Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
I’m not trying to subtract Keenum’s contribution. If you felt that’s what I’m saying, there is a misunderstanding. I realize he is making a substantial contribution.
At the risk of oversimplification, I suggest that there are three levels of QB performance: positive, neutral, and negative.
Positive – The QB impacts the game in a positive way and often is a substantial reason WHY the team is winning.
Neutral – A game manager. He makes some plays, he misses some plays. If they lose, the blame is not really on him; but if they win, he also doesn’t deserve a lion’s share of the credit. For this to work, he must not make many mistakes.
Negative – See “melted down” Foles of 2015. This player routinely loses games for you. Goes out of his way to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. The Austin Davis games against Arizona a couple of years ago also comes to mind.
Keenum is in the neutral category. Which is why Fisher and Snead like him. They have been dealing with QBs who are net negatives the last few years.
Given the offensive ranking and that Keenum hasn’t really minimized mistakes, I would put him at the low end right now of the neutral category. He’s done some good things which is the substantial contribution you talk about. But he’s also done some things that have really hurt the team. The defense has had to bail us out in every win.
I also agree with your assessment of Keenum versus Goff. At this stage, there are things we’d get from one that we wouldn’t get from the other and vice versa. Maybe both would be in the neutral category right now.
For me it comes down to this: if they are even, play your future franchise QB. You only play the placeholder when he’s ahead and would give you a greater chance of winning.
Well not to nitpick but no I think he's doing more than what you describe in the "neutral category."
So maybe you need a "better than merely neutral" category.
In terms of who starts, I have no dog in that fight at all. I don't care who starts. I think a vet can do things a rookie can't and I think Goff can do things Keenum can't.
But how many qbs in week 4 got better than a 8.9 YPR, 2 TDs, no INTs, and a qb rating of 111.3.
We just see it differently. I believe he is firmly planted in the neutral category over the first 4 games.
The first game was clearly bad. The second game, the offense only scored 9 points. You're not gonna win many that way. Fortunately the D saved the day. He did a lot of good things against Tampa. But he also threw a pick 6. Last game he didn't make any egregious mistakes but the offense also didn't put up many points. That 2nd TD, he only needed to move the offense 20 yards to get into the end zone because of Austin's huge return.
You highlight week 4 stats. I'm looking at the entire body of work over the first quarter of the season. But even if I was looking solely at week 4 stats, I would also assess where he ranks on the QBR metric since it measures the QBs impact on the game. That metric factors the point I mentioned above regarding the 2nd TD requiring only 20 yards from him. In QBR, he had a 61.3 rating which was good for 14th.
Overall, he fits my definition of being in the neutral category. A game manager is not a negative thing. It's someone who makes good plays and has good games but also has his fair share of bad plays and games. Keenum's season has been up and down. His overall stats are mediocre. He has a highly rated game in week 4 that is offset by a very low rated game in week 1 with a couple of average to below average games in the other two weeks.
There's nothing neutral plus about him.