's not getting around the block, etc. But he is getting pressures, and as long as that keeps up, the sacks will come.

Re: Post game Packers
 

@MarkBullockNFL

Seen a couple people questioning Ryan Kerrigan after no sacks through 3 games. He was a constant thorn in the side of the Packers. Plenty of pressures, got a couple of holding calls, nice strong edge set vs the run. Packers chipped him with a TE 6 or 7 times too

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=MTK;1201299]@MarkBullockNFL

Seen a couple people questioning Ryan Kerrigan after no sacks through 3 games. He was a constant thorn in the side of the Packers. Plenty of pressures, got a couple of holding calls, nice strong edge set vs the run. Packers chipped him with a TE 6 or 7 times too[/quote]

Lots of discussion about Kerrigan. Agree with pressures being important, and if you have a lot of pressures you affect the game / sacks should come. Stopping the run is important. But at some level it seems like RK is underperforming, he doesn't seem to be changing games. When you discuss Khalil Mack and Von Miller - we're not talking about how pressures they've had, we're talking about game-changing talent.. And we haven't seen top tier Olines (Arizona may be one of the worst, Colts Olines were battered up,etc). Just saying I would have expected more from RK to this point, and [URL="https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/ryan-kerrigan/6168"]his PFF grade is only 65.7 (above average), and the 50th ranked edge defender[/URL], which seems about right.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1201298]I can tell you're statistically challenged. A correlation means that the more pressures you get, the more sacks you'll get. Pressures indicate you're getting close, sacks indicate you got there.

What I'm saying - and let me dumb it down so you can understand it - is that if Kerrigan weren't registering pressures, it would indicate a serious problem. It would mean he's not beating his man, he's not getting around the block, etc. But he is getting pressures, and as long as that keeps up, the sacks will come.[/QUOTE]You should look up correlation and causation.

It also seems like you didn't actually read the post.

More pressures may mean more sacks or it may not. That's what a correlation is, rather than a causation.

Again, it's about defining terms: hurries and pressures.

Another knee jerk post.

Typical.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Re: Post game Packers
 

I think we all can agree Kerrigan just hasn't made the plays we are typical of seeing...but its just 3 games and he is still effective in his role. I have faith the sacks will come...he's been putting in the work.

Zero worried about Kerrigan....I'm more concerned with the other OLB. And actually Im MOST concerned with WR group.

Defense overall has been effective with its pass rush

Re: Post game Packers
 

Feels like every year we put Kerrigan under the microscope and it's just beyond silly at this point.

Here's a guy who averages 10 sacks a year, has been to 3 Pro Bowls, and probably most impressively hasn't missed a single damn game and somehow he's always the one getting singled out. I don't get it, never have, never will.

Re: Post game Packers
 

[quote=MTK;1201307]Feels like every year we put Kerrigan under the microscope and it's just beyond silly at this point.

[B]Here's a guy[/B] who averages 10 sacks a year, has been to 3 Pro Bowls, and probably most impressively hasn't missed a single damn game and somehow he's always the one getting singled out. I don't get it, never have, never will.[/quote]

Cris Collinsworth? Is that you???