Baker Mayfield: Fire The Cannons

[I'mWithDan]

However you are missing the core concept. ANY QUARTERBACK is going to want 25 million/year to be your long term starter at QB. It absolutely doesnt matter if its mickey mouse, case keenum, or Baker mayfield. Yes you might be able to get away with a 1 year rental at 10-15/million a year to go sign whoever. However, the minute you want to commit to them long term you are back to looking at 25+ million/year. So we go back to is Baker mayfield better than Bridgwater/Fitz/Jimmy G long term. yes, emphatically yes. Its not close yes. So whats the point if you are just going to get a worse player for maybe a small savings

Is it your opinion they are worse? Because there's a lot of data that says they are not. Really, Baker has been living off of that middle game sample under Stefanski. But in the aggregate, he's been wholly average. So it is more a question of wether you think Mayfield can consistently reclaim that performance level. His career intimates he probably cannot, as the hallmark has been how up and down his play has been. If he can't reclaim that performance level and sustain it, the scheme and talent we have is generally going to work just as well with a QB you deem to be average.

I also don't think I'm missing the concept here. The Browns have an amazingly friendly QB situation. I am confident that they can get a discount on any of Bridgewater, Fitz, Jimmy G, etc. and I'm confident that discount can be for more than 1 year. The window to win is now.....if you have more confidence that you can get average to above average play from any of those guys, over the next 2 seasons, IMO you move on from Mayfield. Would I be in love with either at QB? I mean no but it is a better alternative than getting in a situation like the Rams got in.....where they were good enough to win but tethered to a QB that was being propped up by the scheme.

This is all obviously worse case scenario, which you described as pay him or he won't be on the roster. If I'm given that choice, today, I'm just moving on.

 

[I'mWithDan]

I would caution using only stats to judge who who is the better QB. People argued that Stafford wasn't an upgrade on Goff because of these statistics, so the eyes have to be used somewhat.

Come on @Amherstcavsfan, this is really an exaggeration. Who was doing this?

Stafford had significantly better production than Goff, in a dumpster fire of an org. The notion that people were arguing he wasn't an upgrade seems borderline Stephen A. Smith First Take to me.



I am posting a lot of these metrics, not because I see Jacoby Brissett as a better QB as Mayfield......but to merely show how much Mayfield has underperformed in total under Stafanski. Not looking at the best 8-10 games......looking at all of it, in comparison to the league. There seems to be a section of our fanbase that wants to just ignore any and all data, in favor of things like only looking at his best stretch of games.

I agree that there is some nuance here........but to me, that nuance doesn't matter nearly as much when a QB is in a great situation. Stefanski's scheme would make any QB who is average look competent. So seeing Mayfield got through these peaks and valley's has just been really concerning from an extension perspective.

All I am pointing out is, the argument for extending Mayfield (at this point), is largely predicated on some really flimsy anecdotes. And if it does work out, him living up to the type of contract it would take to get his long term commitment, the Browns will probably have been really fortunate it did.

 

[bob2the2nd]

Is it your opinion they are worse? Because there's a lot of data that says they are not. Really, Baker has been living off of that middle game sample under Stefanski. But in the aggregate, he's been wholly average. So it is more a question of wether you think Mayfield can consistently reclaim that performance level. His career intimates he probably cannot, as the hallmark has been how up and down his play has been. If he can't reclaim that performance level and sustain it, the scheme and talent we have is generally going to work just as well with a QB you deem to be average.

I also don't think I'm missing the concept here. The Browns have an amazingly friendly QB situation. I am confident that they can get a discount on any of Bridgewater, Fitz, Jimmy G, etc. and I'm confident that discount can be for more than 1 year. The window to win is now.....if you have more confidence that you can get average to above average play from any of those guys, over the next 2 seasons, IMO you move on from Mayfield. Would I be in love with either at QB? I mean no but it is a better alternative than getting in a situation like the Rams got in.....where they were good enough to win but tethered to a QB that was being propped up by the scheme.

This is all obviously worse case scenario, which you described as pay him or he won't be on the roster. If I'm given that choice, today, I'm just moving on.

As @Amherstcavsfan said you cant judge Baker on his stats entirely. He has one of hte best rushing teams in the league behind him and a lot of those easy TDs from the goal line other QBs get, Baker isnt getting. Give Baker 3 more TDs this year and he is suddenly a top 10 QB. the Number of TDs a QB produces are a huge factor into how they get rated. Go down the line and take 3 TDs away from any of the players you are taking about, and see what their numbers look like.

That said Im going to leave it as this. Im glad you arent the GM of this team. No plan should be "I am confident i can get another quarterback to come start for the cleveland browns at a discount". Because quite frankly the best chance you have of getting anyone to take a discount to start here is baker

 

[Vee-Rex]

Yes. You post various versions of it, with different data sets / sources, to see if they are saying the same thing. Stress test it. The above is an ESPN data source. Maybe you trust their data? Maybe you don't? People seem to like QBR as an approximation of QBR play......this is an aggregate look that correlates to QBR, using ESPN's EPA data they generate. It says what the other data sources that track things like this say......that Baker is an incredibly replaceable QB relative to average. Unless your argument is that all these data sources are wrong, what is the actual performance based argument for paying him?

For what it's worth, the QBR you used in your data from your post an hour ago is 2021 Baker. We now know he has had a fully/completely torn labrum for 75% (4.5 games) of his play in 2021.

I strongly doubt the front office is going to judge him based solely on 2021 numbers. IMO, I think both sides will want to push off the contract extension for another year. See what Baker looks like in 2022 since 2021 is just too skewed with injuries. It's what I would do if I were Berry (assuming there is no clear upgrade available). If Baker was gung-ho about an extension right now then I'd be willing to roll the dice and make him the highest paid Browns player at 26'ish million per. It wouldn't handicap the team especially with the rising cap. Myles is better, but you're the QB and we'll pay you more. Obviously Baker wouldn't accept that, so we'd just be playing on his 5th year option and deciding after that.

 

[Bkerr02]

Now post the stats for Baker’s last 10 games of the season last year and the first game and a half this year before the injury. The beginning of last year was a brand new system, new HC, no offseason. Once Baker and stefanski saw what worked and didn’t work and familiarity in the system they took off the second half of last year. Look at the KC game and the Houston game before Baker got hurt. He was playing pretty damn good. He had an 80% completion percentage, yes he did have the 2 picks, one was throwing the ball away while being hit and the other Schwartz gave up on the route leading to Baker hurting his shoulder. Anything after the injury is obviously going to be screwed considering the dude tore his fucking labrum and popped his shoulder out. That injury is going to effect even the best QB’s in the league. This unreal expectation that people have that Baker should throw 300 yard 6 TD’s every game. Yes he has missed throws every damn QB does. Go ahead and sign bridgewater or Winston or some other shit ass QB and I will bet my life on it that you would be begging to have Baker back.

 

[Bkerr02]

The first one is the KC game and the second is Houston. Now watch those and then go find me an average ass QB that can play like that consistently. Accurate, tight window throws, come off 1st and second reads etc. after the injury it all went to shit and honestly how can you put that on baker? Anyone would have those same exact reactions and try to protect the shoulder as best as possible.

 

[I'mWithDan]

For what it's worth, the QBR you used in your data from your post an hour ago is 2021 Baker. We now know he has had a fully/completely torn labrum for 75% (4.5 games) of his play in 2021.

I strongly doubt the front office is going to judge him based solely on 2021 numbers.

Now post the stats for Baker’s last 10 games of the season last year and the first game and a half this year before the injury. The beginning of last year was a brand new system, new HC, no offseason.

This isn't just 2021. It is 2021 and 2020. So he is being given credit for his best games.

I know you guys feel like this is anti Baker sorcery or something.

Per ESPN's interpretation of EPA, Baker's data is:

2020 - 597 plays, 0.140 EPA/play
2021 - 219 plays, 0.073 EPA/play

The view above is a 2 year view relative to league average. Obviously Baker's 2021 play is effecting that sample, because it has been bad. How much of that is injury related is up for debate. Even if you wanted to isolate for his non injured games, it would still only slot him around Winston / Carr. And that is if you are completely excusing his play post injury. So that absolute, most generous evaluation of his play has been that he has provided value on par with Carr. But again, we are excusing a lot in that smaller sample. For any player, if you throw out sub optimal results, no matter the reason, they are obviously going to move up a data set.

For Baker, just for some context......you are throwing out more than 20% of his regular season games (4.5/22) under Stefanski if the the last 4.5 don't count in your eyes. To me, that seems like a more valid argument if he didn't play pretty well against the Chargers and for that matter, his Texans game was roughly right around average as well from an EPA perspective even with the injury. It is not as if all of that data is largely negative. It is just you guys think he could play better. Which maybe he could, maybe he couldn't, relative to those opponents.

 

[Vee-Rex]

This isn't just 2021. It is 2021 and 2020. So he is being given credit for his best games.

The QBR you posted was 2021 data:

https://realcavsfans.com/index.php?attachments/screen-shot-2021-10-21-at-12-46-25-pm-png.6794/

Not talking about EPA here, but 41.6 QBR is his 2021 data.

 

[ShawnKempIsMyDad]

I feel like you give the guy next year unless a stellar trade comes along. Mainly, if Russel Wilson or Rodgers can be had. If he doesn't work after next year, we then can make a judgement and move on if we need to. This simply doesn't have to be discussed right now.

 

[Vee-Rex]

The view above is a 2 year view relative to league average. Obviously Baker's 2021 play is effecting that sample, because it has been bad. How much of that is injury related is up for debate. Even if you wanted to isolate for his non injured games, it would still only slot him around Winston / Carr. And that is if you are completely excusing his play post injury. So that absolute, most generous evaluation of his play has been that he has provided value on par with Carr. But again, we are excusing a lot in that smaller sample. For any player, if you throw out sub optimal results, no matter the reason, they are obviously going to move up a data set.

For Baker, just for some context......you are throwing out more than 20% of his regular season games (4.5/22) under Stefanski if the the last 4.5 don't count in your eyes. To me, that seems like a more valid argument if he didn't play pretty well against the Chargers and for that matter, his Texans game was roughly right around average as well from an EPA perspective even with the injury. It is not as if all of that data is largely negative. It is just you guys think he could play better. Which maybe he could, maybe he couldn't, relative to those opponents.

2021 is a done deal. Not only is it a small sample size, but it's skewed by injury. Once you start trying to say, "Well he played well enough against the Chargers" then you're getting way off base, since no one can measure the impact of his injury. I wouldn't even isolate his non-injured games since the sample size just isn't large enough.

Scrap 2021 and evaluate based on 2022 (or 2020) when he's fully healthy.

 

[I'mWithDan]

The QBR you posted was 2021 data:

https://realcavsfans.com/index.php?attachments/screen-shot-2021-10-21-at-12-46-25-pm-png.6794/

Not talking about EPA here, but 41.6 QBR is his 2021 data.

Yes, it is showing the correlation between QBR and EPA/play data in 2021.

Here is the 2020 chart, so you see that Mayfield's numbers are there in his better sample.



Again, I know people think I am anti Mayfield......I am not.

I'm trying to be as fair to him as I can be here. In the dataset above (page 736), I was even excluding a lot of guys who I think are less relevant. Like retired players that technically factor in to this 2 year look or guys like Tua (smaller data), Fitzpatrick (smaller data), Lock or Watson, etc. That would actually make Baker worse by comparison. Mayfield would actually drop from #22 to #28 for example if you just blindly included everyone in the assessment of wether to pay him.

I'm trying to just take a view of......here are the guys that (to me), are comps in terms of options moving forward for NFL teams. That is even a positive set of criteria in Baker's favor. The look from the ESPN EPA and QBR data just is what it is through 22 games. I'm not inventing ways to make him look bad.

 

[Vee-Rex]

Yes, it is showing the correlation between QBR and EPA/play data in 2021.

Here is the 2020 chart, so you see that Mayfield's numbers are there in his better sample.

View attachment 6801

Again, I know people think I am anti Mayfield......I am not.

I'm trying to be as fair to him as I can be here. In the dataset above (page 736), I was even excluding a lot of guys who I think are less relevant. Like retired players that technically factor in to this 2 year look or guys like Tua (smaller data), Fitzpatrick (smaller data), Lock or Watson, etc. That would actually make Baker worse by comparison. Mayfield would actually drop from #22 to #28 for example if you just blindly included everyone in the assessment of wether to pay him.

I'm trying to just take a view of......here are the guys that (to me), are comps in terms of options moving forward for NFL teams. That is even a positive set of criteria in Baker's favor. The look from the ESPN EPA and QBR data just is what it is through 22 games. I'm not inventing ways to make him look bad.

There is no need to be defensive... look at this thread, I think most people are hesitant about Baker's future and have their doubts.

I just think posting cherry-picked data and/or skewed data and using it as gospel to support the narrative that Baker is replaceable... just feels a bit intentionally slanted (I'm speaking for myself and not others, but this may be why you're feeling so defensive).

No matter how much you want to cling to 2021... it's skewed. That's just how it is.

Baker's QBR for 2020 is top 10. His CPoE is top 10. That's not isolating for the final 10 games either - that's the entirety of 2020. The graph you just posted for 2020 (EPA/play and QBR) shows him in a good light.

 

[DJTJ]

external candidates, Russ is the only player I’d consider.

And I have zero interest in that price tag.

 

[I'mWithDan]

There is no need to be defensive... look at this thread, I think most people are hesitant about Baker's future and have their doubts.

I just think posting cherry-picked data and/or skewed data and using it as gospel to support the narrative that Baker is replaceable... just feels a bit intentionally slanted (I'm speaking for myself and not others, but this may be why you're feeling so defensive).

No matter how much you want to cling to 2021... it's skewed. That's just how it is.

Baker's QBR for 2020 is top 10. His CPoE is top 10. That's not isolating for the final 10 games either - that's the entirety of 2020. The graph you just posted for 2020 (EPA/play and QBR) shows him in a good light.

I'm not defensive. I'm just pointing out that there seems to be this section of our fanbase that thinks they are being tricked by the data or something. It is ESPN's data......I don't really control what it says, I just tell you it correlates to QBR.......and here's a look at all the plays under Stefanski, and how Mayfield compares to the league. That is it. What is his data compared to the average QB.

Cherry picking? It is all the data under Stefanski. How is it cherry picked? I'm not using it as gospel, I'm saying that Mayfield has not performed like a QB you would pay $30 million to. Maybe you think he has?

Also, what does skewed mean in your eyes? Is it 100% worse? Is it 50% worse? 25% worse? If it is 1% worse, you don't care? Or 10% worse you don't care?

I ask, for example......because the Vikings game was horrendous but it wasn't the worst game he's ever played (even under Stefanski). So it isn't an unrealistic outlier. This isn't Pat Mahomes playing like a raging dumpster fire, as the #1 overall QB in this metric......and doing so in a way that is outside the bounds of what he has done before. Mayfield has played that poorly before under Stefanski. So that is why I view it as less skewed than you do. Because it isn't outside the norm. Will the 2021 data be the only data he'll be evaluated on, I mean no, it won't be.......but I also don't think it should just completely be cast aside either. It holds some value......the disagreement is probably on how much.

 

[bigfoot5415]

Get the funk...outta my face

Get...the...funk...outta my face