Grant Cohn on Smith's Strengths and Weaknesses

[deep9er]

Hate? Are fucking kidding me? All I said was that there's a possibility that Smith also regresses, so I would think twice about signing him for longer than a year. Get the fuck over yourself.

no, i think you need to face it (atually i know you can't), we've been reading your Alex Smith hate for months now. it comes thru clearly despite your denials.

most of us don't feel Alex isn't the answer either, but it doesn't totally cloud our thinking. again, it only happens when your posting about Alex Smith.

 

[deep9er]

Now, having said all that, I think we will and probably should give Smith a 2-3 year deal, probably the latter. If Harbaugh likes Smith, we should trust him. But I want a QB who can take over the game and win it, and with a few isolated exceptions - most dramatically the Saints game - Smith still isn't that guy. Our offense has to improve a lot, and I think that starts with Smith.

yes, i think this is close (not exact) to what the majority are thinking? its not that we feel he's the answer, but the lesser of the evils.

but we don't hate Alex Smith so badly we'll justify anything else to keep him from re-signing. we won't push to start CK nowwon't push to sign Peyton, or won't push to trade up in the draft.

 

[MHSL82]

That's fine, but you're basically saying that Alex Smith has the same probably to regress as any other FA, including a guy like Peyton Manning. That's what I'm disagreeing with.

no, if it came out that way my bad?

i certainly don't think this at all.

I know what Deep was saying. What I'M saying is that there's also a possibility that Smith regresses, making a deal more than one year long also risky.

My post had very little to do with what he actually said, but more with what you said he was saying. He didn't "basically say that Alex had the same likelihood of regressing as Smith." You just basically interpretted it that way because of what you think about Smith. He hardly even refuted that the risk was there. He didn't even say that they should sign him for more than a year based upon likelihood of improving/regressing, he was just saying that they will take both into account and he thinks it may be riskier to do a one-year deal when 2+ could do a better job. If he said 4-7, I'd think he was being paranoid. With the ability to cut players and the fact that Smith cannot demand that much, signing him for longer than one year with as little guaranteed looks to be best for both sides. Harbaugh won't play Smith if Kaep is better and Smith would be a good backup to Kaep for a year or two before he'd presumably leave.

Clyde's hate for Alex Smith warps his thinking....badly??? Its so strange cause it only happens with Alex Smith?

Hate? Are fucking kidding me? All I said was that there's a possibility that Smith also regresses, so I would think twice about signing him for longer than a year. Get the fuck over yourself.

Obviously, saying you "hate" him is subjective, but don't pretend that Deep is making this statement solely upon this thread. You two have been on this message board and the other for quite awhile now, there's very little that can be elaborated about Smith to clarify how you two feel about him. You, to me, say it more definitively than Deep. Again, that being 'hate' is subjective.

 

[deep9er]

My post had very little to do with what he actually said, but more with what you said he was saying. He didn't "basically say that Alex had the same likelihood of regressing as Smith." You just basically interpretted it that way because of what you think about Smith. He hardly even refuted that the risk was there.




Obviously, saying you "hate" him is subjective, but don't pretend that Deep is making this statement solely upon this thread. You two have been on this message board and the other for quite awhile now, there's very little that can be elaborated about Smith to clarify how you two feel about him. You, to me, say it more definitively than Deep. Again, that being 'hate' is subjective.

yeah ok, maybe i shouldn't describe it as "hate". but i'm the latest to point this out, not the first and not the only.

 

[imac_21]

In 2009 the NFL avg QB Rating was 81.2

In 2010 the NFL avg QB Rating was 82.2

Smith 2009 81.5

Smith 2010 82.1


Please accept reality served to you on a plate.

In 2010 Alex Smith ranked 21st in QB rating.

In 2009 he was 19th.

You're seriously going to hang to one stat, that can be interpreted in different ways for your entire argument.

And your going to do it in bold and underlined??

Wow. That's all kinds of ridiculous. Who cares if he was below average in multiple categories that matter. He was average in one stat, with one way of interpreting said stat.

Devin McCourty was second in the league in 2010 in interceptions. He's a great CB. DeAngelo Hall was 5th. He's also a great CB.

Because all we need is a single stat to judge a player's entire season.

 

[ViperVisor]

categories that matter ???

QB Rating is not perfect but it is THE stat. To compare it to DB INTs is disingenuous. You interpret it 1 way. How effective is a guy at the basic goals of passing.

And why not factor the passes thrown by guys who didn't throw it 224 times in a season? Did those QBs not exist in the NFL? Were they in football limbo?

 

[clyde_carbon]

In 2009 the NFL avg QB Rating was 81.2

In 2010 the NFL avg QB Rating was 82.2

Smith 2009 81.5

Smith 2010 82.1


Please accept reality served to you on a plate.

QB rating is one of the most ridiculous stats to gauge QB play. I remember you and others on ESPN jumping up and down Cazic's throat, and rightfully so, when QB rating was his mainstay argument against Alex.

And really the averages your using are extremely skewed. Alex was 19th in QB rating in 2009 and 21st in 2010. How is that not sub-par?

 

[clyde_carbon]

no, i think you need to face it (atually i know you can't), we've been reading your Alex Smith hate for months now. it comes thru clearly despite your denials.

most of us don't feel Alex isn't the answer either, but it doesn't totally cloud our thinking. again, it only happens when your posting about Alex Smith.

No, I think YOU need to address the point I was making and not throw around ridiculous accusations as basis for your argument.

You said a 1-year deal for Alex is risky because there's a chance it'll be harder to him sign long-term if he continues to develop. I countered that by saying that you can also say that signing him to a multi-year contract is also risky because he might regress.

Do you disagree with that?

 

[ViperVisor]

Cazic would use wins. That is ridiculous and idiotic. Or sometimes gross yards.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Cazic would use wins. That is ridiculous and idiotic. Or sometimes gross yards.

AND QB rating.

 

[MHSL82]

No, I think YOU need to address the point I was making and not throw around ridiculous accusations as basis for your argument.

You said a 1-year deal for Alex is risky because there's a chance it'll be harder to him sign long-term if he continues to develop. I countered that by saying that you can also say that signing him to a multi-year contract is also risky because he might regress.

Do you disagree with that?

I'd say a high guaranteed amount would be risky and therefore a long-term contract, (4-7 years) would be essentially risky. But if it were a two-year contract (team option third year) with a reasonable guaranteed amount, it'd be a good deal. I think Smith would be a good backup for one year if he regressed this next year. I don't see Alex regressing to the point that he couldn't be a good backup to Kaep.

So, I would make the last year of any contract be a team option year (little or no dead money if not exercised), one year front loaded (10M or less), and a medium-high backup money for the last year (or two, if necessary) of the non-option year(s). I would also make it heavily incentivized but overall the lowest I could get without totally low-balling him. He and his agent know that if he plays great they can extend for more favorable terms.

Alex won't be signing a one-year deal anyway. At the very least it would be a one-year deal disguised as more. (I know you didn't say he would)

 

[MHSL82]

Cazic would use wins. That is ridiculous and idiotic. Or sometimes gross yards.

AND QB rating.

Cazic wasn't discriminatory when it came to which stats to use to criticize Smith. He was an equal-opportunity hater. Any stat will do if it painted Smith in a bad light. And face it, Alex did and still does leave parts of his game vulnerable to bad light - and I'd say I was the 4-5th biggest Alex Smith fan here (Niner first, of course).

 

[NinerSickness]

There is no one stat anyone can use to show one QB is better than the other. One has to make an arguement for it.

E.g. Montana is the best QB to ever play because not only did he consistently dominate in the regular season but he also did so in the post season. He has a 127+ passer rating in 4 superbowls; 12 TDs 0 INTs. Played through 2 strike years and was forced out of one NFC Championship game by injury or else he migh've had 5 SB wins.

Or

I think Kurt Warner was one of the 5 or 6 best QBs to ever play because...

Passer rating is part of it, wins are part of it, yards (per attempt if you're thinking correctly) are part of it. No one aspect is the end all be all.

 

[iHATEdodgers]

It was ridiculous for cazic to use QB rating in the way he used it. "Alex Smith's QBR is 70 he's not good he'll never be good he'll be out of the league in 07 JT O'Sulllivan is the bestest forever and ever and my mom says I have to go back to the basement I'm always right and I had all the ideas for Star Wars!"

It is not ridiculous to say Smith's QBR was average in 09 and 10 and was good in 11.

I agree with vipervisor that it is disingenuous to compare QBR to INTs for DBs. QBR is the closest thing there is to WHIP or OPS in baseball which are basically good parameters to judge a player on. But for instance Brandon Belt's was in the low .700s last year which is not very good - but he is a young player and you can't judge him solely on that. Just as you couldn't definitively judge Alex Smith based on his first few seasons - as has been proven out - and gimme a fucking break cazic was and is just a hater and a moron and he was wrong so I don't see the benefit of bringing up such a dumbass to defend your point...

If you said Alex Smith only threw 17 TDs he sucks, that would be stupid. Just as if you said Alex Smith won 14 games he is the greatest. And to say QBR is the most ridiculous stat is in itself ridiculous.

 

[deep9er]

No, I think YOU need to address the point I was making and not throw around ridiculous accusations as basis for your argument.

You said a 1-year deal for Alex is risky because there's a chance it'll be harder to him sign long-term if he continues to develop. I countered that by saying that you can also say that signing him to a multi-year contract is also risky because he might regress.

Do you disagree with that?

again, i responded to another post and just wanted to mention that as a "small consideration". already said i didn't intend to make it a big deal, but you're STILL taking it as such. how many times do i need to clarify myself?

am i pushing for a multi year deal cause i'm concerned he'll take a big jump? NO.

now to address YOUR big issue above..............yes, he can regress given a multi-year deal, but if you take this by itself.......ANY free agent can regress given a multi year deal.

ok now?

 

[deep9er]

I'd say a high guaranteed amount would be risky and therefore a long-term contract, (4-7 years) would be essentially risky. But if it were a two-year contract (team option third year) with a reasonable guaranteed amount, it'd be a good deal. I think Smith would be a good backup for one year if he regressed this next year. I don't see Alex regressing to the point that he couldn't be a good backup to Kaep.

So, I would make the last year of any contract be a team option year (little or no dead money if not exercised), one year front loaded (10M or less), and a medium-high backup money for the last year (or two, if necessary) of the non-option year(s). I would also make it heavily incentivized but overall the lowest I could get without totally low-balling him. He and his agent know that if he plays great they can extend for more favorable terms.

Alex won't be signing a one-year deal anyway. At the very least it would be a one-year deal disguised as more. (I know you didn't say he would)

yes, there's a bigger picture to consider too.

but again, the topic is Alex Smith so Clyde is discombobulated.

 

[Flyingiguana]

omg, cazic isn't even here and we have his dirty little fingers all over every reply. he's like that BO in jerry's car that won't go away

 

[deep9er]

omg, cazic isn't even here and we have his dirty little fingers all over every reply. he's like that BO in jerry's car that won't go away

haaa, good one

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

In 2010 Alex Smith ranked 21st in QB rating.

In 2009 he was 19th.

You're seriously going to hang to one stat, that can be interpreted in different ways for your entire argument.

And your going to do it in bold and underlined??

Wow. That's all kinds of ridiculous. Who cares if he was below average in multiple categories that matter. He was average in one stat, with one way of interpreting said stat.

Devin McCourty was second in the league in 2010 in interceptions. He's a great CB. DeAngelo Hall was 5th. He's also a great CB.

Because all we need is a single stat to judge a player's entire season.

Heh. An impressive amount of fallacies, deflections and irrelevance packed into ~75 words. Nice work.

 

[MHSL82]

Heh. An impressive amount of fallacies, deflections and irrelevance packed into ~75 words. Nice work.

He's not that efficient. It was more like ~110 words. He did use a lot of contractions to limit the word usage.