Hill isn't a drop off versus Bradford IMO

[wrstdude]

If that's what you think, then your opinion isn't one that I'll pay much attention to on other topics to be honest...

 

[Memphis Ram]

His accuracy has been a subject widely discussed on message boards and by the media. It's easy to place blame on everything but Bradford I guess.

His accuracy HAS been an issue. Britt said he was the most accurate QB "he" played with. Look at the guys he has played with......JLocker, VYoung and an aging KCollins. Not much to brag about there.

Anyway I'm done with this topic.......it's no longer a fun and interesting discussion and I've grown bored with it.

Easier to place blame on everything but Bradford? Yeah, you should be through with this thread because no one has offered that strawman at all. All that has been done is trying to get someone who apparently wants to place blame on Bradford soley to see the light in some of his arguments. And why do I say soley? The completion percentage comments.

Not that it matters, but I visit quite a few message boards (Rams and others) and I seemed to have missed much of what I'd guess is perhaps a vocal minority discussion. That said, while I've even questioned if he is as accurate as some have said on some plays (only to later find out sometimes that WRs were at fault), I've never seen anyone (until this thread) say he was less than accurate. And use a completion percentage to prove that point.

BTW, Britt and/or Cook have also played with Matt Hasslebeck & Ryan Fitzpatrick.

 

[LesBaker]

Easier to place blame on everything but Bradford? Yeah, you should be through with this thread because no one has offered that strawman at all. All that has been done is trying to get someone who apparently wants to place blame on Bradford soley to see the light in some of his arguments.

Not that it matters, but I visit quite a few message boards (Rams and others) and I seemed to have missed much of what I'd guess is perhaps a vocal minority discussion. That said, I've questioned if he is as accurate as some say on some plays (only to later find out sometimes that WRs were at fault), but I've never seen anyone (until this thread) say he was less than accurate. And use a completion percentage to prove that point.

BTW, Britt and/or Cook have also played with Matt Hasslebeck & Ryan Fitzpatrick.

LOL.

OK you win......feel better now?

 

[Memphis Ram]

LOL.

OK you win......feel better now?

 

[Mackeyser]

I respect your opinion Les, and i'm not saying i entirely disagree with you...but i have a question to pose to you:
Do you think hypothetically that Shaun Hill could have put up Bradford's numbers and won 3 games through the first 7 games last season under the same circumstances?
159 for 262
1,687 yards
60.7%
14 TD's
2 INT
2 lost fumbles
90.9 rate

Versus the same opponents:
vs AZ
@ ATL
@ DAL
vs SF
vs JAX
@HOU
@ CAR

With a running game that avg'd 70 yards/game and a bad defense?
---------------------------------------
There is no right or wrong answer, obviously. Just curious of your take.
IMO there's no way we win more than 2 of those games with Shaun Hill. Sam only won 3 but i think if he doesn't go down @ Carolina we win that one.
We don't beat AZ in week one with Shaun Hill.

I'm pretty confident with Hill at QB this year against the Minnesota's, the Washington's and the Oakland's of the league, but against upper echelon defenses is where i think Bradford's abilities and experience vs the division opponents will be missed.

You didn't ask me, but I have an answer.

Sam Bradford has strengths and weaknesses. He's got a strong arm and makes good decisions. However, he really, REALLY needs to work on his touch passes. He STILL can't throw that fade pass consistently (when he got here, he couldn't throw it worth a damn) and watching Bradford throw a touch pass on a crossing, slant or "in" pattern is just agony. His anticipation on horizontal passes is just BAD. Vertically, he's amazing which is doubly why the "Captain Checkdown" moniker is so disappointing.

Please understand that I really, really like Sam Bradford as a QB.

That said, as they say in Boxing, "styles make fights". While there are some games in which Sam Bradford would be a better QB than Shaun Hill, conversely, there are games and opponents for which Shaun Hill is better suited because of his skill set. There are defenses that play deep and simply refuse to let anything go "over the top" so they play their safeties deep. Sam Bradford has stuggled against these opponents because if they can stop the run and he can't go over the top, he's got nowhere else to go. Shaun Hill, on the other hand, lives in the places that Sam struggles in (just like Sam lives in the places that Shaun struggles in. The difference is that more of the passing game lives where Shaun thrives...especially with THIS OFFENSE.

What must be considered is that while Sam Bradford is almost certainly a better QB, he may not be the best QB for this system and we may find that a guy like Shaun Hill actually is a better FIT for what Schotty is trying to do. The Rams may actually see BETTER results than they would have seen with the more talented QB.

I think when it comes to that soft pass to Tavon Austin on a crossing pattern (something we never saw from Bradford) so he could catch it in stride and just fly, that touch pass over the LB to Cook in stride...that's the theme...IN STRIDE.

That's what we had with both Warner and Bulger.... QBs who could hit a guy going horizontally or diagonally in stride. Bradford has struggled mightily with that. We now have weapons who can run after the catch and Hill throws the kind of ball and has the kind of anticipation including against the blitz to not just allow a guy to make the catch, but let them make plays after.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

See Below

Good gawd man

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

I'm really not going to get into a "Princeton Debating Society" over this, if you really believe there is no drop-off, then perhaps you could be way smarter than the braintrust (Snisher) that runs the team ---- a life time journeyman backup = no drop off in quality at QB over Sam Bradford...I'm sure Jeff Fisher would love for this to be true.

Hey, I'm all in and behind Shaun Hill and am hoping for the best, but let's not be ridiculous.

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

The never ending Bradford Hill debate. I didn't see this one coming. . . .

Hill has the skills to be a starter in this league.

Bradford has the skills to be special.

But sadly we may never see what Bradford is capable of due to bad luck injuries.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Fellas, everyone is entitled to a opinion. :notsure:

 

[wrstdude]

You didn't ask me, but I have an answer.

Sam Bradford has strengths and weaknesses. He's got a strong arm and makes good decisions. However, he really, REALLY needs to work on his touch passes. He STILL can't throw that fade pass consistently (when he got here, he couldn't throw it worth a damn) and watching Bradford throw a touch pass on a crossing, slant or "in" pattern is just agony. His anticipation on horizontal passes is just BAD. Vertically, he's amazing which is doubly why the "Captain Checkdown" moniker is so disappointing.

Please understand that I really, really like Sam Bradford as a QB.

That said, as they say in Boxing, "styles make fights". While there are some games in which Sam Bradford would be a better QB than Shaun Hill, conversely, there are games and opponents for which Shaun Hill is better suited because of his skill set. There are defenses that play deep and simply refuse to let anything go "over the top" so they play their safeties deep. Sam Bradford has stuggled against these opponents because if they can stop the run and he can't go over the top, he's got nowhere else to go. Shaun Hill, on the other hand, lives in the places that Sam struggles in (just like Sam lives in the places that Shaun struggles in. The difference is that more of the passing game lives where Shaun thrives...especially with THIS OFFENSE.

What must be considered is that while Sam Bradford is almost certainly a better QB, he may not be the best QB for this system and we may find that a guy like Shaun Hill actually is a better FIT for what Schotty is trying to do. The Rams may actually see BETTER results than they would have seen with the more talented QB.

I think when it comes to that soft pass to Tavon Austin on a crossing pattern (something we never saw from Bradford) so he could catch it in stride and just fly, that touch pass over the LB to Cook in stride...that's the theme...IN STRIDE.

That's what we had with both Warner and Bulger.... QBs who could hit a guy going horizontally or diagonally in stride. Bradford has struggled mightily with that. We now have weapons who can run after the catch and Hill throws the kind of ball and has the kind of anticipation including against the blitz to not just allow a guy to make the catch, but let them make plays after.

 

[RamFan503]

You didn't ask me, but I have an answer.

Sam Bradford has strengths and weaknesses. He's got a strong arm and makes good decisions. However, he really, REALLY needs to work on his touch passes. He STILL can't throw that fade pass consistently (when he got here, he couldn't throw it worth a damn) and watching Bradford throw a touch pass on a crossing, slant or "in" pattern is just agony. His anticipation on horizontal passes is just BAD. Vertically, he's amazing which is doubly why the "Captain Checkdown" moniker is so disappointing.

Please understand that I really, really like Sam Bradford as a QB.

That said, as they say in Boxing, "styles make fights". While there are some games in which Sam Bradford would be a better QB than Shaun Hill, conversely, there are games and opponents for which Shaun Hill is better suited because of his skill set. There are defenses that play deep and simply refuse to let anything go "over the top" so they play their safeties deep. Sam Bradford has stuggled against these opponents because if they can stop the run and he can't go over the top, he's got nowhere else to go. Shaun Hill, on the other hand, lives in the places that Sam struggles in (just like Sam lives in the places that Shaun struggles in. The difference is that more of the passing game lives where Shaun thrives...especially with THIS OFFENSE.

What must be considered is that while Sam Bradford is almost certainly a better QB, he may not be the best QB for this system and we may find that a guy like Shaun Hill actually is a better FIT for what Schotty is trying to do. The Rams may actually see BETTER results than they would have seen with the more talented QB.

I think when it comes to that soft pass to Tavon Austin on a crossing pattern (something we never saw from Bradford) so he could catch it in stride and just fly, that touch pass over the LB to Cook in stride...that's the theme...IN STRIDE.

That's what we had with both Warner and Bulger.... QBs who could hit a guy going horizontally or diagonally in stride. Bradford has struggled mightily with that. We now have weapons who can run after the catch and Hill throws the kind of ball and has the kind of anticipation including against the blitz to not just allow a guy to make the catch, but let them make plays after.

Well put. It will be interesting to see if you are correct on this. I agree that Sam has never been a real good touch passer - especially in close. For whatever reason the "in stride" passes were largely missing as well. Those however seemed to me to be more a matter of play calls and check downs from immediate pressure. Guess we'll see how it all pans out. I still think we are in far better hands with Hill than we were with Clemens and we would have been in better hands with Bradford than with Hill. But if as you say, this team is built more to Hill's set of skills, we should be in better shape than I had been thinking.

In either case, I refuse to believe that the season is somehow lost because one player went down. I like Sam and think he is both a good QB and a great team mate. But my team is WAY bigger than any one player.

Go RAMS!!!

 

[Mackeyser]

Exactly. Notice I didn't say that Bradford wasn't a better QB. I think he's a better QB and a better pure passer. I'm not sure anyone's saying Hill's better.

That said, there's a reason you play the games. Peyton Manning didn't have the highest totals against every team he faced last year (although it was probably close with the year he had). Often times it comes down to matchups and just what's working on that day.

My point is that Hill is not devoid of talent and merit and that he brings substantial skill to the table that in certain instances may very well eclipse Bradford's in this offense in this specific instance of this roster with this coaching staff and so forth.

Now will it amount to anything? I dunno. I think it's unlikely that we tank. I think it's just as unlikely we explode on the NFL and go 13-3 although it's possible because even with Shaun Hill (and this part would be the same with Bradford) I see us being 5-0 going into that Seattle game at home. And if we do, how we fare of the last 11 games, I wouldn't know, but 8-3 doesn't seem far fetched. Very Optimistic, but not crazy. Not if we're sitting at 5-0 to start the season, anyway (and yes, I'm fully aware of that brutal mid-season 8 game stretch).

Our TEAM is just really strong. I think injuries like this tend to galvanize a team to focus even more on the team aspect and they don't look to the QB to fix everything. I think our D will especially be strong because they aren't expecting a monster year from Shaun Hill even though they have confidence in him.

That's pretty much it.

 

[jrry32]

Our TEAM is just really strong. I think injuries like this tend to galvanize a team to focus even more on the team aspect and they don't look to the QB to fix everything. I think our D will especially be strong because they aren't expecting a monster year from Shaun Hill even though they have confidence in him.

That's pretty much it.

I agree with you. Seemed like the entire team stepped up when Bradford went down last year. I think each guy feels like they have to go that much more harder without Bradford, on a subconscious level.

 

[LesBaker]

Exactly. Notice I didn't say that Bradford wasn't a better QB. I think he's a better QB and a better pure passer. I'm not sure anyone's saying Hill's better.

That said, there's a reason you play the games. Peyton Manning didn't have the highest totals against every team he faced last year (although it was probably close with the year he had). Often times it comes down to matchups and just what's working on that day.

My point is that Hill is not devoid of talent and merit and that he brings substantial skill to the table that in certain instances may very well eclipse Bradford's in this offense in this specific instance of this roster with this coaching staff and so forth.

Now will it amount to anything? I dunno. I think it's unlikely that we tank. I think it's just as unlikely we explode on the NFL and go 13-3 although it's possible because even with Shaun Hill (and this part would be the same with Bradford) I see us being 5-0 going into that Seattle game at home. And if we do, how we fare of the last 11 games, I wouldn't know, but 8-3 doesn't seem far fetched. Very Optimistic, but not crazy. Not if we're sitting at 5-0 to start the season, anyway (and yes, I'm fully aware of that brutal mid-season 8 game stretch).

Our TEAM is just really strong. I think injuries like this tend to galvanize a team to focus even more on the team aspect and they don't look to the QB to fix everything. I think our D will especially be strong because they aren't expecting a monster year from Shaun Hill even though they have confidence in him.

That's pretty much it.

I've posted with you for a decade and you still don't know shit about this sport.

 

[RamFan503]

@Mackeyser

Gotta say, I like your outlook on the season. I think it very well could come to pass. This team has talent and depth. Sure we still have some weaknesses but is there a team that doesn't?

And yeah - match-ups make a big difference. All you have to do is recall the Giants dismantling of an undefeated patsies team.

Cheers to you man.

 

[RamFan503]

I've posted with you for a decade and you still don't know crap about this sport.

And he'll still be seen on the same board as you. It's not just this sport he doesn't know shit about.

 

[Mackeyser]

I've posted with you for a decade and you still don't know crap about this sport.

What's a guy to do? I've dogeared my football bible reference...

 

[-X-]

I've posted with you for a decade and you still don't know crap about this sport.

I don't know... there's not much of a drop-off between you and Mac.

 

[RamFan503]

I don't know... there's not much of a drop-off between you and Mac.

I dunno. Look at what they've actually done. We're not talking potential here. Les has never really become that poster we all envisioned when he joined.

 

[-X-]

Anyway what I mean by similar production is this, look at these important statistical categories and you'll see.

TD %
Hill 4.3
Bradford 3.4

INT %
Hill 2.4
Bradford 2.2

Completion %
Hill 61.9
Bradford 58.6

YPA
Hill 6.7
Bradford 6.3

YPC
Hill 10.8
Bradford 10.7

Rating
Hill 85.9
Bradford 79.3 (though Bradfords was rising)

Stats FTW. We could also look at Hill's last season as a starter and compare it to Brady's last season as a starter using your same criteria.

TD %
Hill 3.8
Brady 4.0

INT %
Hill 2.9
Brady 1.8

Completion %
Hill 61.8
Brady 60.5

YPA
Hill 6.5
Brady 6.9

YPC
Hill 10.5
Brady 11.4

Rating
Hill 81.3
Brady 87.3

Doesn't look like much of a drop-off between Brady and Hill, so we're in great shape.

In all seriousness though, statistically speaking, there's negligible difference between Bradford and Hill - which is what you're using to make your comparisons. If you go by that alone, and ignore context, then there's not much of an argument anyone can make using those same numbers. Numbers tell the whole story, and that's that. But let's go ahead and look at context anyway. Just for shits and giggles. And then you can refute it using context of your own.

Bradford's starting receivers (X & Z) and TEs ..... Gibson, Amendola, Alexander, Clayton, Pettis, Givens, Fells, Cook.
Hill's starting receivers (X & Z) and TEs ............... Isaac Bruce, B. Johnson, Crabtree, Morgan, Megatron, Burleson, Vernon Davis, Pettigrew.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let's do Bradford's last season vs Brady's last season while we're at it.
Without context.

TD %
Bradford 5.3
Brady 4.0

INT %
Bradford 1.5
Brady 1.8

Completion %
Bradford 60.7
Brady 60.5

YPA
Bradford 6.4
Brady 6.9

YPC
Bradford 10.6
Brady 11.4

Rating
Bradford 90.9
Brady 87.3

I'm going to say that Bradford was going to continue that trend and be (statistically) pretty close to Brady in what you deemed to be these important statistical categories. And since the numbers add up, you can't prove me wrong. Because ... numbers. Now if you want to add some context, go ahead and I'll try to refute it with context of my own.