Bengals Give Handy Andy 6/115

[Dutch 874]

It's his consistency that's pathetic, Dutch. He's great one week, and then the next week he looks like Akili Smith. In fact, the only thing consistent about his game is his inconsistency as a constant. He's got weapons. He's got one fucking A-bomb and a lot of speedy playmaker type guys with a back that everyone is all about until they try to make a case for Dalton not being a bum. His numbers look nice in a vacuum, but football isn't played in a vacuum. All things are not equal.

 

Yes, his consistency is pathetic but my main point is that you have something to work with and true pathetic QBs do much less than Dalton. All I said that is he can put up points on the board at a higher level than pathetic production. And again, he has a lot to work on. Don't tunnel vision on my one comment. Look at the overall context because I'm not saying that Dalton is good

[Cherry 1,302]

Dalton is consistently pathetic in the playoffs. He is inconsistently pathetic and amazing in the regular season. Remember October player of the month? Had like 12 TDs to 1 INT. If I want to win a game I'm not taking Dalton. If I want to win 9-11 games out of a season for sure, I'll take Dalton.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Chernobyl426

[KempBolt 498]

It's his consistency that's pathetic, Dutch. He's great one week, and then the next week he looks like Akili Smith. In fact, the only thing consistent about his game is his inconsistency as a constant. He's got weapons. He's got one fucking A-bomb and a lot of speedy playmaker type guys with a back that everyone is all about until they try to make a case for Dalton not being a bum. His numbers look nice in a vacuum, but football isn't played in a vacuum. All things are not equal.

 

The fact that Dalton has guys who can make it out of their house in the morning without dropping their coffee and falling on their face give him a vastly superior cast to Smith. Alex has a better back. Everything else, from top to bottom, is better in Cincy.

 

Green > Bowe, all other receivers outside of Avery probably have comparable combined catch numbers to Cincy's #2 guy, and Bernard is a good back in his own right. Dalton's line is better, and his defense is probably as good or nearly as good as that of the Chiefs.

 

Add to that the fact that the Chiefs CURRENTLY play in a tougher division than the Bengals, and the fact that the Bengals got just as far as the Chiefs last season paints a pretty clear picture of Andy Dalton imo. Hell, the Chiefs were poised to possibly make a run before half of the team went out for the game in the Colts playoff collapse.

 

Result: Smith 1, Dalton 0000000

I think you're over accenuating the distinctions.

 

Does Dalton have a better supporting cast? Sure. But he also does a better job, by and large. Scores more points and is responsible for more of his team's offense. Smith only has him on turnovers, but it's easier to turn the ball over when the offense runs through you.

 

They're both game manager caliber talents. The difference being that Smith is allowed to be a game manager and Dalton has been asked to be more. Any perceived gap between them is manufactured rather than actual.

[Dutch 874]

They're both game manager caliber talents. The difference being that Smith is allowed to be a game manager and Dalton has been asked to be more. Any perceived gap between them is manufactured rather than actual.

 

And we've seen Alex Smith's production when he was asked to do more which I can say was much worse than Dalton.

[AL_Royalty 489]

I think you're over accenuating the distinctions.

 

Does Dalton have a better supporting cast? Sure. But he also does a better job, by and large. Scores more points and is responsible for more of his team's offense. Smith only has him on turnovers, but it's easier to turn the ball over when the offense runs through you.

 

They're both game manager caliber talents. The difference being that Smith is allowed to be a game manager and Dalton has been asked to be more. Any perceived gap between them is manufactured rather than actual.

No sir. That statement is by and large an Olympic gymnast - style stretch. He scores more points on the strength of his arm, but he turns the ball over far more too, which essentially takes eggs out of the basket. What's the point of scoring points if you're just going to give them right back?

 

With the kind of defense he has backing him up, this team should be an overwhelming favorite to win their division and maybe go deep into the playoffs if Dalton was a good QB. Just look what Alex Smith did in San Fran.

 

30+ tds is a cool feat, but single digit turnovers is a great asset. Plus, look what Smith did with that offense in the second half of 2013 despite the disappearance of Dwayne Bowe. Look at what he does in playoff games. Smith doesn't rattle, while it's clear that Dalton does- loudly.

 

Basically though, I think Smith is marginally better, but I also think it's pretty clear. I think the bottom line is that if Dalton is worth 12.5 per guaranteed, Smith is easily worth paying a few million more than that.

 

Do I think the 18-20 range is a bit of an overstep? Sure do, but ii didn't create the scale. I'd rather pay a guy who can hold onto the ball and always keep his team in the game than pay a Dalton or Cutler type of guy who's only going to wow you long enough to let everyone down when he inevitably throws picks or fumbles away the hopes of an already frustrated fan base.

[KempBolt 498]

No sir. That statement is by and large an Olympic gymnast - style stretch. He scores more points on the strength of his arm, but he turns the ball over far more too, which essentially takes eggs out of the basket. What's the point of scoring points if you're just going to give them right back?

 

With the kind of defense he has backing him up, this team should be an overwhelming favorite to win their division and maybe go deep into the playoffs if Dalton was a good QB. Just look what Alex Smith did in San Fran.

 

30+ tds is a cool feat, but single digit turnovers is a great asset. Plus, look what Smith did with that offense in the second half of 2013 despite the disappearance of Dwayne Bowe. Look at what he does in playoff games. Smith doesn't rattle, while it's clear that Dalton does- loudly.

 

Basically though, I think Smith is marginally better, but I also think it's pretty clear. I think the bottom line is that if Dalton is worth 12.5 per guaranteed, Smith is easily worth paying a few million more than that.

 

Do I think the 18-20 range is a bit of an overstep? Sure do, but ii didn't create the scale. I'd rather pay a guy who can hold onto the ball and always keep his team in the game than pay a Dalton or Cutler type of guy who's only going to wow you long enough to let everyone down when he inevitably throws picks or fumbles away the hopes of an already frustrated fan base.

 

Like I said... Smith turns the ball over less because he's asked to do less. When he's asked to do more, he turns the ball over more.

 

I can just as easily turn around and ask what's the point of not giving points back if you're not going to score?

 

Anyways, you seem to be saying two things. That the difference between the two is marginal (I agree), but also that saying that they're comparable is a giant stretch and that there's actually a difference between them big enough to be represented by millions per season. So which is it?

[AL_Royalty 489]

 

Like I said... Smith turns the ball over less because he's asked to do less. When he's asked to do more, he turns the ball over more.

 

I can just as easily turn around and ask what's the point of not giving points back if you're not going to score?

 

Anyways, you seem to be saying two things. That the difference between the two is marginal (I agree), but also that saying that they're comparable is a giant stretch and that there's actually a difference between them big enough to be represented by millions per season. So which is it?

It's both. There's not a huge difference in their talent level. There's a pretty big difference in what they do with it though. Jeff George was one if the most talented quarterbacks I've ever seen, but on game day be was a meltdown waiting to happen.

 

For my money I'd rather have a guy who doesn't fuck up a good thing every couple of weeks. We went through this before with Cutler vs Smith. I said the same thing then that I'm saying now.

 

What is different about this situation as opposed to that though is that this is a very fair deal for both parties, whereas Cutler just went all 17th century pirate on the bears.

 

I think Dalton has a shot to be a legit qb, but as of right now he's not in that class. Smith is.

[KempBolt 498]

It's both. There's not a huge difference in their talent level. There's a pretty big difference in what they do with it though. Jeff George was one if the most talented quarterbacks I've ever seen, but on game day be was a meltdown waiting to happen.

 

For my money I'd rather have a guy who doesn't fuck up a good thing every couple of weeks. We went through this before with Cutler vs Smith. I said the same thing then that I'm saying now.

 

What is different about this situation as opposed to that though is that this is a very fair deal for both parties, whereas Cutler just went all 17th century pirate on the bears.

 

I think Dalton has a shot to be a legit qb, but as of right now he's not in that class. Smith is.

To me, this is like drawing a hard line in the sand between Steven Jackson and Maurice Jones-Drew. Preferences may exist, but there's no clear separation.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

33 TDs is nice, but doesn't look nearly as impressive when you give the ball to the other team a staggering 23 times. I would continue on with a long and drawn out rant... But I think John has stated what needs to be said. Andy Dalton is inconsistent. He isn't a guy you can rely on, at all -- because you have no idea which version of him will show up.

It's easy to say... Hey, this guy threw 33 TDs, he is good. Or, hey this guys turned the ball over 23 times, he is bad. Average out the good and bad, and what you are left with is a really mediocre QB whose only constant is the fact that his team would do better in the playoffs if he literally disappeared.

Alex Smith has certain limitations, we've gone over that plenty on this forum... rehashing it isn't exactly what I am interested in doing. Looking at the limitations of each QB, looking at the results of each QB, and looking at the situations of both QBs -- I think it's a decisive Alex Smith victory. In a head to head QB-off, so to speak, at the very least.

[Dutch 874]

Mediocre isn't necessarily pathetic which is the only point I'm trying to make. Not saying Dalton is good but 33 TD's is better than pathetic production even considering he threw a lot of pics. Maybe we just have a different standard of what's pathetic. QB's who come to my mind in terms of pathetic production are Eli Manning , Joe Flacco, Matt Schaub, Geno Smith, Chad Henne etc. 33 TD's is a lot of points which is a good start. He just has to work on other facets of his game to be better overall.

[KempBolt 498]

33 TDs is nice, but doesn't look nearly as impressive when you give the ball to the other team a staggering 23 times. I would continue on with a long and drawn out rant... But I think John has stated what needs to be said. Andy Dalton is inconsistent. He isn't a guy you can rely on, at all -- because you have no idea which version of him will show up.

 

It's easy to say... Hey, this guy threw 33 TDs, he is good. Or, hey this guys turned the ball over 23 times, he is bad. Average out the good and bad, and what you are left with is a really mediocre QB whose only constant is the fact that his team would do better in the playoffs if he literally disappeared.

 

Alex Smith has certain limitations, we've gone over that plenty on this forum... rehashing it isn't exactly what I am interested in doing. Looking at the limitations of each QB, looking at the results of each QB, and looking at the situations of both QBs -- I think it's a decisive Alex Smith victory. In a head to head QB-off, so to speak, at the very least.

 

Yes, totally agree. Dalton provides more bad and more good than Smith and is inconsistent. Smith provides less of both, and is more consistent. If you would prefer Smith on the basis of consistency, then I'd say that's fine… logical even. But my point all along has been that to try and make it more than a preference and create this big distinction where Smith is so much better that he deserves to make way more money is kind of nuts. There's no clear gap of any significance.

 

Dalton throws for more yards, touchdowns, has a higher completion %, higher YPA, and is generally asked to do more.

 

Smith throws for fewer interceptions, is more reliable, and is generally asked to do less.

 

But the bottom line is that Dalton was responsible for 35 scores and 23 turnovers last year (+12), and Smith was responsible for 24 scores and 11 turnovers (+13). So if we average out the good and the bad as you suggest, we're talking about comparable players. It just comes down to whether you prefer the higher potential for big production, or the higher level of consistency.

 

There is no decisive victory here either way.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Consistency wins championships. Even if it is in short bursts like the Packers run or Joe Flacco's uncanny streak of play. It's why, IMO, the 49ers would be lucky to ever win a title with Colin Kaepernick at QB. I mean, it's surely possible he pulls a Flacco, but not something I would bet on.

And if the argument for Dalton is the idea he might hit one of those streaks (and that is definitely possible) at the right time... I think that hurts him.

Averaging out the good and the bad doesn't mean just looking at scores VS turnovers, though. While I don't disagree with your conclusion that both guys are relatively comparable, I think the premise is a bit off. Looking at what Andy Dalton has to work with, it's just a lot harder to either give him a pass or not be much more disappointed with his performance.

But yes, in the end... Neither guy is a world beater, and any team or fan base should be worried when numbers like these are thrown around for a player of either of these guys' caliber.

[KempBolt 498]

So consistency wins championships even if it's inconsistent consistency?

[BJORN 679]

It's both. There's not a huge difference in their talent level. There's a pretty big difference in what they do with it though. Jeff George was one if the most talented quarterbacks I've ever seen, but on game day be was a meltdown waiting to happen.

 

For my money I'd rather have a guy who doesn't fuck up a good thing every couple of weeks. We went through this before with Cutler vs Smith. I said the same thing then that I'm saying now.

 

What is different about this situation as opposed to that though is that this is a very fair deal for both parties, whereas Cutler just went all 17th century pirate on the bears.

 

I think Dalton has a shot to be a legit qb, but as of right now he's not in that class. Smith is.

Alex Smith in his prime is a game manager, definitely legit. Has more turnovers than touchdowns, definitely legit. Give me Handy Andy

 

Cutler? Not even a discussion IMO.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

So consistency wins championships even if it's inconsistent consistency?

Yup. That's all "getting hot" really is -- which we hear every year come playoff time.

[Glanvilles Grits 142]

Consistency wins championships. Even if it is in short bursts like the Packers run or Joe Flacco's uncanny streak of play. It's why, IMO, the 49ers would be lucky to ever win a title with Colin Kaepernick at QB. I mean, it's surely possible he pulls a Flacco, but not something I would bet on.

 

And if the argument for Dalton is the idea he might hit one of those streaks (and that is definitely possible) at the right time... I think that hurts him.

 

Averaging out the good and the bad doesn't mean just looking at scores VS turnovers, though. While I don't disagree with your conclusion that both guys are relatively comparable, I think the premise is a bit off. Looking at what Andy Dalton has to work with, it's just a lot harder to either give him a pass or not be much more disappointed with his performance.

 

But yes, in the end... Neither guy is a world beater, and any team or fan base should be worried when numbers like these are thrown around for a player of either of these guys' caliber.

 

What you said in your first paragraph really hits the mark IMO. Nearly every quarterback in the league right now (note I said nearly) has the ability to hit on one of these streaks. The problem is that you can't calculate or even possibly begin to guess when it's going to come to fruition. Much more, if it will at all. So is it worth it to these teams to take that chance and give these guys big money contracts where they will then be chained to this guy for years to come?

 

It's almost like saying: "I think my friend could be a pretty good simmer even though he hasn't yet shown me that he can swim. I'm going to chain myself to him and we're going to jump into the middle of the lake together, surely we will be able to swim back to shore, right?"

 

Just seems like we see more and more teams jump before actually evaluating what they have, and what it means as a franchise to sign these guys.

 

The option after year two basically protects both the Bengals and the 49ers, but, what happens when teams aren't able to get players to accept this type of contract?

 

I really hope to see the teams take a stand in the next few years and put a little taste of reality back into the quarterback market. Paying a mid-level quarterback this much money is insane.

[OSUViking 505]

Will the NFL begin to adjust the salary cap to match the growing wage demands from NFL stars? Seems like eventually it will be hard to retain more than a few stars on a team regardless of its cap situation.