Sports Talk 2018: Lebron to Brady and Everything in Between

[Town Heretic]

I see it as opposite. Pettit was extremely athletic and his slender build would absolutely translate to today's game.

He was too slight to bang underneath and too poor a shot to be an outside threat.

His listed weight is wrong. When Pettit entered the NBA he weighed 208-209 but in the video below he said he lifted weights as a pro and got up to 245 lbs.

If true that would certainly help, but not enough against the competition I set out. There's no way he started at 205 and would get to 260 without sacrificing something from his quickness and he's not going to compete inside.

Duncan was 6'11" and 250 without bulking up. Malone was what 6'9" and 250 lbs looks like chiseled from a bigger frame. Webber was a natural 6'9" at around 250. Davis is 6'10" and a little over 250. The smallest competition, Barkley, was 6'6" and around that weight. He'd be out quicked by all of them bulked up and beaten up if he didn't. And then we're back to shooting, and he wasn't that great a shooter. Good, but not great.

Pettit also says if he played today he's probably play at 260 lbs. He's listed at 6'9". Kevin Durant is also listed at 6'9" (per ESPN and Basketball Reference) but his weight is listed at 240 lb. There is no way Durant outweighed Pettit by 32 lbs.

Beats me, but that's what I see also. And Durant is both explosive and a great shooter.

I'm not denigrating Pettit. He'd make my top 10, but he's not getting into my top 5. I appreciate your defense of him though. A great player.

On the shooting aspect. AD averaged more than 20 shots in 2017 and shot over .500. He averaged 19.5 the next year and shot at .535
Looking at Petite I see two years when he averaged 20 shots, with both coming in at around .418, not that far off his average otherwise of .436. Malone had five years at around that average and shot well above .500. Webber averaged 20, 23, and 21 in a stretch. His average was closer to .475. Charles never broke 20.

 

[Town Heretic]

I was listening to Will Cain the other day and he was talking about elite athletes. His general theory is that the term is too watered, that elites at any position should be in the top 10 percent. Meaning he's going to limit elite position players to 3 by position, given there are 32 NFL teams and 30 NBA teams.

That's problematic when you're talking about quarterbacks. But the rules changes are having an impact that's appreciable.

Now I'm always talking about how quarterbacks have an easier time of it these days, how that ease translates to longer play and inflated stat lines, especially among quarterbacks.

Here's an illustration of that principle, looking at the average position rating by decade starting with the 80s, and stretching four decades, to our current date.

80s: 74.3
90s: 77.3
2002 to present day: 84.6

Unsurprisingly, the first 80+ overall rating average occurs the year of major changes to protect qbs, 2002.
In 2010 wrs received appreciably greater protection from debilitating hits by defensive players after catching the ball. These changes continue to expand.

From 2010 to present day the average qbr is 86.4

In 2015 defenseless player protections were expanded to cover intended wrs of a pass. In that year, for the first time the average quarterback rating broke 90.

In 2017 the protection to wrs was expanded to route running.

From 2015 to today, the average qbr is 89.8

Or, the average quarterback plays at the thin edge of a pro bowl player.

And now you understand why ESPN came up with a new qbr.

So if you want to get a sense of how the today's qbs compared to the greats of the 80s, you could subtract 10 points from their rating for starters.

Back to the elites of today. I'd say we have more than 3 last year. But the truth is that the rules changes in sum have made it hard to meaningfully distinguish among them. Brady had a great ending to the year, but his overall play, adjusted for inflation, would be solid, but not a pro bowl level. The same is true for Rodgers and Big Ben.

Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.

 

[Cricket]

If New Zealand wanted to win, they should have scored more runs. Rules is rules.
Although I bet the idiots at the ICC tweak a few in response to the tournament:
1. More wins is not a good separator for advancement past pool play.
2. Fewer wickets is far more appropriate — and lines up with Duckworth-Lewis-Stern — for a countback system in ties.
3. The overthrow rule is going to change to dead ball.
What a match, though. It just never gave up. NZ batted in the first innings like they were saving a Test, which turned out to be spot on. England resisted some top-notch bowling early, but succumbed to relentless pressure till Buttler and Stokes intervened. Neesham bowled a wonderful 49th. Boult stood on the boundary marker, adding to the proof that you don't have to clear the ropes to get the maximum.
I thought predictor had it right with England favorites all the way through to the 46th over or so, but the Kiwis seem to have put on a few too many, but for the rub of the green in the 50th. England can't capitalize on a 3-from-2 situation, but then take the initiative in the Super Over (which I called in the 30th over).
The whole dynamic changed in those two added overs. The batters hit without fear, which did not seem to happen in the regulation overs without implosions. I thought Archer showed great poise. That first ball was unlucky to be wided and he missed his length on the 6 (Neesham didn't). Boult missed two or three times, but got away with only 15 from his.
Then down to Guptill. And this is where you gotta feel for a guy. The pitches throughout this tournament simply have not suited the mentality he has been conditioned to play with. He's there to hurt teams, but as Williamson showed, you hurt teams on these pitches more effectively batting 50 overs than scoring quickly. Martin got 19 runs up top, which were vital and a sign that he was finally adjusting, but then had to face the final delivery in what was effectively a boundary-or-nothing scenario.
He went for the running option, which might have looked like the best bet, but perhaps a Buttler-style lap was the one to go for. Would have taken nerves of steel to play such a shot in that scenario. Seems impossible to consider, but perhaps it was the way.
Regardless, he did what he did and has to live with it, but it seems vastly unfair. Williamson should have batted. He can't be that much slower, right?

 

[The Berean]

I was listening to Will Cain the other day and he was talking about elite athletes. His general theory is that the term is too watered, that elites at any position should be in the top 10 percent. Meaning he's going to limit elite position players to 3 by position, given there are 32 NFL teams and 30 NBA teams.

That's problematic when you're talking about quarterbacks. But the rules changes are having an impact that's appreciable.

Now I'm always talking about how quarterbacks have an easier time of it these days, how that ease translates to longer play and inflated stat lines, especially among quarterbacks.

Here's an illustration of that principle, looking at the average position rating by decade starting with the 80s, and stretching four decades, to our current date.

80s: 74.3
90s: 77.3
2002 to present day: 84.6

Unsurprisingly, the first 80+ overall rating average occurs the year of major changes to protect qbs, 2002.
In 2010 wrs received appreciably greater protection from debilitating hits by defensive players after catching the ball. These changes continue to expand.

From 2010 to present day the average qbr is 86.4

In 2015 defenseless player protections were expanded to cover intended wrs of a pass. In that year, for the first time the average quarterback rating broke 90.

In 2017 the protection to wrs was expanded to route running.

From 2015 to today, the average qbr is 89.8

Or, the average quarterback plays at the thin edge of a pro bowl player.

And now you understand why ESPN came up with a new qbr.

So if you want to get a sense of how the today's qbs compared to the greats of the 80s, you could subtract 10 points from their rating for starters.

Back to the elites of today. I'd say we have more than 3 last year. But the truth is that the rules changes in sum have made it hard to meaningfully distinguish among them. Brady had a great ending to the year, but his overall play, adjusted for inflation, would be solid, but not a pro bowl level. The same is true for Rodgers and Big Ben.

Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.

The NFL had made it so easy for QB's to put out video game passing number it's silly. All these 5,000 yard passing seasons this decade are absurd. As I mentioned before Dan Marino's NFL record of 5,084 passing yards in 1984 stood for 27 seasons. Then in 2011 it was broken by two QB's and a third QB came within 50 yards of Marino. Ten of the 11 5,000 passing yard seasons happened between 2008-18. There have been an additional eight seasons between 4,903 yards and 4,967 yards in the same time frame as well.

 

[Gary K]

He was too slight to bang underneath and too poor a shot to be an outside threat.


If true that would certainly help, but not enough against the competition I set out. There's no way he started at 205 and would get to 260 without sacrificing something from his quickness and he's not going to compete inside.

Duncan was 6'11" and 250 without bulking up. Malone was what 6'9" and 250 lbs looks like chiseled from a bigger frame. Webber was a natural 6'9" at around 250. Davis is 6'10" and a little over 250. The smallest competition, Barkley, was 6'6" and around that weight. He'd be out quicked by all of them bulked up and beaten up if he didn't. And then we're back to shooting, and he wasn't that great a shooter. Good, but not great.


Beats me, but that's what I see also. And Durant is both explosive and a great shooter.

I'm not denigrating Pettit. He'd make my top 10, but he's not getting into my top 5. I appreciate your defense of him though. A great player.

On the shooting aspect. AD averaged more than 20 shots in 2017 and shot over .500. He averaged 19.5 the next year and shot at .535
Looking at Petite I see two years when he averaged 20 shots, with both coming in at around .418, not that far off his average otherwise of .436. Malone had five years at around that average and shot well above .500. Webber averaged 20, 23, and 21 in a stretch. His average was closer to .475. Charles never broke 20.

That neither of you guys give any love to Nate Thurmond as one of the greatest centers of all time is telling. He very well may have been the greatest defensive center of all time as both Kareem and Wilt rate him as good or better than Bill Russell on the defensive end of the court. He could shoot the 20' jump shot, score inside, rebound extremely well--he holds the NBA record for rebounds in a quarter, 18, and had seasons where he averaged 20+ rebounds a game, was a good passer, and was a great shot blocker. During the prime of his career along with his defensive and rebounding ability he was also right around the 20ppg mark too. If the NBA had kept statistics on blocks during most of his career he would be one of the top 2 or 3 shot blockers in NBA history.

I used to listen to the Warriors play on KNBR out of SF and one game against Chamberlain he blocked 3 consecutive dunk attempts by Chamberlain.

Thurmond was named as one of the 50 greatest players of all time.

Here's a synopsis of his career. See how his competitors on the court rated him. https://www.nba.com/history/legends/profiles/nate-thurmond

 

[Town Heretic]

That neither of you guys give any love to Nate Thurmond as one of the greatest centers of all time is telling.

I left a few greats off my short list, but for the same reason, I don't think they can hang with my big 3.

Jabbar: 24.6 ppg, 11.2 rbs, 3.6 asts, .9 stls, 2.6 blks
Wilt: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rbs, 4.4 asts, na stls, na blks
Olajuwon: 21.8 ppg, 11.1 rbs, 2.5 asts, 1.7 stls, 3.1 blks

Nate: 15 ppg, 15 rbs, 2.7 asts, .5 stls, 2.5 blks

Solid numbers, but he's not cracking into that group. Neither is Russell, Shaq, or Ewing.

He very well may have been the greatest defensive center of all time as both Kareem and Wilt rate him as good or better than Bill Russell on the defensive end of the court. He could shoot the 20' jump shot, score inside, rebound extremely well--he holds the NBA record for rebounds in a quarter, 18, and had seasons where he averaged 20+ rebounds a game, was a good passer, and was a great shot blocker. During the prime of his career along with his defensive and rebounding ability he was also right around the 20 ppg mark too. If the NBA had kept statistics on blocks during most of his career he would be one of the top 2 or 3 shot blockers in NBA history.

I used to listen to the Warriors play on KNBR out of SF and one game against Chamberlain he blocked 3 consecutive dunk attempts by Chamberlain.

Thurmond was named as one of the 50 greatest players of all time.

A lot of top 50 guys aren't making my final team, but he was something.

You should check out Land of Basketball head to heads. It can help.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.

Wentz?

Are you serious? If any QB from the NFC East should be on that list it is Dak Prescott! After he finally got a number one receive his play was fantastic!

 

[Town Heretic]

Wentz?

Are you serious? If any QB from the NFC East should be on that list it is Dak Prescott! After he finally got a number one receive his play was fantastic!

Prescott: 242 yds a game, 1.4 tds, to .5 ints, 67.7 comp%, 96.6 rating.
Wentz: 279.5 yds a game, 1.9 tds, to .6 ints, 69.6 comp%, 102.2 rating

He's not far off, but I meant only Wentz was over 100 in qbr.

Of course, last year if you counted the quarterbacks who were above that it was around 12.

I'm going back and coming up with a new, revised top 25 QBs of all time, using their rating, adjusting it for decades prior to 2002, and adding value for SB appearances and victories.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Wentz: 279.5 yds a game, 1.9 tds, to .6 ints, 69.6 comp%, 102.2 rating

In nine games with Cooper, Prescott’s passer rating jumped from 87.4 to 103.

Besides that, in the last three years Prescott has a higher Passer Rating than both Wentz and Goff.

 

[Town Heretic]

In nine games with Cooper, Prescott’s passer rating jumped from 87.4 to 103.

Besides that, in the last three years Prescott has a higher Passer Rating than both Wentz and Goff.

He still has a few things to prove to me. Wentz was in line for league MVP. Not many saying that about Prescott, in part because of the running game he has enjoyed to take pressure off of the position. If Wentz is healthy and can stay that way, I don't know many GMs who are taking your guy over him.

But it's early enough in everyone's career to establish bragging rights. That is, if either can get past the heat generated by KC, Cleveland, Houston and maybe Arizona before long.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

He still has a few things to prove to me. Wentz was in line for league MVP. Not many saying that about Prescott, in part because of the running game he has enjoyed to take pressure off of the position. If Wentz is healthy and can stay that way, I don't know many GMs who are taking your guy over him.

Prescott won Rookie of the Year in both quarterbacks' first year. Prescott's record as quarterback over his career is 29-15 while Wentz lags far behind at 23-16. Prscott's completion percentage is better than that of Wentz, 65-7 to 63.8. Besides that, Wenz has had tight end Zach Eartz and wide receiver Alshon Jeffery to throw to throughout his career.

Prescott is the much better runner, 940 yards to 545 and Prescott has scored 17 touchdowns on the ground compared to 2 for Wentz.

Besides that, Wentz's team-mates think he is self-centered:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...nonymous-eagles-teammates-calling-him-selfish

Dak is such a great leader that his teamates will follow him to hell and back!

 

[Town Heretic]

In nine games with Cooper, Prescott’s passer rating jumped from 87.4 to 103

So Amari was underrated. I could have told you that.

Wentz was far weaker than Prescott in their rookie years.

Dak had a 104.9 rookie year, startling the league with his combination of gifts and taking advantage of having arguably the best running back in the league keeping defenses honest.

After that start and with a book on him he fell to a respectable, but not league leading or pro bowl level 86.6 in his sophomore year, improving to a playoff caliber again by year three, where he ended with a 96.9 rating.


Wentz? From the end of season one to the end of season two Wentz went from a 79 rating to a 101 rating. That's essentially going from talented backup rating to pro bowl starter rating. A fluke? No, he improved on even that the very next year. And he managed it without Amari or one of the premiere backs in the league.

Besides that, in the last three years Prescott has a higher Passer Rating than both Wentz and Goff.

A bit misleading, as I note above.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

After that start and with a book on him he fell to a respectable, but not league leading or pro bowl level 86.6 in his sophomore year, improving to a playoff caliber again by year three, where he ended with a 96.9 rating.

He had no outstanding receiver, unlike Wentz!

In fact, Wentz was only the second best quarterback on the Eagles in the last few years! Wentz is really unliked by many of the Eagle players.

Dak has been named to the Pro Bowl in two out of his three years and his first year he was named Rookie of the Year.

 

[Town Heretic]

He had no outstanding receiver, unlike Wentz!

Wentz has yet to have a 1,000 yd receiver. Your guy played with Dez and Witten on the field, then Amri.

In 2016 Dak was throwing to Dex, Witten, and Beasley, who caught 194 balls for 2,302 yds, and 16 tds. Tack on another few hundred yards from Ezekiel, who was also busy keeping defenses in the box as the league leader in rushing.

The next year it was Ertz again, this time with 74 receptions. Your guy targeted Dez Bryant 69 times.

In 2018 Ertz had his break out year and totaled 116 receptions, cracking the 1,000 yard mark. His top 3 garnered 245 catches for 2,742 yds and 18 tds.

Dak's top 3 went for 195 receptions, 1,964 yds, and 12 tds.

In fact, Wentz was only the second best quarterback on the Eagles in the last few years!

Not really, though Foles did an outstanding job in relief, and with a coach tailoring/limiting the offense for him.

In 2017 Foles rating was 79.5. In 2018 it was 96. Or he continued to play around the way he did late in 2017. A very good quarterback with mad leadership.

In 2017 Wentz rating was 101.9 before injury. In 2018 it was 102.2. A much better quarterback, but in need of maturation as a leader, a thing you'd expect from a highly touted newly minted NFL qb.

So I do think Foles, at 28 and 29 was a more mature person and leader than Wentz, at 23 or 24, and for reasons that go beyond age. Foles has been humbled. Wentz is still in that "I'm the man" mode of Marino and others. He may only find what Foles has in retirement, if then. The way Elway did very, very late. Who knows?

But no one is going to take Foles over Wentz who knows football. If they do they're leading with their heart and not their head.

Wentz is really unliked by many of the Eagle players.

Really reaching at this point...A few weren't fond of him, to be sure, though that had as much to do with the qb situation and Foles' success as anything else. Not everyone is fond of Baker Mayfield in his locker room of late. It's early for young qbs to figure that part out.

Dak has been named to the Pro Bowl in two out of his three years and his first year he was named Rookie of the Year.

As I noted, an outstanding rookie year. One where he enjoyed playing behind the league leading running back, a thing that's kept defenses from cheating for his entire career.

Meanwhile, the leading rusher on those Eagles' teams?

2016:
Eagles: Matthews, 661 yds, 8 tds
Cowboys: Elliot: 1,631 yds, 15 tds

2017:
Eagles: Blount, 766 yds, 2 tds
Cowboys: Elliot, 983 yds, 7 tds

2018:
Eagles: Adams, 511 yds, 3 tds
Cowboys: Elliot, 1,434 yds, 6 tds

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I still think that Dak has been the superior player, being named All Pro two out of three years and was also Rookie of the Year.

Prescott has led Dallas to two NFC East titles in his three seasons as the starting quarterback. Prescott has never had a losing season in the NFL.

Jason Witten has effusive praise for the leadership the two-time Pro Bowl quarterback brings, "The intangibles that he has as a leader, as a guy is unlike anything I've ever seen. Everybody respects him. They wanna play for him. They listen to him. They believe in him and a a player."

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/sports/...e-Leader-Of-This-Football-Team-513300391.html

The same can't be said for Wentz.

 

[Town Heretic]

I still think that Dak has been the superior player, being named All Pro two out of three years and was also Rookie of the Year.

Prescott has led Dallas to two NFC East titles in his three seasons as the starting quarterback. Prescott has never had a losing season in the NFL.

Jason Witten has effusive praise for the leadership the two-time Pro Bowl quarterback brings, "The intangibles that he has as a leader, as a guy is unlike anything I've ever seen. Everybody respects him. They wanna play for him. They listen to him. They believe in him and a a player."

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/sports/...e-Leader-Of-This-Football-Team-513300391.html

The same can't be said for Wentz.

I think you're a fine Cowboys fan, but objectively missing the picture. Dak had a great rookie system playing with the league's best pressure diffusing running back. He looked mortal and only very good when that running back was missing for a chunk of his sophomore season and then looked better if not replicating that rookie year in year three with Elliot back full time.

Wentz had a more typical rookie season, followed by two great years in a row, interrupted by injury and without anything like the same support.


Wentz is the better player at this stage in their careers, but one to keep a wary eye on for potential fragility.

 

[Idolater]

I've got a bad feeling that 2019 might be it for Tom Brady. He's very healthy for a 42 year old but he remains a 42 year old, and no matter what kind of diet you eat, to how much quality sleep you get, to how much you strength train your legs and stretch out before and after every workout (or how much water you drink ), sooner or later your body is just going to start to slow down. I have a bad feeling that 2019 might be the year it occurs to Tom Brady.

This is from a lifelong Pats fan ('can't help where I was born!). It'll go down either due to an injury that he can't heal 100% from, or it will be a noticeable degradation in his performance apart from any identified injury. I'm biting my nails already for this upcoming NFL season.

 

[Town Heretic]

I've got a bad feeling that 2019 might be it for Tom Brady. He's very healthy for a 42 year old but he remains a 42 year old, and no matter what kind of diet you eat, to how much quality sleep you get, to how much you strength train your legs and stretch out before and after every workout (or how much water you drink ), sooner or later your body is just going to start to slow down. I have a bad feeling that 2019 might be the year it occurs to Tom Brady.

Last year was his lowest rating since 2014, but he'd still playing at a consistently high level. I looked at his first and second eight and he was off by a fraction over the second half, but more consistent and with less decline than many younger qbs. Now in the playoffs it looked like time was catching him. After the Chargers implosion he played badly except in stretches, with his lowest overall three game playoff stretch in over a decade.

We'll see if that's a harbinger this year, to be sure.

This is from a lifelong Pats fan ('can't help where I was born!). It'll go down either due to an injury that he can't heal 100% from, or it will be a noticeable degradation in his performance apart from any identified injury. I'm biting my nails already for this upcoming NFL season.

Hard to tell, but if last year's playoffs were the bell ringing we should see it earlier this year than later.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Wentz is the better player at this stage in their careers, but one to keep a wary eye on for potential fragility.

Wentz wasn't even the best quarterback of the Eagles team for the last three years while Dak Prescott was the Rookie of the Year and was All Pro two of his three years.

Wentz is not the better player at this stage of his career. It was Prescott who was named to the All Pro team this year, not Wentz. It was Prescott who was named Rookie of the Year in both player's initial year, not Wentz. It is Prescott who has the better win-loss record between the two, not Wentz!

Your judgment concerning the abilities of quarterbacks is flawed because you ignore their intangibles.

 

[Town Heretic]

Wentz wasn't even the best quarterback of the Eagles team for the last three years

Guy, that's just not objectively true. I set out the numbers.

In his first year Foles had a 79 rating, which is a good back up, not a decent grade for a starter. Then they limited the offense to suit his strengths and cover what he doesn't do as well and he played out of his mind well during the playoffs. Over 100 in every game.

The next year? 96 rating, excellent numbers for five games. Then he had the reigns in the playoff and looked, well, not very good. His rating in those two games? 77 in the win (meh backup numbers) and 61 (bad backup numbers) in the loss.

Despite demonstrating great locker room leadership, the reality is that Wentz (essentially rated 102 both of the years Foles pinch hit for the Eagles) was and is the better qb. The offense can be opened up when he plays and he plays at a higher level. Foles had that great stretch and made a case for himself as a starter somewhere where there was need, but not in Philly.

while Dak Prescott was the Rookie of the Year and was All Pro two of his three years.

And still was outperformed by Wentz in year two and three, without having the run support or a better wr corps.

Wentz is not the better player at this stage of his career.

He absolutely is...even with a top 3 back to keep defenses at the line he's not outplaying Wentz, as I noted using objective data.

It was Prescott who was named to the All Pro team this year, not Wentz.

He was named as an alternate for the number two, Drew Brees. You know that, right? Wentz couldn't play at that point.

And his numbers, despite a full season of Elliot, weren't as good as Wentz's. Your guy had six more games, but only 1 more td than Wentz and Prescott had one more int, which is why he was rated around 97 while Wentz was rated over 100.

It was Prescott who was named Rookie of the Year in both player's initial year, not Wentz.

I agreed that in his rookie year he was better. He also had the league leading rusher that year and Witten, etc.

So he wins a qualified rookie season, all things not being even. Thereafter it's Wentz.

It is Prescott who has the better win-loss record between the two, not Wentz!

That's a team accomplishment. How he played and contributed is how we gauge him, or should be. That's why Bradshaw isn't considered for the GOAT despite having 4 SB rings.

Your judgment concerning the abilities of quarterbacks is flawed because you ignore their intangibles.

No, I don't really. But intangibles only really determine when everything else is even.