[RD] Colin Kaepernick

If one of your rational standards is to have a better skilled backup quarterback, he is not a liability according to that standard for a good number of teams.
 
It's not accurate, but it is more accurate than gutter analysis like "did this guy win a super bowl" or "playoff record", which separate out the player's performance even less.

Not really, because those conclusions aren't attempting to separate the player's performance from his team's performance.

That's a pretty disingenuous thing to cite. Yes, teams that are winning or losing big alter their strategies which influences stats. That has nothing to do with my point that "statistically good QBs lose in the playeoffs therefore they're not actually good" is a farce.

That's kind of the point, though. I think it's safe to assume that in the first half of a one score football game, a team is very likely adhering to the game plan that was set out during the week. Playoff games are generally close because teams are both quality teams in most cases, so it's more likely a QB is going to be operating under a set game plan for most of the game. I think it's absolutely fair to look at situational play when trying to analyze QB performance, and statheads seem to agree to some extent.

Yes, and replacement level effectively implies an interchangeable player with the talent pool sitting in unsigned FAs.

Several starters were below replacement level. It's just a statistical construct, it has no real-world meaning.
 
If one of your rational standards is to have a better skilled backup quarterback, he is not a liability according to that standard for a good number of teams.
The rational standard is that he will make the team more likely to win games. By that standard he should be unemployed.

J
 
That is not the rational standard. The rational standard is if he is a more capable quarterback than your backup QB. You can throw in some other factors such as salary demand and disruption probability, but by the rational standard of if he is in the top 64 QBs out there, he should be employed.
 
That is not the rational standard. The rational standard is if he is a more capable quarterback than your backup QB. You can throw in some other factors such as salary demand and disruption probability, but by the rational standard of if he is in the top 64 QBs out there, he should be employed.
I reject that. Football is a team game. If the player makes the team more likely to win games, then he has value. Kaepernick is not such a player.

J
 
Football is a team game and part of that team is backup QB. The measure is if Kaepernick is better than the current guy holding the clipboard.
 
Football is a team game and part of that team is backup QB. The measure is if Kaepernick is better than the current guy holding the clipboard.
If by better you mean that the team is more likely to win games where he plays, perhaps. If you mean that the team is just as likely to win games where he does not play, then no, he isn't.

J
 
A rational team will assume that the backup QB may see significant playing time if the starter goes down. By that measure, Kaepernick is a better option that a good number of current backups.
 
A rational team will assume that the backup QB may see significant playing time if the starter goes down. By that measure, Kaepernick is a better option that a good number of current backups.
The NFL has seen multiple seasons of Kepernick as a backup. In the fully informed opinion of every GM, Kaepernick is a worse than ALL of the backups.

A rational team balances the positives against the negatives. Kaepernick's liabilities exceed his assets. He's busted.

J
 
They are factoring in more than his playing ability in making that decision, but if they were basing on playing ability alone, he would have a job.
 
They are factoring in more than his playing ability in making that decision, but if they were basing on playing ability alone, he would have a job.
You just stated they made the right decision for their teams, which is what I have been saying all along. So, what was your point supposed to be?

J
 
Compare Kaepernick's treatment with how the NBA is actively encouraging its players to speak up when they think societal and political change is needed.

Clearly conservatives (such as the USfootball establishment) speak about free speech a lot but when they don't like the things you say you're out of a job.
 
Another factor to consider is if you have a young quarterback starting is how good of a mentor he would be.
 
You just stated they made the right decision for their teams, which is what I have been saying all along. So, what was your point supposed to be?

J
No. You have been saying there is no rational standard to keep him. I have maintained there is - judging on playing ability alone. The GMs are sometimes considering other factors, but that does not change the fact that the is a rational standard to sign him.
 
No. You have been saying there is no rational standard to keep him. I have maintained there is - judging on playing ability alone. The GMs are sometimes considering other factors, but that does not change the fact that the is a rational standard to sign him.
Considering playing ability alone is not a rational standard. The objective standards is not ability but wins and losses. GMs must consider everything relating to that standard. Keapernick is a net liability.

J
 
More of a liability than Bortles or Hoyer or Cutler?
 
Better QB means more likely that he will guide the team to a win on the field if he has to play. Kaepernick meets this standard when compared to numerous backup QBs.
 
Better QB means more likely that he will guide the team to a win on the field if he has to play. Kaepernick meets this standard when compared to numerous backup QBs.
Only in a reductive sense. A backup has other responsibilities--practicing the defense, game prep, being a part of the team. This is an area where CK failed massively.

J
 
Back
Top Bottom