Would Goff Be Our Game One Starter If Not For Drops?

[Roman Snow]

It remains to be seen who will be the starting quarterback for the Los Angeles Rams when they open the season against the San Francisco 49ers, Monday September 12th, in Santa Clara. Currently, Case Keenum seems to be the safe choice to start the opener. He has led the first team offense well in the first 3 preseason games, and seems to have the confidence of the coaches.

But the question I would like to consider today is this:

• Would Jared Goff be considered more strongly as the best candidate to start the season behind center were it not for his receivers' drops?

Now, before anyone goes down the path of; "Every quarterback deals with drops" or "Some of the drops were just good defensive breakups", I will acknowledge, these are valid points. Also, of course, if the balls are caught, it changes EVERYTHING that happens afterward. But I will set that aside for now.

So let us look at the statistics, and each pass in question. I will only hold truly egregious drops against the receivers, or failure by blockers, and express an expected catch as an ADJUSTED STATISTIC. Then, later we will ask the question again.

GAME 1
Goff 4/9 38 yds. 1 Int. Incompleted passes:

1. Drop by Cooper on a slant. 5yds (A.S. 5/9 43yds)
2. Hit by rusher not picked up, while throwing -Int.- Harkey was open on an easy 12 yd. curl (A.S. 6/9 55yds.) I know, I am stretching on this one, but did you see the replay from behind?
3. Drop by Thomas in the flat. (3 yds) (A.S. 7/9 58yds.)
4. Overthrow to Quick deep down right sideline- NO adjusted statistic.
5. Drop by Cooper on beautiful throw over the middle, GREAT pass- good defensive breakup- even though Cooper could have hung on,- NO adjusted statistic.

Final AS: 7/9 58 yds. 0 Tds 0 Ints.

GAME 2
Goff 8/12 82 yds. 1 td Incomplete passes:

1. Out pattern, dropped by Quick, who seemed to be slow to turn his head. (A.S. 9/12 88 yds.)
2. Out pattern to Quick batted down. (Maybe he could have fought better for it) Good defensive play. NO adjusted statistic
3. Slant to Quick- dropped. It was that high pass, but well within the catch range. (A.S. 10/12 100yds.)
4. Screen to Magee behind the line-dropped. Could have been a big play. He looked up field too soon. (A.S. 11/12 110 yds.)

Final AS: 11/12 110 yds. 1Td. 0 Ints.

GAME 3
Goff 4/12 45 yds. 0 Tds. 0 Ints. Incomplete passes:

1. Pass to Thomas-batted down. Good defensive play. NO adjusted statistic.
2. Out pattern to Higbee-he should have caught it. (Boy did he have a down day) (A.S. 5/12 50yds.)
3. Screen pass to Higbee- overthrown. NO adjusted Statistic.
4. Scramble pass to Duke Williams- the most egregious drop of preseason to date. GREAT Pass (A.S. 6/13 67 yds.) *Pass technically did not count because of defensive penalty. ADD one total pass.
5. Pass to Higbee- nearly a pick six by former Ram Darian Stewart. Whew. Worst pass of preseason to date. (A.S. 6/13 67 yds. 1 Int.)
6. Pass over the middle to Brown-knocked loose at impact. Good pass. Better defense. NO adjusted statistic.
7. Screen pass to Thomas- dropped. (A.S. 7/13 70 yds. 1 Int.)
8. Throw away screen pass, with pass rusher in his face. NO adjusted statistic.
9. Pass to Thomas in the flat- dropped. (A.S. 8/13 75 yds. 1 Int.)

Final AS: 8/13 75yds. 0 Tds. 1 Int.)

3 game AS: 26/34 243 1 Td 1 Int. Not bad. And that is just taking into account egregious drops. (Also by the defense)

So again I ask: Would Goff, at this point in time, be the favorite to start game 1 of the regular season, if not for the 10 egregious drops by his receivers? We will never really know.

Please vote in the poll! Thanks :cheers:

 

[Ram_Rally]

I doubt the coaching staff is judging goff based on his stats. They see him in every practice and were likely evaluating his performance. They saw the drops. If they decided that he was playing exceptionally than he'd start.

 

[Roman Snow]

I doubt the coaching staff is judging goff based on his stats. They see him in every practice and were likely evaluating his performance. They saw the drops. If they decided that he was playing exceptionally than he'd start.

I agree, Rally. I guess my question should more be: Would the media sheep be clamoring for Goff to start if these were his stats?

 

[tomas]

Starting a high draft pick QB as a rookie generally led to a lower passer rating from him and worse win percentage in years 1, 2 and onward as compared to the QBs who are given the chance to develop and learn from the sideline.(2000-2015 QB analysis)

 

[jrry32]

No. Fisher made up his mind before the drops became an issue.

Starting a high draft pick QB as a rookie generally led to a lower passer rating from him and worse win percentage in years 1, 2 and onward as compared to the QBs who are given the chance to develop and learn from the sideline.(2000-2015 QB analysis)

How was this "analysis" or "study" conducted? How were they compared?

 

[Ramhusker]

It would just have more people clamoring for Goff to start but Fisher was probably never going to start a rookie on the road in a prime time game.

 

[Picked4td]

In the end I doubt it woulda changed anything but if it did it wouldn't be because of the better stats he'd have, but because the catches would have likely resulted in more 1st downs and therefore more reps which would give the coaches a better and longer look

 

[fearsomefour]

Christ I hope not.

 

[tomas]

No. Fisher made up his mind before the drops became an issue.



How was this "analysis" or "study" conducted? How were they compared?

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/when-to-start-your-rookie-quarterback-050715

 

[DaveFan'51]

I agree, Rally. I guess my question should more be: Would the media sheep be clamoring for Goff to start if these were his stats?

ESPN would say " YES! Start Goff!!" NFLN would say " No! Let him sit the first few weeks!!" Fisher will remind them he said " Keenum is our starter!"

 

[Fatbot]

Starting a high draft pick QB as a rookie generally led to a lower passer rating from him and worse win percentage in years 1, 2 and onward as compared to the QBs who are given the chance to develop and learn from the sideline.(2000-2015 QB analysis)

I don't think you should look to studies to pick a path. Every rookie QB situation is unique. Besides, any "analysis" will be flawed because the sample size isn't big enough to account for outliers. It's like saying QBs drafted in round 6 have a better win % than QBs drafted in round 1 (1994-2013 QB analysis)... The stat technically isn't lying, but it's just not meaningful.

 

[jrry32]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/when-to-start-your-rookie-quarterback-050715

Yea, there are some pretty major flaws to the analysis that undermine the point you're arguing for. Nobody on earth will argue that Goff's passer rating will be harmed if he sits for 1-3 years. The comparison he draws here is an uneven one. And the results are skewed by variables he doesn't account for. What variables? The fact that 1st round busts generally play early on and start for a few years before teams give up on them. Especially when on bad teams. The good teams can generally afford to sit their guys. That accounts for a couple of key things:
1. The slightly higher win percentage
and
2. The better performance on average

The argument that Goff will be worse off moving forward and the Rams will be worse off moving forward if he plays from Day 1 isn't an especially strong one. This analysis doesn't lend particularly strong support to that point because of the things the author doesn't account for.

If you wanted to make a more fair study, you'd need to even the odds a bit. How could you do this?
1. Eliminate all players who didn't start a minimum number of games.(set the minimum high enough that it filters out busts)
2. Compare passer ratings and success based on how long they have been in the league rather than the number of years starting. Start later in the careers so the guys who sit aren't disadvantaged.

This would give you a truer analysis of the impact that playing and sitting have on a QB's career. But you're still going to have problems with sample size and problems with the analysis being outdated (because today's NFL isn't equivalent to the 1990 NFL or 2000 NFL).

 

[yrba1]

Depends, Fisher and co sees more from Goff during practice. One thing that stands out as to why Keenum is starter over Goff how they look under center. I've seen some lapses of Goff operating under center and often times, it does not look pretty. Hopefully he gets up to speed.

 

[Force16X]

he's still learning the nfl game and speed. when he stops making silly mistakes, misreads or trying to do more than he's (or WR he's targeting) are capable of, then things will gel. its more of a when than if propostion. he's not ready to start. maybe if this team was a little better offensively, ok...........a lot better offensively like say having a true #1 receiver, he would have better odds starting right away. this receiving corps isnt that good. say it again. think about it.


A) 2 of the better preseason receivers are both injured (cooper / spruce).
B) brian quick's 4 yr career is barely a good total for 1 season.
C) kenny britt is a decent #2.
D.)Higbee shows promise.
E) Kendricks needs to do a lot more now that the FA debacle @ TE is now over.

there really isnt any one receiver that is able to help Goff out right now, due to the fact each of those receivers have their own playing ability issues to deal with. once everyone understands that, things will get easier to deal with.

 

[BatteringRambo]

Keenum or Goff game 1 roll with it. We should top the Whiners by plus 21 either way. If not, I'll be disappointed. This has Gurley and Tavon all over it. And that GW defense with that Donald (Duck) guy.

 

[Ram_Rally]

I agree, Rally. I guess my question should more be: Would the media sheep be clamoring for Goff to start if these were his stats?

Oh the media would be hailing him as the next Montana lol

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

You can't count drops as completions, or Bradford would have been an all pro.

 

[Roman Snow]

You can't count drops as completions, or Bradford would have been an all pro.

That's why I only counted the brutal drops. To make a point. Still. A catch is a catch. Right?

 

[Athos]

Better question is how he'd have looked/progressed with the 1s in general.

A series with Todd. A quarter with Lance, Tavon, Britt....

Play calling that matches his strengths.

 

[WestCoastRam]

Not after tonights game.