7 minutes ago, RLC said:

Enjoyed this explanation of why he had so many clean pockets. 

"Hall-of-Famer by himself."  

14 hours ago, pisceschica said:

so in mlb history only one team has come back from 0-3 (redsocks over yankees '04) 

hopefully yankees lose tonight

Hopefully the Yankees lose EVERY night.

11 minutes ago, RLC said:

Enjoyed this explanation of why he had so many clean pockets. 

Is that sustainable though? Does he need 3-4 seconds or is that just for the plays to develop?

12 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

 

Garrett would be long term

14 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Won’t get him but would be cool 

That would be something.

They'd have to move someone expensive to make it work though, I'd think.  Not sure who that would be.  Maybe Schwarber and/or Castellanos.  

14 hours ago, pisceschica said:

 

@Joe Ball

7 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Garrett would be long term

I'm waiting for Parsons. 

12 hours ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

39-83-1 (32%) during the regular season since this photo.  1-2 in the playoffs.

That's a crazy defining moment for that franchise.   Makes no sense!   And yet... is a true defining line.

5 hours ago, judunno said:

A shame he only gets carries in garbage time carries. I missed his called back TD run. Can't find any footage of it.

It was a helluva run.  I didn't know he had that level of burst... but once he got through the initial gap in the line (where the hold was) he was fired through the rest of the defense like a heat seeking missile.

4 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I'm waiting for Parsons. 

 at least there's a nonzero chance of mine happening

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

Covey does an admirable job on screens for an offense where no one but Goedert knows how to follow blockers and develop one.

He’s not acceptable running routes and being a WR.

I'd love to see the team try one with Barkley.  I have no idea why this hasn't happened yet.

2 hours ago, just relax said:

Particularly with Goedert out. Calcaterra is a good receiver but hopeless as an in-line blocker.  He did have a nice block on a DB on Hurts' non-TP TD run.

I thought Stoll had a fine game. His block on the DE on the bomb to Devonta was terrific.

If they could some how morph Calcaterra and Stoll into a single body, they'd likely have a top 5 TE.  Sadly, they cannot.

13 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Is that sustainable though? Does he need 3-4 seconds or is that just for the plays to develop?

Hurts has been a career 3+ second thrower.

2020: 3.37 seconds

2021: 3.18

2022: 2.86

2023: 3.11

2024: 3.07

He averaged 2.7 seconds against Cincy, 3.6 against the giants, and 2.51 against the browns, so hes mostly been doing better since the bye.

I think the protection can hold up, and the way they are doing it allows for some flexibility. Some teams will try to take advantage of it, but I definitely think Moore has something up his sleeve to counter it with the RB or TE leaking out late.

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

If they could some how morph Calcaterra and Stoll into a single body, they'd likely have a top 5 TE.  Sadly, they cannot.

Crazier things have happened

1 hour ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Hot take: position we should trade for at trade deadline is RB.

Go get Sydney’s twin to spell Saquon, and just barrel over everyone the rest of the season

 

Run the ball, yes.

They have a good RB room they do not need to trade for a RB that's silly.

11 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

Hurts has been a career 3+ second thrower.

2020: 3.37 seconds

2021: 3.18

2022: 2.86

2023: 3.11

2024: 3.07

He averaged 2.7 seconds against Cincy, 3.6 against the giants, and 2.51 against the browns, so hes mostly been doing better since the bye.

I think the protection can hold up, and the way they are doing it allows for some flexibility. Some teams will try to take advantage of it, but I definitely think Moore has something up his sleeve to counter it with the RB or TE leaking out late.

Do you know how long he was able to hold the ball in the Bucs games?

4 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Do you know how long he was able to hold the ball in the Bucs games?

I'll give all of this years so far:

GB: 3.0

ATL: 3.59

NO: 3.2

TB: 2.84

CLV: 2.51

NYG: 3.6

CIN: 2.7

 

2023

TB: 2.95

Playoff TB: 2.79

 

2021

TB: 3.71

Playoff TB: 2.98

 

1 hour ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

white version of the Kelly green jersey 

Time to throw is a really muddy stat.  

You want fast processing, fast decisions, and a fast release.  

You also want a QB to accept a secure pocket when the OL provides him with one.  Don't force a bad throw, don't bail.  I've seen prime Manning and Brady sit flat footed in clean pockets for what felt like 5,6+ seconds just waiting.  If you do that because you aren't setting open reads, it's a problem.  If you do it because no one is open and the pocket is still solid, then kudos.  

In general, lower numbers are better, but there are enough situations where holding onto the ball for 5+ seconds is actually a good thing that it makes it tough to put too much value into the stat.

 

3 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Then the blackout Kelly greens....combine both alternates into the Voltron of alternates.

Just now, twistr said:

Then the blackout Kelly greens....combine both alternates into the Voltron of alternates.

43 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That would be something.

They'd have to move someone expensive to make it work though, I'd think.  Not sure who that would be.  Maybe Schwarber and/or Castellanos.  

Source: Scott Boras.

 

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Time to throw is a really muddy stat.  

You want fast processing, fast decisions, and a fast release.  

You also want a QB to accept a secure pocket when the OL provides him with one.  Don't force a bad throw, don't bail.  I've seen prime Manning and Brady sit flat footed in clean pockets for what felt like 5,6+ seconds just waiting.  If you do that because you aren't setting open reads, it's a problem.  If you do it because no one is open and the pocket is still solid, then kudos.  

In general, lower numbers are better, but there are enough situations where holding onto the ball for 5+ seconds is actually a good thing that it makes it tough to put too much value into the stat.

 

Depends on the routes being run, some crossing and deep routes take 3-4 seconds to develop, so QB has to sense whether he has time - you don't want him panicking and dumping it off and negating a big play opportunity, or holding the ball too long with the pocket collapsing.

And of course the play calls will depend on how the OL is playing, if they're being caved on a regular basis (Giants game) you dial up a lot of plays with targets getting open quickly, when you give the QB time, slower developing plays.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Time to throw is a really muddy stat.  

You want fast processing, fast decisions, and a fast release.  

You also want a QB to accept a secure pocket when the OL provides him with one.  Don't force a bad throw, don't bail.  I've seen prime Manning and Brady sit flat footed in clean pockets for what felt like 5,6+ seconds just waiting.  If you do that because you aren't setting open reads, it's a problem.  If you do it because no one is open and the pocket is still solid, then kudos.  

In general, lower numbers are better, but there are enough situations where holding onto the ball for 5+ seconds is actually a good thing that it makes it tough to put too much value into the stat.

 

You have Mahomes who has a career time to throw closer to 4 seconds and Brady who's closer to 2.5 seconds. Both have multiple SB rings and yet opposite ends of the spectrum for TTT.

TTT by itself isn't very useful, but you generally want your QB to stay consistent.