Poll: Rookie of the Year (week 16)

[tmljeh19]

Originally Posted by wogitalia

If it's the MVP award then it swings in Luck's favour. He means far more to his team, shoulders a far bigger burden and is asked to do much more for his team to win and all the teams are winning at the same rate, meaning that Luck should lead under this criteria.

ummm what? Indy has had a decade plus of probably the best QB in history. The Redskins have had two decades plus of HORRIBLE QB play. RG3 has the biggest burden of any rookie QB or maybe any QB in the league to turn this franchise around.

[tmljeh19]

How can you lead the league in INTs and win ROY? I dont care about wins because its an individual award not a team award. Anyone know how many teams the Colts beat with a winning record? ONE! Andrew Luck leading late game come backs against teams with losing records due to the fact that he turned the ball over 3-4 times? Not impressed.

[Halsey]

Wins matter. If Luck's INT's were all that big a deal, why have they won 9 games? Because of that stout defense?

[21ST]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

Assuming all three make it to the playoffs, which rookie QB wins the most games??

If the Skins win the NFCE, I believe if the Seahawks are a WC, they would play in FedEx in the first round.

Classic.

We owe them 2

[jsagan77]

I'm curious as to how many games you guys have watched of Griffin Wilson and Luck because a lot of the arguments made seem hyperbolic in nature. Like you guys watch a few games and exaggerate what you see and it always seems to be the stereotypical stuff that's always said when comparing pocket passers and non-traditional guys coming out of college.

I only ask because over the past month I've gone back and really tried to be objective and figure out what you guys are seeing and it's just not there. In fact Luck has been worse than I previously thought. Last game alone he had 3 picks dropped by the Texans and he had others against Detroit and the Titans that he got very Lucky they weren't picked. He tries to force so many throws that he shouldn't and should be criticized appropriately for it. Griffin and to a lesser extent Wilson are much more careful with the football in similar situations, It's not even close. Luck is playing like a rookie, plain and simple, while Wilson and RG3 are playing like seasoned vets.

You can make all the excuses, but in the end it's about results and with all 3 QB's seemingly playoff bound Luck has likely been eliminated from this thing.

[Bob Sanders Dreadlock]

Luck- 2 rookie wide outs, 2 rookie tight ends, rookie RB, no offensive line and turned around a team almost anyone thought would be picking in the top 5 of this years draft and is instead going into the playoffs. Cmon.

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by jsagan77

I'm curious as to how many games you guys have watched of Griffin Wilson and Luck because a lot of the arguments made seem hyperbolic in nature. Like you guys watch a few games and exaggerate what you see and it always seems to be the stereotypical stuff that's always said when comparing pocket passers and non-traditional guys coming out of college.

I only ask because over the past month I've gone back and really tried to be objective and figure out what you guys are seeing and it's just not there. In fact Luck has been worse than I previously thought. Last game alone he had 3 picks dropped by the Texans and he had others against Detroit and the Titans that he got very Lucky they weren't picked. He tries to force so many throws that he shouldn't and should be criticized appropriately for it. Griffin and to a lesser extent Wilson are much more careful with the football in similar situations, It's not even close. Luck is playing like a rookie, plain and simple, while Wilson and RG3 are playing like seasoned vets.

You can make all the excuses, but in the end it's about results and with all 3 QB's seemingly playoff bound Luck has likely been eliminated from this thing.

[jsagan77]

Did you find that gif at the bottom of the barrel next to all the meaningless stats you post to try and prove your point? Since the Luck camp is about to lose it's leverage in the playoff argument, What stats are next? Luck has the better record over teams with losing records? The folks in the Luck camp are much bigger homers than anyone in the other camps. You can polish a turd but in the end it's still a turd and that's what Lucks rookie season has been, a hot steamy turd compared to the guys he's going up against.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Whoever wins the MVP.....!

One thing I'm wondering about Luck that just really jumps out at me is why is his completion percentage is so low???
I don't think he's necessarily making a majority of the wrong reads, but I do watch him sometimes and wonder about the actual zip he puts on his throws.

He still reminds me of the guy at Stanford who I always wondered about his ability to drive the football downfield. His passes still seem to hang IMO sometimes, especially on out routes.

[jsagan77]

And the running game debate is lame too. RG3 gets 19.4 ypg from his RB's per game more than Luck. The rest is on RG3.

[Trogdor]

How about this try responding in an intelligent manner to ANY of the points below and demonstrate you understand football more so than studying box scores of your favorite team.

• Explain how Luck isn't asked to do much more than RGIII essentially breaking down how having 564 attempts (Luck) is less of a burden than RGIII having 351 attempts, which happens to be the LOWEST number of attempts of ANY QB in the league who has at least 11 games played. Continuing on this point demonstrate how the Colts 21st ranked (yardage) rushing attack is more helpful than the Redskins 1st ranked rushing attack.
  
• Explain how Luck's 12.9 yards per completion mark is less impressive than RGIII's 12.5. Keep in mind that Luck has 75 more completions.
  
• Explain why Luck is vastly more proficient at converting 3rd downs compared to RGIII. Continuing on this question explain why RGIII's yards per completion on 3rd and long is less than the yards to go.

The only "end-all" statement for this is what Wog said. If you view the ROY award as a purely statistical argument based only on QBR and TD:INT ratio than of course RGIII is your man. However if you vote based on the individual merits (i.e. MVP) than RGIII is battling Russell Wilson for lowest attempts per game from an NFL QB while Luck walks away with the prize.

You do realize that if you project the attempts per game out through the rest of the year Wilson and RGIII barely break 400 attempts? Luck is projected to be at 645 attempts. You do realize that the rookie pass attempts record which was set by OROY award winner in 2010 Sam Bradford is 590. Luck is on pace to DESTROY that record and you expect him to be more efficient than a player who is driving the bus.

[jsagan77]

Well When you are super efficient and put your team in good spots you aren't forced to air it out constantly to try to win. If you can score 3-4TD's because it only takes you x number of attempts to do so your numbers are going to be less. Because RG3 is more efficient Throughout the game he doesn't collect all the garbage 4th quarter stats Luck has had to in order to win games.

It's funny how people in the Luck camp say 'don't look at stat's in a vacuum' yet they constantly fail to comprehend the premise.

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by jsagan77

Well When you are super efficient and put your team in good spots you aren't forced to air it out constantly to try to win. If you can score 3-4TD's because it only takes you x number of attempts to do so your numbers are going to be less. Because RG3 is more efficient Throughout the game he doesn't collect all the garbage 4th quarter stats Luck has had to in order to win games.

It's funny how people in the Luck camp say 'don't look at stat's in a vacuum' yet they constantly fail to comprehend the premise.

No offense but I said intelligently. I'll explain each point to you so perhaps you will stop the verbal diarrhea.

• Explain how Luck isn't asked to do much more than RGIII essentially breaking down how having 564 attempts (Luck) is less of a burden than RGIII having 351 attempts, which happens to be the LOWEST number of attempts of ANY QB in the league who has at least 11 games played. Continuing on this point demonstrate how the Colts 21st ranked (yardage) rushing attack is more helpful than the Redskins 1st ranked rushing attack.

The Redskins do not have to rely on RGIII throwing more than his 25 attempts per game due to being able to maintain a balanced attack. The Redskins average more running plays per game than passing plays (32 rushes per game) while also being VERY efficient at running the ball (5.1 yards per carry). This prevents defenses from keying on the passing game and due to the number of running plays called actually forces defenses to put extra emphasis on defending the run. Players/schemes focused on stopping the run are less adept at stopping the pass and give advantageous looks to the QB.

On the flip side the Colts average 27 rushes a game and due it far less efficiently (3.9 yards per carry). By having an inefficient running game you force the QB to carry more of the offensive load and attack defenses who are focused on defending the pass.

Thus the point you were drawn to is that RGIII gets a lot of help not just directly from his team running the ball effectively but also indirectly by defenses being forced to stop the running game as it is the majority of the offensive gameplan. It would be impossible for you to argue that defensive sets focused on stopping the run are somehow equal to those focused on stopping the pass when comparing QB stats. This is why people are commenting that you are using stats in a vacuum without delving into why they look the way they do.

• Explain how Luck's 12.9 yards per completion mark is less impressive than RGIII's 12.5. Keep in mind that Luck has 75 more completions.

Facetious argument. I was using this to demonstrate that Luck throws less checkdowns, screens, short throws and more intermediate even with his increased workload. Easiest one to attack and not the best argument. By far the weakest of the three I posted.

• Explain why Luck is vastly more proficient at converting 3rd downs compared to RGIII. Continuing on this question explain why RGIII's yards per completion on 3rd and long is less than the yards to go.

Nothing really to argue here as I posted before. Luck is out of this world in terms of converting third and long while RGIII has the worst mark of any QB in recent history. The crux of this falls on offensive scheme but if you give RGIII the massive credit for being super efficient in the scheme you give him his lumps for it's failures.

Problem for RGIII is that the offense isn't suited for third and long distances. It needs the threat of the running game or defensives can key on the pass and take away the intermediate throws. This puts RGIII in a confounding decision matrix. He has to choose between forcing the ball downfield or checking down to players underneath.

As the numbers show the decision is the play it safe. Five percent success for 3rd and 10+ is an unacceptable number. Onside kick recoveries are more likely than RGIII completing a third and long with his arm.

[J-Mike88]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

No offense but I said intelligently.

You want to talk stats, numbers, let's go with some more of that here.
You talk about Luck slinging it 200 more times than RG3, having more of a "burden".

Whether one throws the ball 12 times a game more like Luck does than Griffin, or one throws it less, and runs for more yardage, the bottom line and the goal in football for any offense, QB, is what?
That's right, to score points, preferably touchdowns.

The Washington Redskins, even playing in a better division because I'm told the NFC is always the best, have scored 381 points, 45 touchdowns.
The Indianapolis Colts have scored 309 points, 34 touchdowns, in a dome with no weather elements unlike Washington.

Each defense has allowed 350-358 points, so pretty even on the opposite side of the ball, so nobody can use that as a crutch, excuse, reason.

It cracks me up when the anti-RG3 folks dismiss his work because he hasn't thrown it as much (even though Luck has only 2 more TD passes yet 14 more ints, and because the Redskins have such a great running game.

How great is it?
Who the hell is Afred Morris? Stud out of Florida Atlantic? You pegged him as an NFL star right? No.
The fact is his 4.7 average is fine. He has 1300 yards as the primary ball carrier there. Vick Ballard, and Donald Brown, have almost 1100 yards sharing the primary load there.

But it's Griffins 6.7 avg, 750 yards rushing that have been the catalyst for Washington, as opposing defenses and defensive coordinators will tell you.

Some people act like that doesn't mean anything.
Ask Viking fans if Griffin's legs, running mattered.

Passing stats favor Griffin.
Rushing stats favor Griffin.
Overall team scoring favors Griffin and the Redskins.
That's why he's the ROY.

[Trogdor]

Oh boy. I'm more than game to dissect numbers. Problem is you haven't brought any to the table to dissect. Do I really need to make the pro-RGIII argument as well as the pro-Luck one? I don't understand the premise here of comparing the Washington Redskins as a TEAM versus the Indianapolis Colts as a TEAM. If you meant to reply in the "Colts vs Redskins" Team of the Year thread I apologize for poking fun but it's clearly out of place.

I gave you easy talking points to combat and you ranted off-topic incoherently. I'll attempt to reel you back in though.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

The Washington Redskins, even playing in a better division because I'm told the NFC is always the best, have scored 381 points, 45 touchdowns.
The Indianapolis Colts have scored 309 points, 34 touchdowns, in a dome with no weather elements unlike Washington.

Team play means QB play? Lets just close this thread Russell Wilson wins.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

Each defense has allowed 350-358 points, so pretty even on the opposite side of the ball, so nobody can use that as a crutch, excuse, reason.

Agreed that the difference is minute. Advanced statistics (yards per play, weighted contribution, etc) favor the 'Skins as a better defense but that's splitting hairs.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

It cracks me up when the anti-RG3 folks dismiss his work because he hasn't thrown it as much (even though Luck has only 2 more TD passes yet 14 more ints, and because the Redskins have such a great running game.

Pointing out holes in the "perfect" player isn't the same as being "anti-RGIII". It has been stated by even the most stout Luck voters here that RGIII would be OROY most years. Not revisiting the attempts/td/efficiency argument. If you have a point to make rebutt the point in my previous post rather than attempting to rope in a bunch of disconnected points. No one is arguing that Luck is more efficient only MORE IMPORTANT to his team than RGIII.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

How great is it?
Who the hell is Afred Morris? Stud out of Florida Atlantic? You pegged him as an NFL star right? No.
The fact is his 4.7 average is fine. He has 1300 yards as the primary ball carrier there. Vick Ballard, and Donald Brown, have almost 1100 yards sharing the primary load there.

If you can't understand that the Redskins running game is MUCH more efficient than the Colts I don't know what to tell you. They are averaging almost 2 yards per carry more. If you don't believe that having the strongest running game in the NFL leads to additional openings in the passing game you don't understand the fundamentals of football.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

But it's Griffins 6.7 avg, 750 yards rushing that have been the catalyst for Washington, as opposing defenses and defensive coordinators will tell you.

Finally! You've made a solid point. RGIII has been impressive and without a doubt a nightmare for defensive coordinators.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

Passing stats favor Griffin.
Rushing stats favor Griffin.

And just like that you torch your momentum. Basic box score stats favor Griffin. He's efficient and managing his team excellently.

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

Overall team scoring favors Griffin and the Redskins.
That's why he's the ROY

Team scoring is not a directed correlated with QB play. If so the Vikings are lucky to have Christian Ponder playing at such a high level since obviously the Vikings scoring are solely on him.

[FUNBUNCHER]

If someone is going to argue that RGIII has the lowest number of pass attempts per minimum 11 games started, which is only 2 less than Russell Wilson BTW, a fair caveat would be to point out that Grif sat out the Cleveland game. Just saying.

Also if RG3 wasn't in the backfield with Morris, and wasn't nearly as much of a run threat to opposing defenses as Morris was, our rookie RB would be closer to a season high 1K rushing yards for 16 games, instead of 1500.

You have to ask yourself, why is the Skins run game so productive?
And if the QB is the reason why, then Robert has almost as much value to the Skins offense on the ground as he does through the air.

You might say his 'value', or the 'burden' of the offense rests almost entirely on how successful he is as a scrambler and a thrower.

EDIT: Team scoring IS directly correlated to QB play.
It's not a one-to-one correlation, but that's a far cry from implying they aren't related at all.

[jsagan77]

I stop reading after the first lines of your posts anymore because they just you make the most stupid obscure points that it completely discredits you. You keep acting like you're smart but it's obvious you just don't get it so I don't even know why I try-but I will one more time.

The skins run game is inflated by Griffins running success. W/o factoring his runs in they'e rushed a whopping 7 more times than the colts all season (not factoring in Lucks carries either) and have averaged a whopping 19.4 ypg from their RB's on average of a little less than 1 yard (.8) per carry than the Colts RB's. So this BS that Griffin's rushing attack is 'so much better than Lucks' is complete garbage (which suits this place I guess). The reason the skins run game is so good is because of Griff and the reason their offense is so efficient is because of Griff, and the reason their TO differential is oustanding is because of Griff. This team is who it is because of Griff.

Guess what else, if Luck didn't turn the ball over 30 times maybe the colts could run the ball in the fourth quarter instead of inflating Lucks stats against crappy secondarys and prevent defenses.

I don't know how Luck can even put his pants on.

Originally Posted by Trogdor

No offense but I said intelligently. I'll explain each point to you so perhaps you will stop the verbal diarrhea.

• Explain how Luck isn't asked to do much more than RGIII essentially breaking down how having 564 attempts (Luck) is less of a burden than RGIII having 351 attempts, which happens to be the LOWEST number of attempts of ANY QB in the league who has at least 11 games played. Continuing on this point demonstrate how the Colts 21st ranked (yardage) rushing attack is more helpful than the Redskins 1st ranked rushing attack.

The Redskins do not have to rely on RGIII throwing more than his 25 attempts per game due to being able to maintain a balanced attack. The Redskins average more running plays per game than passing plays (32 rushes per game) while also being VERY efficient at running the ball (5.1 yards per carry). This prevents defenses from keying on the passing game and due to the number of running plays called actually forces defenses to put extra emphasis on defending the run. Players/schemes focused on stopping the run are less adept at stopping the pass and give advantageous looks to the QB.

On the flip side the Colts average 27 rushes a game and due it far less efficiently (3.9 yards per carry). By having an inefficient running game you force the QB to carry more of the offensive load and attack defenses who are focused on defending the pass.

Thus the point you were drawn to is that RGIII gets a lot of help not just directly from his team running the ball effectively but also indirectly by defenses being forced to stop the running game as it is the majority of the offensive gameplan. It would be impossible for you to argue that defensive sets focused on stopping the run are somehow equal to those focused on stopping the pass when comparing QB stats. This is why people are commenting that you are using stats in a vacuum without delving into why they look the way they do.

• Explain how Luck's 12.9 yards per completion mark is less impressive than RGIII's 12.5. Keep in mind that Luck has 75 more completions.

Facetious argument. I was using this to demonstrate that Luck throws less checkdowns, screens, short throws and more intermediate even with his increased workload. Easiest one to attack and not the best argument. By far the weakest of the three I posted.

• Explain why Luck is vastly more proficient at converting 3rd downs compared to RGIII. Continuing on this question explain why RGIII's yards per completion on 3rd and long is less than the yards to go.

Nothing really to argue here as I posted before. Luck is out of this world in terms of converting third and long while RGIII has the worst mark of any QB in recent history. The crux of this falls on offensive scheme but if you give RGIII the massive credit for being super efficient in the scheme you give him his lumps for it's failures.

Problem for RGIII is that the offense isn't suited for third and long distances. It needs the threat of the running game or defensives can key on the pass and take away the intermediate throws. This puts RGIII in a confounding decision matrix. He has to choose between forcing the ball downfield or checking down to players underneath.

As the numbers show the decision is the play it safe. Five percent success for 3rd and 10+ is an unacceptable number. Onside kick recoveries are more likely than RGIII completing a third and long with his arm.

[jsagan77]

Funny how when the skins were 4-6 the biggest things people point to is the W/L record, and now that the records are relatively even, the team accomplishments don't matter. Hilarious.

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Oh boy. I'm more than game to dissect numbers. Problem is you haven't brought any to the table to dissect. Do I really need to make the pro-RGIII argument as well as the pro-Luck one? I don't understand the premise here of comparing the Washington Redskins as a TEAM versus the Indianapolis Colts as a TEAM. If you meant to reply in the "Colts vs Redskins" Team of the Year thread I apologize for poking fun but it's clearly out of place.

I gave you easy talking points to combat and you ranted off-topic incoherently. I'll attempt to reel you back in though.



Team play means QB play? Lets just close this thread Russell Wilson wins.



Agreed that the difference is minute. Advanced statistics (yards per play, weighted contribution, etc) favor the 'Skins as a better defense but that's splitting hairs.



Pointing out holes in the "perfect" player isn't the same as being "anti-RGIII". It has been stated by even the most stout Luck voters here that RGIII would be OROY most years. Not revisiting the attempts/td/efficiency argument. If you have a point to make rebutt the point in my previous post rather than attempting to rope in a bunch of disconnected points. No one is arguing that Luck is more efficient only MORE IMPORTANT to his team than RGIII.



If you can't understand that the Redskins running game is MUCH more efficient than the Colts I don't know what to tell you. They are averaging almost 2 yards per carry more. If you don't believe that having the strongest running game in the NFL leads to additional openings in the passing game you don't understand the fundamentals of football.



Finally! You've made a solid point. RGIII has been impressive and without a doubt a nightmare for defensive coordinators.



And just like that you torch your momentum. Basic box score stats favor Griffin. He's efficient and managing his team excellently.



Team scoring is not a directed correlated with QB play. If so the Vikings are lucky to have Christian Ponder playing at such a high level since obviously the Vikings scoring are solely on him.

[falloutboy14]

Averaging .8 ypc over the course of the season is very significant imo. If the Colts rushed for .8 ypc over the course of the season, that would move their ranking from 23rd to 6th. I also think that that to put the onus of their RB success on RG3 is a leap.

[jsagan77]

No, it's not significant, 19.4 extra yards per game is not significant. You're adding significance to it using a relative scale.

[jsagan77]

And most of he Atl game.

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

If someone is going to argue that RGIII has the lowest number of pass attempts per minimum 11 games started, which is only 2 less than Russell Wilson BTW, a fair caveat would be to point out that Grif sat out the Cleveland game. Just saying.

Also if RG3 wasn't in the backfield with Morris, and wasn't nearly as much of a run threat to opposing defenses as Morris was, our rookie RB would be closer to a season high 1K rushing yards for 16 games, instead of 1500.

You have to ask yourself, why is the Skins run game so productive?
And if the QB is the reason why, then Robert has almost as much value to the Skins offense on the ground as he does through the air.

You might say his 'value', or the 'burden' of the offense rests almost entirely on how successful he is as a scrambler and a thrower.

EDIT: Team scoring IS directly correlated to QB play.
It's not a one-to-one correlation, but that's a far cry from implying they aren't related at all.

[xjxdarren]

Originally Posted by jsagan77

No, it's not significant, 19.4 extra yards per game is not significant. You're adding significance to it using a relative scale.

That's the single most egregiously flagrant and proposterous statement in today's sports world.

Tell that to teams who only needed that 20 yard to march down the field into field gold range to tie or win the game; tell that to the center who was called for a blocking foul only because the the tip on his one heel was touching the semi-circle; tell that to that Milorad Cavic who lost to Phelps in Beijing by just that much; tell that to the striker who had his potential equaliser disallowed only because his forearm was in front of the last defender.

Go back to school, don't shoot kids though.

[AntoinCD]

Ok, so for all you guys who are putting the fact the Redskins are a top running team on Griffin, you do realise that Mike Shanahan has pretty much ALWAYS had a top rushing attack? It is his scheme, also ran by his son (now in Washington as well) and long time Shanahan friend/cooridinator Gary Kubiak in Houston.

Here's a fun game for all you crazy kids;

Name the can't miss RB prospect from the draft who everyone knew was going to set the league on fire

Terrell Davis?
Clinton Portis?
Alfred Morris?
Arian Foster?
Tatum Bell?
Mike Anderson?
Reuben Droughns?
Roy Helu?
Olandis Gary?
Steve Slaton?
Tim Hightower?

Come one...it's an easy one

Mike Shanahan has been able to produce thousand yard backs from virtually any one cut runner he wants. The Redskins rushing attack is helped by RG3, but let's not just ignore history and Shanahan's success by saying this is all on RG3 when it's clearly not

[FUNBUNCHER]

Kyle has implied the reason their running the zone option is because they don't have the ideal parts on the Oline to run a ZBS. RGIII on the move opens up holes and cutback lanes because of the attention he attracts from defenders.

Alfred Morris is a find no doubt, but I don't think he'd be a 1500 yard back as a rookie without RG3 lined up in the backfield with him.

[njx9]

well, i've seen the light. because of the endless horse-beating, it's clear to me that rg3 is literally the greatest qb in nfl history and andrew luck should probably be cut tomorrow. i'm not really even sure how luck made an nfl roster. i mean, he's actually worse than a hypothetical qb with blaine gabbert's courage, patrick ramsey's accuracy, ken dorsey's arm strength and jamarcus russell's intelligence. he's just lucky that the rest of his team is completely responsible for bailing him out on every throw and in every game, or the colts would probably be winless. if only rg3 had as much talent surrounding him... and that's not even talking about how much better the colts coaching staff is.

but really, how anyone can think andrew luck is playing any better than a random fan the colts might pull out of the stands is beyond me. he's the physical incarnation of terrible qb play.