Baker Mayfield Gettin' funky on the field

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

bs80

In the Rotation
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
570
Reaction score
753
Points
93
Right? But also does QB need an upgrade? Not saying baker is the best QB in 30 years but look we have THE #1 run game in the league the #1 offensive line in the league. Despite last week a budding defense .. of course it would be great to have the #1 pass offense but this isn't Madden.

Notice Mahomes has a piss poor defense and no running attack... a team is built based on balance and what an organization is willing to prioritize and what it is willing to risk... thats all. Not saying he is the best but to expect the best on top of what we have is just crazy.
Right, and to your point, look at KC's record! Small sample size and of course most of us would expect the Chiefs to figure it out in the end. No QB should reasonably be expected to cover for a defense that gives up 40+ points in a game.
 

Amherstcavsfan

Always a Wine and Gold Winner
Browns Moderator
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
18,149
Reaction score
26,564
Points
135
The problem is that, at some point, the Browns are going to have to cut corners in order to win if they pay Baker. They won't be able to maintain the same offensive line, most likely, and probably will only keep 1 good back.

At some point, your QB has to carry you.
 

Real Deal

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
31,806
Reaction score
23,895
Points
135
Landry is set to practice or already practicing. Knowing him, he's going to be ready. The stage could be set for a 4-5 TD game for Baker considering the weakness of Arizona. And I think if you have any opportunity to pour it on, Baker deserves a 6 TD kinda day in the worse way.
 

CBBI

Super Chill Mode
Joined
Apr 17, 2005
Messages
10,906
Reaction score
21,111
Points
135
The problem is that, at some point, the Browns are going to have to cut corners in order to win if they pay Baker. They won't be able to maintain the same offensive line, most likely, and probably will only keep 1 good back.

At some point, your QB has to carry you.

This is very true. It's not the worst thing in the world if your QB can't carry you when he's only making 10.5M.

But when that 10.5 turns into 38.5... you just gotta have more.
 

WellYouNeednt

Needles and Pins
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
3,131
Reaction score
2,693
Points
113
Great breakdown on Baker that Jordan Zirm just released while I was yammering on.


How this does not have more likes is beyond me.

I think people will defend Baker, because i believe he has proven over time he can be an incredible QB more than a bad one. I am not the ttpe to say Baker is X QB or is comparable to Y QB or his ceiling is (enter whatever you want here). Bottom line — nobody really knows.

After reading that article, my final question (not answers) are this:

- Has the injury contributed to his tentative/lack of confident play?

- To what extent does Stefanski’s scheme impact Baker’s approach to risk?

- Inside of the second statement — what does the coaching from AVP/Stefanski look like — take X throw, because it is safer or emphasis on the first/second read over third due to analytical risk?

Again, i have no fucking clue, as i am a former drummer who now works in finance and played high school football at a really slow/white school!

I love our Leadership/management and especially Stefanski. That is not to say he does not have room to evolve, just like Baker. I am NOT assigning blame on Baker or Stefanski — but, i believe they will figure it out and we will see the Baker we all fell in love with.
 

Vee-Rex

NBA Starter
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
1,529
Reaction score
3,398
Points
113
This is very true. It's not the worst thing in the world if your QB can't carry you when he's only making 10.5M.

But when that 10.5 turns into 38.5... you just gotta have more.
I agree, though I wonder how well off we'll be with the salary cap and the new tv deal. Remember, next year is his 5th year option with just an 18m cap hit.

The defense is young - we might not be able to retain Clowney or Harrison but I don't think we'll suffer any drastic changes there besides those two.

The bigger question is offense, but I see some money being freed up with Wyatt Teller walking (unless he signs a friendly contract since he has regressed a lot). I think Hooper is a goner. Unless a miraculous turn-around happens, OBJ is gone as well. That's a lot of money off the books and I don't think our offense would be severely crippled if we lost those 3.

It gets trickier when we go to 2023 and beyond, which will include Baker's contract extension or franchise tag, but with some precise and effective drafting along with Callahan guiding the young and cheap FA offensive linemen, there exists the possibility that we can remain a contender even with the aforementioned cap hit.

Obviously we'd rather have someone with the talent level of Aaron Rodgers, Prime Peyton Manning's brain, Lamar Jackson's legs, and my 99-rated Madden QB all wrapped into one, but I don't know if we're screwed if Berry decides to slap the franchise tag on Baker.
 

Randolphkeys

When you gonna gimmie some time, Corona?
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
30,916
Reaction score
73,054
Points
148
The bigger question is offense, but I see some money being freed up with Wyatt Teller walking (unless he signs a friendly contract since he has regressed a lot)

I was planning a write up on the progress of the offensive line but likely won't have time this week. Sufficient to say, Teller had a rough first game going against Chris Jones.

That was followed by steady improvement, and according to PFF he has been great the past two games.

Teller is absolutely still in the running for an extension, especially as we see Hudson isn't close to ready.
 

I'mWithDan

"Straight Cash Homie"
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
9,271
Reaction score
16,626
Points
123
Doesn't change the fact that your logic is fundamentally flawed.

Are you following the argument being made here?

Baker landed in a middle band (15th overall in tied or trailing QB rating) that followed with:

Gardner Minshew, Kyler Murray, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Ryan, Teddy Bridgewater and Jared Goff

1 of those guys was traded for a half eaten bag of chips, 2 are pretty washed, 1 is on his 4th team in 7 years and 1 signed one of the worst QB contracts in recent memory. The guy with a pulse is one of the most electric runners at the position, something Baker has zero in common with.

So, do you believe that you can win a Super Bowl with present day Gardner? Big Ben? Matt Ryan? Teddy B? Goff? That is the argument that is being had here, if you are following the discourse of this thread. These are Mayfield's statistical peers, while only 1 of these guys (Baker) is in an absolutely perfect situation. That is what is and should be concerning. Baker is in an ideal situation and performing at a very average level by the letter of the QB rating law and he's in the grouping of guys who are constantly called bad on this board and around league talking heads. Instead, you believe this Big Ben esque data to be some sort of confirmation that Baker isn't bad, below average, whatever other poor synonym you want to use.......when none of these other similar guys that came after him are anyone who you would say you'd be winning a super bowl with. That is the entire premise of what we have been arguing for 20 pages.......but we keep spinning off in these strange side conversations about what this word means, or if "bad" is too strong of a word, or whatever. Most people would call Big Ben bad.....or Goff bad........and Baker ranks near them in late game performance but is not bad I guess?

In our last 9 games, Baker has had 4 opportunities to engineer a late tying or winning or go ahead drive......those 4 drives resulted in this:

Jets......3-6, 41 yards, lost fumble on 4th down sneak
Chiefs.....3-4, 11 yards, punt....Browns never got the ball back
Chiefs....3-4, 26 yards, INT......game ended
Chargers.....4-7, 21 yards.....drive ended on downs

In the Chiefs playoff game, something that will likely show up in late game "wins" with a blind look at drive stats. The TD drive to start the 4th quarter included this stat line for Baker:

3-5, 12 yards, 0 TD's

In the Jets game, something that will likely show up in late game "wins" with a blind look at drive stats. The TD drive to start the 4th quarter included this stat line for Baker:

1-4, 3 yards, 0 TD's

So he engineered 2 of the TD drives that contribute to some of the stats mentioned in 4th quarters, of him.....you know, not being bad......where he literally did nothing. He was 4-9, for 15 passing yards and 0 TD's.

But lets just set that aside for now.

Baker's QB rating on his last 4 tries to win a game:

53.47

His raw stats:

13-21, 99 yards, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 1 FUM.....4.7 YPA, 7.6 YPC


Is this laid out well enough for you? Or was there a word in here that was too much of an exaggeration that we can talk about instead? Not trying to be cranky but we are quibbling over language instead of seeing what the discussion is....so do you understand what I am saying about Baker?......the observation that, late in games, obvious or do or die passing situations.....he has some really bad tape and results. A litany of things......from bad throws, to bad decisions, to not seeing guys, to wasting half the clock to get a single first down. That is the discussion here.......can this guy close a game on a team trying to win a Super Bowl? Maybe he can......but there is a lot not to like and yes, it has been downright bad, especially recently.

And again.....is this bad?

Stat by Dan Orlovsky this morning: Baker Mayfield is 31st in QBR since enetering the league in one score games in the 4th quarter

You just have to expect more than what we are seeing, for a team trying to win a Super Bowl. I hope Baker goes out and proves this is just a rut but we are 50 games in here. At some point, you will need to make a tough decision if nothing changes.
 
Last edited:

bs80

In the Rotation
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
570
Reaction score
753
Points
93
Are you following the argument being made here?

Baker landed in a middle band (15th overall in tied or trailing QB rating) that followed with:

Gardner Minshew, Kyler Murray, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Ryan, Teddy Bridgewater and Jared Goff

1 of those guys was traded for a half eaten bag of chips, 2 are pretty washed, 1 is on his 4th team in 7 years and 1 signed one of the worst QB contracts in recent memory. The guy with a pulse is one of the most electric runners at the position, something Baker has zero in common with.

So, do you believe that you can win a Super Bowl with present day Gardner? Big Ben? Matt Ryan? Teddy B? Goff? That is the argument that is being had here, if you are following the discourse of this thread. These are Mayfield's statistical peers, while only 1 of these guys (Baker) is in an absolutely perfect situation. That is what is and should be concerning. Baker is in an ideal situation and performing at a very average level by the letter of the QB rating law and he's in the grouping of guys who are constantly called bad on this board and around league talking heads. Instead, you believe this Big Ben esque data to be some sort of confirmation that Baker isn't bad, below average, whatever other poor synonym you want to use.......when none of these other similar guys that came after him are anyone who you would say you'd be winning a super bowl with. That is the entire premise of what we have been arguing for 20 pages.......but we keep spinning off in these strange side conversations about what this word means, or if "bad" is too strong of a word, or whatever. Most people would call Big Ben bad.....or Goff bad........and Baker ranks near them in late game performance but is not bad I guess?

In our last 9 games, Baker has had 4 opportunities to engineer a late tying or winning or go ahead drive......those 4 drives resulted in this:

Jets......3-6, 41 yards, lost fumble on 4th down sneak
Chiefs.....3-4, 11 yards, punt....Browns never got the ball back
Chiefs....3-4, 26 yards, INT......game ended
Chargers.....4-7, 21 yards.....drive ended on downs

In the Chiefs playoff game, something that will likely show up in late game "wins" with a blind look at drive stats. The TD drive to start the 4th quarter included this stat line for Baker:

3-5, 12 yards, 0 TD's

In the Jets game, something that will likely show up in late game "wins" with a blind look at drive stats. The TD drive to start the 4th quarter included this stat line for Baker:

1-4, 3 yards, 0 TD's

So he engineered 2 of the TD drives that contribute to some of the stats mentioned in 4th quarters, of him.....you know, not being bad......where he literally did nothing. He was 4-9, for 15 passing yards and 0 TD's.

But lets just set that aside for now.

Baker's QB rating on his last 4 tries to win a game:

53.47

His raw stats:

13-21, 99 yards, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 1 FUM.....4.7 YPA, 7.6 YPC


Is this laid out well enough for you? Or was there a word in here that was too much of an exaggeration that we can talk about instead? Not trying to be cranky but we are quibbling over language instead of seeing what the discussion is....so do you understand what I am saying about Baker?......the observation that, late in games, obvious or do or die passing situations.....he has some really bad tape and results. A litany of things......from bad throws, to bad decisions, to not seeing guys, to wasting half the clock to get a single first down. That is the discussion here.......can this guy close a game on a team trying to win a Super Bowl? Maybe he can......but there is a lot not to like and yes, it has been downright bad, especially recently.

And again.....is this bad?

Stat by Dan Orlovsky this morning: Baker Mayfield is 31st in QBR since enetering the league in one score games in the 4th quarter

You just have to expect more than what we are seeing, for a team trying to win a Super Bowl. I hope Baker goes out and proves this is just a rut but we are 50 games in here. At some point, you will need to make a tough decision if nothing changes.
Dude, I've been pretty fucking consistent all along, that all I'm trying to say is that the data that I listed does not feed into your argument that Baker is bad during crunch time.

I've also conceded that it's cool if you think that Baker is below average in moments when we need him to step up.

The reason I keep replying is that you took the data that I posted and claimed that it was the very definition of your point when in fact it indicated the opposite.

I'm strictly playing by your fucking parameters here and pointing out that your logic in using that data is flawed. If I wasn't clear enough, all I've been trying to say is that while I have no issue with you expecting better pay from Baker, your assertion that a specific set of data that I posted supports your theory is unequivocally logically unsound.
 

I'mWithDan

"Straight Cash Homie"
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
9,271
Reaction score
16,626
Points
123
The reason I keep replying is that you took the data that I posted and claimed that it was the very definition I'm strictly playing by your fucking parameters here and pointing out that your logic in using that data is flawed. If I wasn't clear enough, all I've been trying to say is that while I have no issue with you expecting better pay from Baker, your assertion that a specific set of data that I posted supports your theory is unequivocally logically unsound.

In the best year of his career, his data is saying he performs at a level near Gardner Minshew, Big Ben, Goff, etc in tight games. He’s closer to that group than he is the top tier guys.

How is it logically unsound to think that data set might intimate he’s not good late in games? A data set that thinks he’s more like Gardner Minshew than Russell Wilson?
 

bs80

In the Rotation
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
570
Reaction score
753
Points
93
In the best year of his career, his data is saying he performs at a level near Gardner Minshew, Big Ben, Goff, etc in tight games. He’s closer to that group than he is the top tier guys.

How is it logically unsound to think that data set might intimate he’s not good late in games? A data set that thinks he’s more like Gardner Minshew than Russell Wilson?
It's logically unsound to say that if the league average passer rating is 93.6, that Baker putting up a passer rating of 95.9 is the definition of below average. I don't know how much more clear I can be.
 

Vee-Rex

NBA Starter
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
1,529
Reaction score
3,398
Points
113
In the best year of his career, his data is saying he performs at a level near Gardner Minshew, Big Ben, Goff, etc in tight games. He’s closer to that group than he is the top tier guys.

How is it logically unsound to think that data set might intimate he’s not good late in games? A data set that thinks he’s more like Gardner Minshew than Russell Wilson?
He's saying that the descriptions used for Baker earlier in this 234908324 page clusterfuck don't match what the data is saying.

Before, the narrative was: "Late in games, Baker is bad/terrible, lost, confused, below-average, Charlie Frye, etc..."

The above ^^ were actual descriptions used against Baker. Then after Bs80 demonstrates that the data set shows he's average/slightly above-average...

Now, the narrative is: "Late in games, Baker is not near the top tier guys, not good enough to win a Super Bowl, look at these names in his grouping (Ben, Ryan, Minshew...)"

There is a shifting of goalposts here, is there not?

He has been consistent more than anyone. I believe I've been consistent, but if you feel I shifted with you and point it out, I'll acknowledge it face-up. There really isn't any room for intellectual dishonesty or flat out lying (I'm not accusing you of either) and I think people need to have the ability to level with each other. At least on this site :chuckle:
 

bs80

In the Rotation
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
570
Reaction score
753
Points
93
Great breakdown on Baker that Jordan Zirm just released while I was yammering on.

Thanks for sharing, this was a great read. Unfortunately I have even more questions than before :chuckle:.

I think it's pretty clear that Stefanski has neutered Baker to an extent and coached him to rein in his gunslinger mentality. I'd be surprised if anyone would disagree with that. And with that has come some really good things but not without a few drawbacks. Way more good than bad though, IMO.

I also think it's evident that Baker has some serious arm talent. I'll never forget that bomb to Jarvis against Carolina his rookie year. Or the perfect pass to Higgins in the end zone while rolling right against the Falcons. His arm didn't just lose the ability to sling it like that.

The argument becomes, can we get to the point where Baker can get back to challenging the deeper parts of the field enough to keep defenses honest under Stefanski?

I can think of two legitimate views on this off the top of my head. The first is that Baker still has the arm talent, and once he gets his confidence back and Stefanski fully removes the training wheels, Baker will be making those big time throws again on a regular basis.

The other view I can imagine is that Baker won't be able to get back to those big time throws without throwing his fair share of picks like he did back in 2019 -- he can't read the entire field quickly enough, and that was the whole point of Stefanski reprogramming Baker.

One could argue that Stefanski's scheme does not discourage Baker to take shots down the field because he has Odell busting open down the field on a regular basis, but who knows to what extent Kevin is drilling into Baker's head that he needs to be smart and take the easy double over the home run.

In a perfect world, Baker keeps progressing as a QB and gains Stefanski's full trust to cut it loose. If Baker can find a way to balance his ability to make big time throws that he showed as a rookie with the ability to take care of the ball that Stefanski is likely demanding, I absolutely think we have a $35 to $40 mil AAV franchise QB. I realize that's a huge "if" but I don't think it's unrealistic at all.
 

DirtyDan

Sixth Man
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
1,227
Points
113
He's saying that the descriptions used for Baker earlier in this 234908324 page clusterfuck don't match what the data is saying.

Before, the narrative was: "Late in games, Baker is bad/terrible, lost, confused, below-average, Charlie Frye, etc..."

The above ^^ were actual descriptions used against Baker. Then after Bs80 demonstrates that the data set shows he's average/slightly above-average...

Now, the narrative is: "Late in games, Baker is not near the top tier guys, not good enough to win a Super Bowl, look at these names in his grouping (Ben, Ryan, Minshew...)"

There is a shifting of goalposts here, is there not?

He has been consistent more than anyone. I believe I've been consistent, but if you feel I shifted with you and point it out, I'll acknowledge it face-up. There really isn't any room for intellectual dishonesty or flat out lying (I'm not accusing you of either) and I think people need to have the ability to level with each other. At least on this site :chuckle:
Well no, @bs80 own data places Baker in the middle of pack during his best statistical year in those situations. bs seems to believe it's a marginal difference in passer rating that separates him from the next tier up of QBs, which I guess is a fair argument alone, but based off recent results it seems like last year was more of a best case scenario than a testament on Baker being average in trailing/tied situations as a QB in general. I guess @I'mWithDan can concede that Baker wasn't Charlie Frye in the clutch last year? :chuckle:

Baker's numbers in the 4th went from average at best to dumpster fire. If Baker can return that previously level of play then he's still not at the level of Herbert or Stafford(in that next tier above BM last year) and the margin for error is way more slim than ever before.

I know people feel the criticism is unjust after a close game, Baker's shoulder issue, and being his second year in Stefanski's offense. This is his 4th season in the league though, the Browns are trying to win a superbowl, and negotiate a new deal with him. We need him to be at minimum the same player as last year and even then it may not be enough.
 

Vee-Rex

NBA Starter
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
1,529
Reaction score
3,398
Points
113
Well no, @bs80 own data places Baker in the middle of pack during his best statistical year in those situations.
I think the ~better~ measuring stick is last year accounting for player progression.

If you look at the career stats of Josh Allen - they don't look all that hot. However, Allen grew in his system and improved as a player to an MVP level, so his output in 2020 is most indicative of where he is now as a player (compared to 2018 and 2019). His 2021 stats show some regression, but the sample size is not large enough to declare he is ~not~ still 2020 Josh Allen.

2021 is still up in the air because the sample size is small, so the largest sample size we have is 2020. HOWEVER, maybe Baker regresses and 2020 is his outlier year, but we don't have a sample large enough to make that determination at this time.

To bring my point around - he's not simply cherry-picking Baker's best statistical year, he's using the most applicable and probable year as to where Baker resides as a player as of this very moment (2021 sample size is still too small to make any concrete determinations). If Baker had a terrible rookie year, great 2019, and terrible 2020, he'd be using 2020 as the measuring stick still.

Level with me - are we on the same page? Do you disagree with that approach?
 

RBF Podcast

Additional text can be placed above or below the player.
Top