Comments on: Pros & Cons of Brett Being a Jet http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/ Ranting and Raving about the Gang Green Sun, 12 Feb 2012 08:20:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bent http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91096 Bent Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:14:24 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91096 Most national media types have ruled out Favre going to the Jets because they are not a contender. I agree with you that decent QB play would certainly make us a very good team, but why would Favre share our assessment of the Jets rather than the widely held one? Therefore, I am not convinced it could happen as you, even if it should (which I am not convinced of either - even with Favre's durability he is a risk at that age). I liked the analogy, but loads of people here would say that the same analogy could equally be applied to Chad or Clemens...think how much better they could perform with just an adequate offensive line. I do agree our QB play must improve. How that happens is not my decision, thankfully. Most national media types have ruled out Favre going to the Jets because they are not a contender. I agree with you that decent QB play would certainly make us a very good team, but why would Favre share our assessment of the Jets rather than the widely held one? Therefore, I am not convinced it could happen as you, even if it should (which I am not convinced of either – even with Favre’s durability he is a risk at that age).

I liked the analogy, but loads of people here would say that the same analogy could equally be applied to Chad or Clemens…think how much better they could perform with just an adequate offensive line.

I do agree our QB play must improve. How that happens is not my decision, thankfully.

]]> By: SackDance99 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91088 SackDance99 Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:41:01 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91088 Bent, but you're not factoring in what Favre would do for the running game. Favre just can't be blitzed effectively. His ability to throw with pace off of his back leg, quick release (with pace) and good (if not great) mobility in the pocket, make blitzing him unsound. So, 8 men in the box against Favre is suicide. Against Chad, it's a challenge to him to pass deep. We saw defenses time and agian last year stack the line and it was ugly. KC will be blitzed relentlessly because his defense recognition and pocket poise are questionable. The defense just can't get too gimmicky with Favre. The Jets, who were already decent at running right up the middle, with Faneca, who is a great run-blocker, would just kill teams with power running right up the gut. Favre is just a better QB in almost every facet of the game. In fact, it's his supreme confidence that gets him in trouble; he thinks he can complete passes to anyone anywhere on the field. But, if Schott/Mangini can have him buy into the program, which would likely prolong Favre's career by not making him toss over 500 attempts, the Jets offense could be dominant. FO's numbers tend to bear out two of my central arguments about the Jets, for the most part, this decade. The offense is much worse than the defense. In particular, the Jets' redzone offense is awful. Favre is a quick fix for both problems. We just don't know what superior QB play could do for the Jets because we've seen it so rarely--1998 and 2002. I know it's not a perfect comparison, but here I go. We all knew that Willie Randolph was an inferior manager. But, we had no idea what just a competent manager could do for the Mets. Well, 9 wins in a row and a record-breaking pitching performance later, we're getting a clue. But, to me, swapping Randolph for Manuel is nowhere near the magnitude of change swapping Chad/KC for Favre. It's like swapping Art Howe for a combination of Sparky, Leyland, La Russa, Stengel and Weaver. And, I disagree with your assessment on what the Pack would take. They need to get Favre out of the NFC and, moreover, they need to trade Favre to a team that the Pack will not play. In the AFC, the Jets are probably the best team without a bona fide NFL QB. The Jets are a choice that would fit both Favre's desire to go to a team in contention (Faneca and Favre...are you kidding me?) and the Pack's desire not to see Brett against the Pack, unless it's in the Super Bowl. A 3rd rounder and maybe a conditional pick in '10 might just get it done. This probably won't happen; but, now, I am certain that it could and shame on Mangini and Tannenbaum if they don't try to get it done. Bent, but you’re not factoring in what Favre would do for the running game. Favre just can’t be blitzed effectively. His ability to throw with pace off of his back leg, quick release (with pace) and good (if not great) mobility in the pocket, make blitzing him unsound. So, 8 men in the box against Favre is suicide. Against Chad, it’s a challenge to him to pass deep. We saw defenses time and agian last year stack the line and it was ugly. KC will be blitzed relentlessly because his defense recognition and pocket poise are questionable. The defense just can’t get too gimmicky with Favre. The Jets, who were already decent at running right up the middle, with Faneca, who is a great run-blocker, would just kill teams with power running right up the gut. Favre is just a better QB in almost every facet of the game. In fact, it’s his supreme confidence that gets him in trouble; he thinks he can complete passes to anyone anywhere on the field. But, if Schott/Mangini can have him buy into the program, which would likely prolong Favre’s career by not making him toss over 500 attempts, the Jets offense could be dominant.

FO’s numbers tend to bear out two of my central arguments about the Jets, for the most part, this decade. The offense is much worse than the defense. In particular, the Jets’ redzone offense is awful. Favre is a quick fix for both problems. We just don’t know what superior QB play could do for the Jets because we’ve seen it so rarely–1998 and 2002. I know it’s not a perfect comparison, but here I go. We all knew that Willie Randolph was an inferior manager. But, we had no idea what just a competent manager could do for the Mets. Well, 9 wins in a row and a record-breaking pitching performance later, we’re getting a clue. But, to me, swapping Randolph for Manuel is nowhere near the magnitude of change swapping Chad/KC for Favre. It’s like swapping Art Howe for a combination of Sparky, Leyland, La Russa, Stengel and Weaver.

And, I disagree with your assessment on what the Pack would take. They need to get Favre out of the NFC and, moreover, they need to trade Favre to a team that the Pack will not play. In the AFC, the Jets are probably the best team without a bona fide NFL QB. The Jets are a choice that would fit both Favre’s desire to go to a team in contention (Faneca and Favre…are you kidding me?) and the Pack’s desire not to see Brett against the Pack, unless it’s in the Super Bowl. A 3rd rounder and maybe a conditional pick in ’10 might just get it done.

This probably won’t happen; but, now, I am certain that it could and shame on Mangini and Tannenbaum if they don’t try to get it done.

]]> By: Bent http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91069 Bent Tue, 15 Jul 2008 07:18:55 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91069 That's OK. I am not arguing with what you said, just thought I would throw it into the discussion. The numbers have indeed got worse but would 1.8% better completion percentage, 1 TD and 3 less interceptions really be worth all that money and a first day pick? (Note...that is not a third rounder anymore so your Schlegel comment does not apply). I know Favre has a lot more yards, but that is at least partly based on the fact they expect the Jets to run the ball a lot more. That’s OK. I am not arguing with what you said, just thought I would throw it into the discussion.

The numbers have indeed got worse but would 1.8% better completion percentage, 1 TD and 3 less interceptions really be worth all that money and a first day pick? (Note…that is not a third rounder anymore so your Schlegel comment does not apply).

I know Favre has a lot more yards, but that is at least partly based on the fact they expect the Jets to run the ball a lot more.

]]> By: SackDance99 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91063 SackDance99 Tue, 15 Jul 2008 03:59:07 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91063 Actually, seanmac's numbers must have been preliminary. While I think KC's projection for 2008 is still over-optimistic; it's not great: 57.7% completion pct., 20 TDs, 17 INTs for 3,099 yards and a -25.2% DVOA. Judging from the poor DVOA, I would expect fewer yards, a worse completion pct. and more INTs. Chad's overall projection is better: 62.6% completion pct., 2,876 yards, 21 TDs, 16 INTs and a -15.6% DVOA; but, I don't think anyone thinks Chad's numbers are so much better to declare him a clear winner for the job based on FO's projection. Favre's 2008 projection is stellar: 64.4 completion pct., 4,032 yards, 22 TDs, 13 INTs and a +23.6% DVOA. So, FO's numbers are a KO, Favre would far outperform either Chad or KC. Actually, seanmac’s numbers must have been preliminary. While I think KC’s projection for 2008 is still over-optimistic; it’s not great: 57.7% completion pct., 20 TDs, 17 INTs for 3,099 yards and a -25.2% DVOA. Judging from the poor DVOA, I would expect fewer yards, a worse completion pct. and more INTs. Chad’s overall projection is better: 62.6% completion pct., 2,876 yards, 21 TDs, 16 INTs and a -15.6% DVOA; but, I don’t think anyone thinks Chad’s numbers are so much better to declare him a clear winner for the job based on FO’s projection. Favre’s 2008 projection is stellar: 64.4 completion pct., 4,032 yards, 22 TDs, 13 INTs and a +23.6% DVOA. So, FO’s numbers are a KO, Favre would far outperform either Chad or KC.

]]> By: SackDance99 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91049 SackDance99 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:51:41 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91049 Bent, but forecasts are inherently subjective, while assessing past performance is objective. Objectively, Favre was a far superior QB last season to either Chad or KC...that's what the whole "replacement level" analysis is supposed to do, put all the QBs on a level playing field. Subjectively, in FO's view (which I do not share), KC will have a great season, be better than Chad and, likely, not be materially worse than Favre. I just do not believe that FO's analysis is valid because it projects that KC will have his best season in football since high school. There's something screwy and statistically invalid in FO's analysis. Or, stated differently, there's no factual or statistical precedent for the type of improvement that FO is projecting for KC. I would love to see a single example where an inexperienced QB with the worst numbers in football magically becomes a league leader the next season. Play at just the replacement level for KC would be a huge improvement; FO is projecting far better than that and I just don't think that will happen, do you? Also, I think FO is predicting that KC will out play Big Ben. Do you think that will happen? And, even if you did, it would not be based upon stats, it would be based on the type of fuzzy logic, hunches and feelings that most stats guys eschew. I just want stat geeks like the guys at FO to be consistent. Stick to the stats and forget the assumptions. Bent, but forecasts are inherently subjective, while assessing past performance is objective. Objectively, Favre was a far superior QB last season to either Chad or KC…that’s what the whole “replacement level” analysis is supposed to do, put all the QBs on a level playing field. Subjectively, in FO’s view (which I do not share), KC will have a great season, be better than Chad and, likely, not be materially worse than Favre. I just do not believe that FO’s analysis is valid because it projects that KC will have his best season in football since high school. There’s something screwy and statistically invalid in FO’s analysis. Or, stated differently, there’s no factual or statistical precedent for the type of improvement that FO is projecting for KC. I would love to see a single example where an inexperienced QB with the worst numbers in football magically becomes a league leader the next season. Play at just the replacement level for KC would be a huge improvement; FO is projecting far better than that and I just don’t think that will happen, do you? Also, I think FO is predicting that KC will out play Big Ben. Do you think that will happen? And, even if you did, it would not be based upon stats, it would be based on the type of fuzzy logic, hunches and feelings that most stats guys eschew. I just want stat geeks like the guys at FO to be consistent. Stick to the stats and forget the assumptions.

]]> By: TOON2388 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91040 TOON2388 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:42:50 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91040 I was in the Hoosier Dome for that game in 1998 - talk about bad memories. I was in the Hoosier Dome for that game in 1998 – talk about bad memories.

]]> By: Bent http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91027 Bent Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:40:28 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91027 If you're going to (indirectly) quote PFP, Sack, remember that seanmac said that, in PFP, KC and Chad both had pretty good forecasts for the 2008 season, so based on their numbers I strongly doubt that the projected upgrade (if any) would be worth the overall cost. If you’re going to (indirectly) quote PFP, Sack, remember that seanmac said that, in PFP, KC and Chad both had pretty good forecasts for the 2008 season, so based on their numbers I strongly doubt that the projected upgrade (if any) would be worth the overall cost.

]]> By: Bent http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91026 Bent Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:36:09 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91026 Capwise, the money saved by cutting Chad would be less than $2m if memory serves. But yes, I'd imagine that Favre joining another team (whoever it is) could depend on him reworking his deal. Plus if they traded for him, they could theoretically cut him or trade him again at any point with no accelerated cap hit, so the long term financial risk is lower than a mid-priced free agent. Capwise, the money saved by cutting Chad would be less than $2m if memory serves. But yes, I’d imagine that Favre joining another team (whoever it is) could depend on him reworking his deal.

Plus if they traded for him, they could theoretically cut him or trade him again at any point with no accelerated cap hit, so the long term financial risk is lower than a mid-priced free agent.

]]> By: SackDance99 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91021 SackDance99 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:09:24 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91021 I saw this fun fact from today's NYT article about Favre: According to “Pro Football Prospectus 2008,” Favre was 1,437 yards better than a “replacement level” quarterback (a rookie or an off-the-rack backup) last season — about 90 yards a game I do not have the numbers for Chad and KC, but I'll guess that both played somewhere south of "replacement level" last season. So, wouldn't Favre be a huge upgrade? I mean, at least, 90 extra yards a game is a lot, right? Just more fuel on this fire..... I saw this fun fact from today’s NYT article about Favre:

According to “Pro Football Prospectus 2008,” Favre was 1,437 yards better than a “replacement level” quarterback (a rookie or an off-the-rack backup) last season — about 90 yards a game

I do not have the numbers for Chad and KC, but I’ll guess that both played somewhere south of “replacement level” last season. So, wouldn’t Favre be a huge upgrade? I mean, at least, 90 extra yards a game is a lot, right? Just more fuel on this fire…..

]]> By: SackDance99 http://www.thejetsblog.com/2008/07/12/pros-cons-of-brett-being-a-jet/#comment-91016 SackDance99 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:54:17 +0000 http://www.thejetsblog.com/?p=4559#comment-91016 Guys, my point was not made well. If in '98 the Jets had gotten Favre, he would've been obtained to start from day 1, so I wasn't comparing Vinny to Favre directly. Their circumstances are different. Vinny was a journeyman and a question mark when he joined the Jets at 35 (he started for the Jets in '01 at 38, by the way). Favre would only go to a team that he would start for, so I projected that Favre would've been playing from day 1 and maybe would've won one of those 2 games. Plus, he beats the Colts in week 11...why no mention of that game? I've said this on another thread. But, the Jets would save some money by trading or cutting Chad (why not cut Chad in order to sign Favre?) and, then, the rest of Favre's contract could be redone in a cap friendly manner. Tannenbaum is the NFL's best capologist, so I don't think the cap is an issue (plus, what about the uncapped year? If that happens, you'll see a lot of contracts redone so cash is front-loaded in the uncapped year. Knowing Tannenbaum, if there is an uncapped year, the next capped year we will see the Jets ridiculously under the cap). Guys, my point was not made well. If in ’98 the Jets had gotten Favre, he would’ve been obtained to start from day 1, so I wasn’t comparing Vinny to Favre directly. Their circumstances are different. Vinny was a journeyman and a question mark when he joined the Jets at 35 (he started for the Jets in ’01 at 38, by the way). Favre would only go to a team that he would start for, so I projected that Favre would’ve been playing from day 1 and maybe would’ve won one of those 2 games. Plus, he beats the Colts in week 11…why no mention of that game?

I’ve said this on another thread. But, the Jets would save some money by trading or cutting Chad (why not cut Chad in order to sign Favre?) and, then, the rest of Favre’s contract could be redone in a cap friendly manner. Tannenbaum is the NFL’s best capologist, so I don’t think the cap is an issue (plus, what about the uncapped year? If that happens, you’ll see a lot of contracts redone so cash is front-loaded in the uncapped year. Knowing Tannenbaum, if there is an uncapped year, the next capped year we will see the Jets ridiculously under the cap).

]]>