Easy there, Berg's.I voted for Mac. I don't know what his rookie-season ceiling is, but I do know that Cam can't throw a fucking football.
Also, there's no apostrophe in Pats.
Ditto. I think we see MJ in the first half of the season sometime, and he takes the job for the rest of the way. Cam just seems to have really lost a lot of his passing ability, but his mobility, and the fact that they should have a good running game, makes him a fairly safe to start a couple/few games. But I'd rather see MJ in there this year, rather than sit the entire season. I voted other based on that.My "preferred starter" is Mac. But I don't have an issue letting him start the season watching for a game or three.
Not just Allen, but also guys like Carr and Wentz and Goff. Lamar was pretty bad as a passer as a rookie. You can argue about whether those guys qualify as "good," but there's no disputing they were much worse as rookies than they were later.Well, It depends on the stat you use, but it's worth pointing out that, in ANY/A, of the three 1st round rookie QBs last season who saw significant playing time (Tua, Burrow, Herbert), each of them was either as good as or better than Cam. And, that of the QBs that were worse as a rookie than Cam was last year, they were/are just bad QBs, period, besides Allen (and maybe Daniel Jones, I'm not sure about him.) rookieJones's competition isn't Brady, it's Cam.
I think we can agree he was in that range with most stats in 2020.In EPA/play, which includes rushing production, Cam was 25th in the NFL last year at 0.063.
Cam had a rough 2016, but he was basically average in 2017 (16th in EPA/play) and 2018 (17th), his most recent performances outside of last season (since he only played 2 games in 2019). So I do think it's possible that he's still roughly average. Moreover, I don't think the 25th-best QB performance last year-with that horrible supporting cast-is inconsistent with being averageish either. We saw Brady slip from .272 EPA/play in his MVP year of 2017 to .207 in 2018 to .109 in 2019 with those garbage receivers, only to bounce back to .280 last year in much better circumstances. How much do we think having to throw to flotsam and jetsam depressed Cam's numbers last year? If it was a full .100 (the difference between Brady's 2018 and 2019), that puts him right around league average, or at least medianish.Cam Newton is not an average NFL quarterback. Out of all QBs with at least 320 snaps at QB between 2016 and 2020, he ranks 38th in EPA/play, at 0.051. If you pull up the minimum to 2000 snaps, he ranks 18th... out of 20, with only Joe Flacco and Eli Manning being beneath him. Reduce the minimum to 1500 snaps, and he ranks 27th, above the aforementioned two schmucks and Blake Bortles. 26th is Mitch Trubisky. 25th, Case Keenum.
And that downside goes away if Cam sucks for 4 games, is replaced by Mac, and then Mac struggles through the next 4-6 games?I'm part of the silent minority. Cam should start the season and show what he can do with the (vastly) improved cast of skill players. There is huge downside to starting Mac on a veteran team and watching him struggle for 4-6 games and being forced to bench him as a result.
Same thing Belichick has said himself over and over. Players get better by playing. Far more than they get better by watching somebody else play.I'm reminded of Bill Parcells' decision to start Drew Bledsoe over (was it Tony Eason?) Many of the same worries were present then. His take was that you learn by playing. It seems as valid today as it did then.
It was Scott secules with Zo as the backup.I'm reminded of Bill Parcells' decision to start Drew Bledsoe over (was it Tony Eason?) Many of the same worries were present then. His take was that you learn by playing. It seems as valid today as it did then.
This and also I’m fine by Cam starting off the season. I think Cam has looked better in both practice and in the games so far. I believe it is his job to lose. Seeing Mac pick things up as quickly as he did reminds me that there is so much that we don’t know as outsiders going into the draft. Work ethic and intelligence is huge for QB. I’m reminded of Sark talking about Mac and how Sark would be able to run anything he threw at him and understand how to pick apart each defense in the SEC.I want whatever's in the best interest of Mac Jones's development -- I just don't know what that is.
There is the issue of his contract being laden with incentives that he would not reach as a backup. He clearly wants to start.Every NFL player would prefer to be the starter. But Cam would be in a sweet spot as the backup to Mac Jones, if he looks at the long view.
- Cam has already made crazy money (over $125 million)
- Cam has already won an MVP award
- Cam has already been a 3x pro bowler and 1x all-pro
- Cam has already led a team to the Super Bowl
- Cam's brains aren't scrambled and he seems like his body is in pretty good physical shape (especially for a football player that's taken some huge hits)
It would be a pretty sweet gig to be a well-paid veteran backup with the Patriots. He'd likely get to run some specialty plays (and thus play more than typical backups), the guys love him, the coaches love him, he could extend his career, but without taking all the punishment that QBs normally do, so when he retires he could retire in pretty good health.
That wouldn't be the worst path for him at this point, to be honest. Though obviously he'd rather be a starter in the NFL.
This is all correct. That was Cam's absolute best performance in a year+, and he still didn't outperform the rookie. On the other hand, that Eagles lineup and effort was an absolute joke. Cam was out there with our top-ten (5?) offensive line in the NFL, against a group of backup defenders. It's hard to take anything at all away from last night.Well, tonight was the best I've seen Cam look as a Patriot. And Jones was better.
Yup. After Cam exited the game my feeling was he'd pretty much ended the debate with a strong performance that Mac would be hard pressed to match. Then Mac came in and played at a similar level on a more even competitive ground (Cam played with starters against a whole lot of Eagles backups). Cam played well enough that he's probably still in the lead to start in Bill's mind, but to me the tie has to go to the guy you have a long term investment in.This is all correct. That was Cam's absolute best performance in a year+, and he still didn't outperform the rookie. On the other hand, that Eagles lineup and effort was an absolute joke. Cam was out there with our top-ten (5?) offensive line in the NFL, against a group of backup defenders. It's hard to take anything at all away from last night.
Totally agree. Just a quick note on the Eagles… they are super top-heavy. The bottom of their roster is a wasteland. Now I want to make a joke about tops and bottoms but nothing good comes to mind.This is all correct. That was Cam's absolute best performance in a year+, and he still didn't outperform the rookie. On the other hand, that Eagles lineup and effort was an absolute joke. Cam was out there with our top-ten (5?) offensive line in the NFL, against a group of backup defenders. It's hard to take anything at all away from last night.
Mac looks so comfortable already. He doesn’t hang onto the ball forever like so many young QBs do. Three step drop and out.Yup. After Cam exited the game my feeling was he'd pretty much ended the debate with a strong performance that Mac would be hard pressed to match. Then Mac came in and played at a similar level on a more even competitive ground (Cam played with starters against a whole lot of Eagles backups). Cam played well enough that he's probably still in the lead to start in Bill's mind, but to me the tie has to go to the guy you have a long term investment in.
I also thought even when Cam made good throws yesterday there was still this laboured motion, man, I don't know, things just seem to flow easier with Mac under center.
It is early but you and @EL Jeffe sure look like you were right. In particular I want to see him vs when a defense changes their pre-snap to post-snap looks. Let's see him vs non-vanilla stuff. That is probably my biggest concern with him going into the year. Nitpicky but it is an important aspect of the job.We haven't seen Mac in a real NFL game yet so the jury is still out. But I'm very happy that all my gushing about him during last season and wanting him on the Pats has at least shown to not be totally nuts.
For sure - he has a lot to prove still. He hasn't even faced a team's #1 defense in a preseason game. So a long way to go. But all the things I saw in him last year have shown up so far - quick processing, good decision-making, good awareness and movement in the pocket, a tiny bit of running ability when needed, a highly accurate arm, and definitely enough (though not elite, but good enough) arm strength to hit guys at all levels.It is early but you and @EL Jeffe sure look like you were right. In particular I want to see him vs when a defense changes their pre-snap to post-snap looks. Let's see him vs non-vanilla stuff. That is probably my biggest concern with him going into the year. Nitpicky but it is an important aspect of the job.
Yes, we certainly can't rule out the possibility that Mac turns out to be an absolute potato (although, I feel quite confident in saying that he's just not going to be remotely close to Rosen or Haskins), but the point of the conversation isn't what his floor is, but what his ceiling as a rookie is, particularly when compared to what Cam's ceiling as a 10-year vet is, as this team isn't getting anywhere with either Newton or Jones playing at their floor. But I think it can be agreed that within the past ten years that there absolutely have been rookie performances that have exceeded what can be reasonably expected out of Newton playing at his ceiling, and you just have to go to last year to see one of them, nevermind going back to 2012 or whenever. The "error bars" for a rookie QB can extend into the top 10 on rare occasions, and do not infrequently get into the "above average" area.Not just Allen, but also guys like Carr and Wentz and Goff. Lamar was pretty bad as a passer as a rookie. You can argue about whether those guys qualify as "good," but there's no disputing they were much worse as rookies than they were later.
And of course, we can't rule out that Mac becomes another Rosen or Haskins or Sanchez or Gabbert or whoever at this point in his career. So you can't dismiss those data points either.
I think we can agree he was in that range with most stats in 2020.
Cam had a rough 2016, but he was basically average in 2017 (16th in EPA/play) and 2018 (17th), his most recent performances outside of last season (since he only played 2 games in 2019). So I do think it's possible that he's still roughly average. Moreover, I don't think the 25th-best QB performance last year-with that horrible supporting cast-is inconsistent with being averageish either. We saw Brady slip from .272 EPA/play in his MVP year of 2017 to .207 in 2018 to .109 in 2019 with those garbage receivers, only to bounce back to .280 last year in much better circumstances. How much do we think having to throw to flotsam and jetsam depressed Cam's numbers last year? If it was a full .100 (the difference between Brady's 2018 and 2019), that puts him right around league average, or at least medianish.
I don't think "amazing" is the right word to use here. Awesome, great, sweet? Sure, but not amazing. "Amazing" is a sixth-round pick being the best QB in NFL history. We are talking about a guy who was at the head of what was arguably the best offense in the history of college football and statistically outperformed 2019 Joe "Consensus 1st Overall Pick" Burrow (who was throwing to such scrubs as Justin "Should Have Been RotY" Jefferson and Ja'Marr "Picked Above Smith and Waddle" Chase) on almost everything but volume. Not that volume doesn't matter, but Jones didn't get games against Utah State and Georgia Southern to inflate his rate/efficiency stats either. If, ten years from now, Jones is clearly the best out of the five first rounders, I really don't think you'd see all that many people having been amazed by it. How high would one have to be on the other guys, among whom is a FCS QB with one season of work under his belt and another QB who played at BYU against BYU opponents, to be amazed at Jones ending up as the best?I'm sorry but wouldn't it be amazing if Mac Jones turned out to be the best QB drafted in his class? I know that's wishful thinking, but all I've seen of the guy both in college and so far with the Pats is good stuff.
Thank you so much for this analysis. A really great post.Yes, we certainly can't rule out the possibility that Mac turns out to be an absolute potato (although, I feel quite confident in saying that he's just not going to be remotely close to Rosen or Haskins), but the point of the conversation isn't what his floor is, but what his ceiling as a rookie is, particularly when compared to what Cam's ceiling as a 10-year vet is, as this team isn't getting anywhere with either Newton or Jones playing at their floor. But I think it can be agreed that within the past ten years that there absolutely have been rookie performances that have exceeded what can be reasonably expected out of Newton playing at his ceiling, and you just have to go to last year to see one of them, nevermind going back to 2012 or whenever. The "error bars" for a rookie QB can extend into the top 10 on rare occasions, and do not infrequently get into the "above average" area.
(And I use EPA because A. it's just the best stat for raw production that exists, really, and B. it's quite favorable to Cam, as it (rightly) includes and values his rushing ability.)
I was curious, so I had my brother, who knows how to do this sort of thing, scrape the data to isolate Cam's passing from his running over that stretch. This doesn't include his rushing production on scrambles (but rather designed runs), which would rightly raise up his efficiency on dropbacks, but I think it serves to illustrate two things. The first thing is that Cam is still a very, very effective rusher; ~0.1 EPA/rush is absurdly efficient for a runner, something that running backs practically never achieve. (Which is kind of why the "Lamar Jackson is a running back" thing is, outside of the racism, really funny. Lamar Jackson is just so much more effective at running the ball, as a result of his abilities as a quarterback, than any running back in existence that he kind of can't even be a running back.) The second thing is that Newton, purely as a passer, was just putrid. If you want to bump him up a full 0.100, as a passer he'd rank close to Minshew last year. And I don't think you can really do that, as he was passing with incredibly low volume last year in an environment that was tilted heavily towards offenses, probably as a result of pandemic disruptions.
View attachment 43598
Now, obviously it's quite unfair to not factor in the genuinely positive value that Cam brings as a runner, especially when comparing him with what Jones could bring, seeing as we can be reasonably confident that Jones wouldn't/won't be getting over a hundred designed runs this season. I don't think you're wrong when you say that being the 25th-best QB when forced to give Damiere fucking Byrd 18% of the team's targets isn't necessarily inconsistent with being average-ish, and I would actually take Newton over every QB over him until you get to Burrow at 18th (except for maybe but probably not Goff), but that is still primarily derived from his running ability. He has not been good, or even close to average, at throwing the ball for five years. It's really a question of what threshold he has to reach as a passer for his running ability to take his value the rest of the way towards average.
However, philosophically I'll take 100 points of passing ability over 50 points of passing ability and 50 points of running ability any day of the week and multiple times on Sundays. I'll take Mac Jones's potential to be above average as a passer (as much as it pains me to say his absolute ceiling as a rookie is "above average NFL passer," I'm trying to be realistic here rather than inhaling cocaine on the McCorkle hype train as I'd prefer to be doing) over a relatively assured "average NFL quarterback when and only when you rightfully include his value as a runner" level of play from Newton.
I don't think "amazing" is the right word to use here. Awesome, great, sweet? Sure, but not amazing. "Amazing" is a sixth-round pick being the best QB in NFL history. We are talking about a guy who was at the head of what was arguably the best offense in the history of college football and statistically outperformed 2019 Joe "Consensus 1st Overall Pick" Burrow (who was throwing to such scrubs as Justin "Should Have Been RotY" Jefferson and Ja'Marr "Picked Above Smith and Waddle" Chase) on almost everything but volume. Not that volume doesn't matter, but Jones didn't get games against Utah State and Georgia Southern to inflate his rate/efficiency stats either. If, ten years from now, Jones is clearly the best out of the five first rounders, I really don't think you'd see all that many people having been amazed by it. How high would one have to be on the other guys, among whom is a FCS QB with one season of work under his belt and another QB who played at BYU against BYU opponents, to be amazed at Jones ending up as the best?
I would be amazed if he were better than Lawrence. Mac Jones being better than Lawrence would be shocking. I also don't agree with scouting the helmet - I don't think it is appropriate to categorize Trey Lance as an FCS QB without talking about his context. He was a special talent. I was lower on Wilson than consensus. Level of competition is a factor in evaluation but it is never the primary factor. Mac Jones also started the same number of games as Lance. While he had more time as a backup he did not as a starter. We're talking about a small sample size of guys to choose from so perhaps none of this should be shocking but yeah if Jones beats out Lawrence et al I will be.I don't think "amazing" is the right word to use here. Awesome, great, sweet? Sure, but not amazing. "Amazing" is a sixth-round pick being the best QB in NFL history. We are talking about a guy who was at the head of what was arguably the best offense in the history of college football and statistically outperformed 2019 Joe "Consensus 1st Overall Pick" Burrow (who was throwing to such scrubs as Justin "Should Have Been RotY" Jefferson and Ja'Marr "Picked Above Smith and Waddle" Chase) on almost everything but volume. Not that volume doesn't matter, but Jones didn't get games against Utah State and Georgia Southern to inflate his rate/efficiency stats either. If, ten years from now, Jones is clearly the best out of the five first rounders, I really don't think you'd see all that many people having been amazed by it. How high would one have to be on the other guys, among whom is a FCS QB with one season of work under his belt and another QB who played at BYU against BYU opponents, to be amazed at Jones ending up as the best?
Yeah I’m kinda in the same place. I kept getting excited seeing him make good throws yesterday and I had to keep reminding myself that basically no one on defense when Mac was in is going to sniff actual NFL playing time (and if they do I pity the Eagles).I wonder if we see Mac get game reps with the 1s before the season starts. I would like to see him vs a starting defense live before I have an opinion on this which is why I still haven’t voted. Right now my answer is Cam by an inch.
I agree with this reading of Belichick's probably philosophy.I think the first quarter of the season has been treated as an extended preseason since the last CBA and its limitations on contact have been in place. I also think Belichick would not want Mac starting against TB 12 in week 4, particularly if he views him as the future franchise QB. If they are 3-1 after 4 perhaps Cam starts until the bye in week 14 (although that seems a little late).Yeah I’m kinda in the same place. I kept getting excited seeing him make good throws yesterday and I had to keep reminding myself that basically no one on defense when Mac was in is going to sniff actual NFL playing time (and if they do I pity the Eagles).
I have no evidence to support this but I have a hunch that BB is going to give Cam the first 4 weeks and evaluate the position after that. BB routinely treats Games 1-4 as quasi-preseason anyway, and that will likely be even more true this year with an extra game on the schedule. If the Pats are 3-1 or better after those 4 games Cam will probably remain the starter until he hits a rough patch (unless they win those games on the strength of the D and Cam clearly sucks).
I don't understand this commonly repeated theme. If Brady is going to come in and win anyways, BB would be shielding Jones from exactly what?I also think Belichick would not want Mac starting against TB 12 in week 4, particularly if he views him as the future franchise QB.
I don't believe for a second that this is a valid line of thought. Does Belichick strike you as a guy who thinks that way?I don't understand this commonly repeated theme. If Brady is going to come in and win anyways, BB would be shielding Jones from exactly what?
Losing to the best QB ever? That sounds like a forgone conclusion for most. Hearing the cheers for the most important athlete in Boston history returning home? Would Mac suddenly be "more intimidated" than he already was? If they play well or actually win, it could be an amazing step forward. If they lose, what's the difference?
Honestly, I never watched much of Clemson when Lawrence was there and I didn't pay any attention to him during the draft process because he was a remarkably boring topic; he was never not going to go to the Jags. So my knowledge of him has always been the surface level of "incredibly highly touted prospect who everyone and their mother(s) thinks is the hottest thing since Andrew Luck, with supposedly great athleticism, a great arm, and a superlative feel for the game." And people whose opinion I trust generally hold to that, so I'm generally not going to question it. That having been said, what I saw from him in his very small, probably worthless preseason sample size was not confidence inspiring. He had one play that was really impressive, the beautiful throw to Marvin Jones with perfect anticipation on a comebacker. (The other noteworthy completion to Jones down the field... I'm not sure about, he had an eternity and I'm pretty sure he really underthrew that ball, either that or the defensive back recovered tremendously.) Other than that, he had a number of ugly throws, and, much more significantly, it felt like he had no feel for the pocket or pass rush, taking a few ugly sacks and constantly camping ten or more yards behind the line of scrimmage. (Is that an Urban Meyer coaching thing? I sure hope not.) I don't think he stepped up in the pocket even once, even when he really needed to. Much more importantly, it's just generally not uncommon for the 'top guy' in the class to not actually end up being the top guy. After one season of play, Herbert looks better than Burrow (but the jury's still out), Allen and Jackson are better than Mayfield, Mahomes and Watson are hilariously better than Trubisky (admittedly, in this case, Trubisky was a head-scratcher at the time), 2nd round Carr is the best guy out of 2014, and while Luck was mostly as-advertised, Wilson is undeniably the best QB to come out of that draft class and was Luck's superior from the very beginning.I would be amazed if he were better than Lawrence. Mac Jones being better than Lawrence would be shocking. I also don't agree with scouting the helmet - I don't think it is appropriate to categorize Trey Lance as an FCS QB without talking about his context. He was a special talent. I was lower on Wilson than consensus. Level of competition is a factor in evaluation but it is never the primary factor. Mac Jones also started the same number of games as Lance. While he had more time as a backup he did not as a starter. We're talking about a small sample size of guys to choose from so perhaps none of this should be shocking but yeah if Jones beats out Lawrence et al I will be.
You forgot Terrance Marshal to add to that list - a 2nd rounder . That 2019 LSU team was stacked. Having watched both Joe Burrow was more pin-point accurate as well as had better athleticism at the position.
Both QB threw to a bunch of 1st and 2nd round guys.
One thing I will say with confidence is that if Mac Jones is the sort of player that needs to be shielded from losing to TB lead by TFB, he has zero chance of making it in the NFL. Also, I can think of another rookie QB who lost to Tom Brady and the Bucs. In week 4. His name was Justin Herbert. Anyone know how his rookie season went after that?I don't believe for a second that this is a valid line of thought. Does Belichick strike you as a guy who thinks that way?
The best way to show evidence for this is to point out Nick Mullens is 2nd all time in passing yards in the first 16 games of his career, behind Mahomes. Where you are definitely matters.The thing about the QBs, and I have been saying this since before the draft, is that situation matters more than maybe any other variable. I would be more confident in predicting the success of the QBs based on which team takes them as opposed to predicting success based on the name of the QB. The Niners and Pats QBs have a better chance of success, IMO, than the Jets, Jags, and Bears. Today I would absolutely bet on Jones having a better career than Wilson and Fields. If you traded either to the Pats or Niners I would bet on them over whoever the Jets or Bears took. Is that too simplistic? Maybe. But if forced to bet I’d definitely bet on Shanahan and BFB over the Jets, Jags, or Bears. Name on the back of the jersey be damned.
Yeah couldn't help feeling bad for Fields when the Bears grabbed him. We knew Wilson was fucked when the Jets telegraphed that they were grabbing him, but the last time that the Bears developed a good QB, MTV was still showing rock videos.The thing about the QBs, and I have been saying this since before the draft, is that situation matters more than maybe any other variable. I would be more confident in predicting the success of the QBs based on which team takes them as opposed to predicting success based on the name of the QB. The Niners and Pats QBs have a better chance of success, IMO, than the Jets, Jags, and Bears. Today I would absolutely bet on Jones having a better career than Wilson and Fields. If you traded either to the Pats or Niners I would bet on them over whoever the Jets or Bears took. Is that too simplistic? Maybe. But if forced to bet I’d definitely bet on Shanahan and BFB over the Jets, Jags, or Bears. Name on the back of the jersey be damned.
I think "infrequently" is fair.The "error bars" for a rookie QB can extend into the top 10 on rare occasions, and do not infrequently get into the "above average" area.
There is good and bad in EPA. I think you've laid out some of the good. For bad, it's a great "descriptive" stat but not necessarily "predictive." One 90-yard pass can have a pretty big effect on EPA (as it can on rate-based stats like Y/A and assorted families). But whatever.(And I use EPA because A. it's just the best stat for raw production that exists, really, and B. it's quite favorable to Cam, as it (rightly) includes and values his rushing ability.)
I don't know what the low volume and pandemic disruptions have to do with anything. For the record, I don't know what the right amount is-I don't think anyone does-but ...If you want to bump him up a full 0.100, as a passer he'd rank close to Minshew last year. And I don't think you can really do that, as he was passing with incredibly low volume last year in an environment that was tilted heavily towards offenses, probably as a result of pandemic disruptions.
... this is my point. And Byrd, at 7.8 yards per target, wasn't even the worst offender on a team that averaged 7.1.I don't think you're wrong when you say that being the 25th-best QB when forced to give Damiere fucking Byrd 18% of the team's targets isn't necessarily inconsistent with being average-ish
I've read it.HT: SuperNomario the book is called Draft Stage. You seem like a quant type so you might really like it. Personally I think it is a must read.
Yeah, I noticed in college a lot of his deep sideline throws tended to die / fade to the middle of the field, so seeing that throw out of Jones was really nice.But, considering the knocks on Mac coming out of college, his perfect deep ball to Harry last night gave me a chubby. That was such a perfectly thrown ball. Had Harry simply stayed on his feet, he'd have coasted untouched into the endzone.
I also would like to read that, I'm guessing it's listed on Amazon as: The Drafting Stage: Creating a Marketplace for NFL Draft Picks?HT: SuperNomario the book is called Draft Stage. You seem like a quant type so you might really like it. Personally I think it is a must read.
I agree.Newton sucked last year. Bring on McCorkle. I think "sit and learn" is kind of overrated. Jones will learn by far the most if he is playing this year. He might make more mistakes than if he sat for a while, but I'd rather have him out here and doing and I don't think this team can really win anything with Cam at QB anyways.