And it's not a good point. Just because they aren't all awesome right away doesn't mean you cant glean anything from watching them as rookies or first year players. It is not close to "meaningless" You are misusing the (limited) data.

They dont have to be "real good" to separate them and see the potential for greatness.

Oh, if that's what you're looking for then you're good. Mitch has shown the potential definitely. That's hardly remarkable, a lot of guys have shown the potential. I would say almost every 1st round QB ever has shown the potential. A few like Paxton Lynch havent but its rare for guys to be so bad they dont even get on the field at all.

You're the one who drew the equivalence between not playing as a rookie and playing poorly as a rookie. I've merely made the point that consistency demands not playing in one's career counts as similarly being unproductive.

What about the other half of the equation? Can I also list guys who started bad and stayed bad?

But I take RBP's point as saying that poor performance can't simply be dismissed as altogether irrelevant. You seem to be insistent on conflating guys who didn't play with guys played but not well and suggest that the information on both of them is the completely the same.

I also think your talk of (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky not being supposed to play is largely irrelevant here since that very act of playing itself can impact his developmemt or lack thereof, and I would suggest that this is one of the reasons you find it so much easier to list successful quarterbacks who sat rather than played poorly as rookies.

Finally, framing this discussion in terms of good vs bad as a rookie is also somewhat unsophisticated since the latter category can run the gamut from mediocre to worst in the league. Introducing degrees of badness would probably allow even more reasonable predictions from rookie year performance. To use one of the favorite examples of a rookie playing poorly, Peyton Manning didn't have a good first season but he was nowhere near as poor as his counterpart Leaf.

The fact that most of them aren't really good right away is why it is meaningless. That's why you stopped naming quarterbacks. You probably saw Andy Dalton show up and knew it wasn't going to get better when you have to go down to guys worse than Andy Dalton.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You don't seem to understand. I'm saying it is meaningless whether they played or not. For all we know, Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady would have been bad as rookies too. Take a look at Jared Goff for just one example of the difference one year can make.

Of course, and it helps my argument that we should ignore rookie year production.

This is what you don't seem to get. I'm saying ignore it all. A rookie quarterback who doesn't play may be better or worse than a rookie quarterback who plays good or bad. There is a reason that the Browns, Bills and the 49ers tried to do everything they could to not have their rookie quarterbacks play this year. The Bears did too with the signing of Glennon.

Sure. So what?

Well, then I suggest you come up with that argument if you think you can come up with a predictive tool for rookie year quarterback production. I look forward to it.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

No. You judge them with the context that they are rookies.

This is just a terrible conclusion by you.

The only thing you've shown is that Not all great qb's are great right away. Its very far from "rookie years are meaningless"

Im talking the next level of potential. All QB's have potential when they're drafted high. Im talking things the guy does on the field that make you say "hmm, this guy might actually be really good"

I have seen almost none of that from (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky. I think throwing with accuracy from the pocket is the most important thing. Mitch is not so good there.

This pretty much sums up the lack of logic you are working with in this argument, Rick.


Bad and stays bad? Rookie year doesn't matter

Good and stay good? Rookie year doesnt matter

Bad then good or good then bad? Rookie year doesn't matter


"Rookie year doesnt matter and there is no amount of data that can change my mind"

And for all we know they could've been great as well. The correct response to not knowing how good they'd have been as rookies is to treat them as N/As for the purpose of this discussion, not to group them in with the bad rookies by default.

Great!
Cade McNown
Ryan Leaf
Blaine Gabbert
Joey Harrington
Tim Couch
Heath Shuler
Geno Smith
Mike Glennon
Bruce Gradkowski
Kyle Boller

Note that all these guys started 6 games or more as rookies and all were bad and all stayed bad. Please list 20 guys who started a similar number of games playing poorly and became good. Of course, if you want to continue to list guys who didn't play as rookies and became good, then I'll list quarterbacks who didn't play as rookies and continued to not play or play poorly (your Hackenbergs and the like), a list that's probably greater than the number of guys we'd even call good quarterbacks in the history of the league.

Agreed, which is why rookies who do play and look bad should be kept analytically separate from those who sit.
I think it's reasonable to predict that Manning was more likely to be successful than Leaf after their rookie years than before it based on how each of them performed. Your view seems to be that their respective likelihoods of becoming great quarterbacks in the league should have been exactly the same as it was before the season even took place because rookie years are meaningless anyway.

You have given no data. What data do you have that rookie production matters? Make a case about what is predictive of future success.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Exactly. They could have been great. They could have been bad. A lot of quarterbacks are bad in year 1 and much better in year 2. You keep on countering with things that help my argument. It's an interesting strategy for sure.

I never said bad rookies don't sometimes become bad players for their career. Now, if you want to create a predictive model based on those guys then I'd love to hear it. Tell me what rookie quarterback stats are predictive of the career instead of random anecdotes like 6th round pick Bruce Gradkowski played as a rookie, was bad, and was bad his whole career.

I'll even give you the template. Fill in the blank.

Rookie quarterbacks end up likely failing in their career if their performance as a rookie is ___________________________.



Leaf was historically awful as a rookie though. It's an outlier as much as RGIII is an outlier in the opposite direction. So, I will concede this point. If a rookie quarterback is as bad or worse than Ryan Leaf they probably won't be good.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You seem to have forgotten what's being argued about. Here was your point that RPB, FF, and I have pushed back on:
You are now saying that treating bad rookies and non-playing rookies as separate and distinct categories is somehow helping your argument rather than hurting it.

So you're suggesting my list consists of random anecdotes whereas yours, which is inflated by guys who didn't even play as rookies at all, isn't? If Gradkowski's inclusion really offends you so much, feel free to swap him out with Akili Smith or Matt Leinart or any of the other quarterback busts from recent years.

Once again, I took it easy by only listing guys who played over a third of the season as rookies. If we're going to start listing those who weren't even good enough to make the field as rookies or in their careers, then I'm afraid I'm going to have an even longer list than you.

Here's a prediction for you: rookie quarterbacks who play and look bad are more likely to fail than rookie quarterbacks who play and look good. The number of guys who were good and turned bad is small in comparison to the number who were bad and stayed bad.

Lots of non answers. Cool.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Clowns.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Listening to Nagy's press conference today is pretty nauseating. I get that he has to stand up for his QB, especially after kinda selling him out earlier, but jesus...the way he talks to the media you know he's lying.

I was probably a bigger Grossman fan than his mother. I would have never liked Cutler because of my Grossman loyalty. I see some things in (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky that I really like and he has some elite tools. The difference between him and Grossman for me is Grossman had elite games. Problem was he was great or awful. There was no in between. (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky hasn't had that game. If he doesn't have it sometime in the next 13 weeks he's going to lose me.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

So one game and you’re in?

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance

He's still maturing. I need to see more than a few flashes a game for me to keep the faith.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Mitch has actually never been truly awful in a game. He's just been shockingly mediocre, which in a way is worse. But the 3+ INT game? Hasn't happened. I dont think it will happen.

But I have.

My list of 5 qbs who ended up good were all good as rookies. Then you did some work for me and listed 5 who were bad.

You've just come up with a bad conclusion.

The actual conclusion should be "Not all great QB''s show it or even perform well in their rookie year" rather than "Rookie years are completely meaningless!"

There are just as many quarterbacks who were good as rookies who ended up being nothing special though and plenty who were bad who ended up being good.

I also don't think there is a major difference in those conclusions. Both basically say that rookie production isn't a good predictor of long term success.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You don't think Mitch is ever going to throw 3+ INTs in a game?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

He's too afraid.

Might sound silly but I'm not sure Mitch throws 3 interceptions a game until he gets better.

Or do you mean he won't get better until he throws 3 interceptions in a game?

_________________

Maybe that's it?

At some point he just has to let go of his fear. He is so scared to make a mistake he doesn't seem to realize all QB's make them. I appreciate a little more prudence after a decade of Cutler who flat did not give a fuck about how many interceptions he threw, but holy shit Mitch its ok to throw the ball sometimes.

But part of his confidence problem stems from his inability to see the field/read coverage. And he doesn't seem to be progressing in this area.

_________________