When Does Herbert Sit? - Justin Herbert Discussion

[like54ninjas]

My discussion of turnovers was with respect to QB play. Lynn seems to think that turnovers and whether or not the team won are the only determinative factors. Such thinking in my view consitutues a poor analysis.

A QB can play well like Herbert did and his team can still lose and a QB can play poorly like Taylor did and his team can still win.

Simlarly, a player can make a turnover and still play better than a player that did not make a turnover--even on the same drive, much less when the whole game is taken into consideration.

Look at the Herbert INT drive on which the Chiefs took the ball at their own 5 yard line following the INT. We took the ball at our own 16 yard line. Unless Taylor leads the team to a FG or a TD on that drive, then there is almost a 100% chance that Taylor would have produced a worse result on that very drive than Herbert did.

Having referenced Taylor as running the "one, two, three, kick offense", you know where my money is on which QB would have had the better outcome on that series. And again, that is even with Herbert throwing an INT at the end of the drive. With Taylor, it is either three and out or one first down and then a punt. Barring a miraculous punt, KC is likely starting at at least its own 25 yard line.

And that analysis does not even get us to the obvious reality that one QB can turn the ball over more than another QB and yet still be a much better QB. I will take a QB that throws 6 TDs and 2 INTs over three games any day over one that throws 1 TD and 1 INT over that same span.

The question is which QB is moving the ball and putting the team in the best position to produce net points, which is how teams win. When a QB like Taylor fails to move the ball, he hurts his team by not letting the defense rest and he hurts his team by producing superior starting field position for the other team, both of which help other teams score independently of turnovers. And, of course, the failure to score points makes it very difficult to produce positive net points, again, independently of turnovers.

While turnovers do matter and I have never said anything to the contrary, a small turnover differential between two QBs can certainly be trumped by a large difference in these areas I have identified in favor of the QB that is turning the ball over slightly more often. That large difference exists between Herbert and Taylor and that large difference appears to be being ignored in its entirety by Lynn, which is not good.

You surmise far too many “what if” correlations. You or I have no idea what specific results would occur on drives with different players on the field.
Yes a player can perform great and his team lose. I get that. I have no issues.
The facts still show us turnovers committed, leading to a game negative turnover differential, lead to far more losses than wins.

Most coaches/fans will take a 3 to 1 TD/INT ratio by a QB. Who wouldn’t? Especially when the other option is a 1 to 1 over the same time span. Just purely ridiculous comparison.
That is like saying I prefer my woman to have a 34DDD rack versus the 44AA (chub with nipples). Makes for a very one sided comparison.

[like54ninjas]

I wonder if the INT was conditioning and a rookie's ignorance of how an NFL game would wear you down. KA was behind the defenders. It wasn't a bad decision to throw that if you could get the ball there just a split second sooner or put some more air under it and let LA run to it. That CB is also really really fast. Again, something a rookie might miss. I didn't see over thinking at all. Decisions were fast, and right almost every time.

Escaping left from the pocket, running to the leftside #s, and then jump throwing across your body to the far hash is NEVER a good idea.

[Sb4Rivers]

Was Hebert drafted to be the starting QB? He was, and if he plays well in next two games as the starter he should be. Point is he rolled off bench and played like a rookie franchise QB. He is better than Taylor, it’s that simple.

if Lynn does not see it, it’s because he doesn’t understand that type of football.

[Xenos]

Just to be clear, I want Herbert to succeed and I’m excited to see him play. But I’m also not going to give into mass hysteria about Lynn and this perceived QB controversy. It would be nice to have a rookie QB win a Super Bowl for the first time ever. But I’m also realistic about this season.

[like54ninjas]

Just to be clear, I want Herbert to succeed and I’m excited to see him play. But I’m also not going to give into mass hysteria about Lynn and this perceived QB controversy. It would be nice to have a rookie QB win a Super Bowl for the first time ever. But I’m also realistic about this season.

Same.

[Guest]

You surmise far too many “what if” correlations. You or I have no idea what specific results would occur on drives with different players on the field.
Yes a player can perform great and his team lose. I get that. I have no issues.
The facts still show us turnovers committed, leading to a game negative turnover differential, lead to far more losses than wins.

Most coaches/fans will take a 3 to 1 TD/INT ratio by a QB. Who wouldn’t? Especially when the other option is a 1 to 1 over the same time span. Just purely ridiculous comparison.
That is like saying I prefer my woman to have a 34DDD rack versus the 44AA (chub with nipples). Makes for a very one sided comparison.

The issue is not turnovers. It is which QB would have produced a better result on that drive and other drives. The fact is that the INT at the 5 yard line, while not the best result, is not a terrible result for a drive that began at our own 16. Against the Bengals, Taylor took the ball at our 25 or deeper in our own territory 9 times. In those possessions, he led the offense to exactly 3 points. So, Taylor gave the ball back to the Bengals 8 times and all 8 resulted in the Bengals having field position better than their own 5 yard line. So, an INT at the 5 yard yard line would have been Taylor's second best result on any of those series.

Herbert was 3 for 7 in such series versus KC, leading the team to a TD and two FGs, clearly better than Taylor. So, even with the INT, which left the defense better off than Taylor did 8 of 9 times on similar drives with poor field position, Herbert still moved the team better and with less adverse consequence to the defense.

The otherwise blind analysis focusing solely on simple turnover differential misses so much that it is scary.

[like54ninjas]

The issue is not turnovers. It is which QB would have produced a better result on that drive and other drives. The fact is that the INT at the 5 yard line, while not the best result, is not a terrible result for a drive that began at our own 16. Against the Bengals, Taylor took the ball at our 25 or deeper in our own territory 9 times. In those possessions, he led the offense to exactly 3 points. So, Taylor gave the ball back to the Bengals 8 times and all 8 resulted in the Bengals having field position better than their own 5 yard line. So, an INT at the 5 yard yard line would have been Taylor's second best result on any of those series.

Herbert was 3 for 7 in such series versus KC, leading the team to a TD and two FGs, clearly better than Taylor. So, even with the INT, which left the defense better off than Taylor did 8 of 9 times on similar drives with poor field position, Herbert still moved the team better and with less adverse consequence to the defense.

The otherwise blind analysis focusing solely on simple turnover differential misses so much that it is scary.

Except in the win column.

Different games, teams, running game success, play calling, weekly game plans, etc. Hard to give an apples to apples comparison but you tried.

The over engineered repeated blind analysis trying to refute turnover differential denies so much that it is scary.

[21&500]

Tyrod rarely makes turnovers/mistakes. This is the main thing AL is trying to ingrain into this team. Sound, disciplined, situational, assignment football.
Now on the adverse side Tyrod rarely makes any impact plays

I’m sold.
the potential for Lynns vision combined with the ceiling Herbert appears to have sounds like a year round contender.
Rooting for this tandem to last longer than the drama

[Guest]

Except in the win column.

Different games, teams, running game success, play calling, weekly game plans, etc. Hard to give an apples to apples comparison but you tried.

The over engineered repeated blind analysis trying to refute turnover differential denies so much that it is scary.

We are discussing QB play, not team wins. I would say the difference between the reigning worst team in the league and the reigning best team in the league as the opponent tells us much more than the turnover differential does as far as the team results are concerned, although the crappy play of Taylor and the good play of Herbert nearly, but not quite, offset the difference in caliber of opponent.

Nobody is saying that turnover differential counts for nothing, just putting the turnovers into perspective. No matter how you slice it, a turnover at the opponent's 5 yard line is better than the result you will get from the punt that results at the end of most similarly situated possessions with Tyrod at QB after Tyrod fails to move the team.

[Boltjolt]

Except in the win column.

Different games, teams, running game success, play calling, weekly game plans, etc. Hard to give an apples to apples comparison but you tried.

The over engineered repeated blind analysis trying to refute turnover differential denies so much that it is scary.

well, i'll add Lynns turnover for not kicking that FG in the first half and turning it over on downs......we lost by 3 points in OT when we may not have needed to go to OT.

[like54ninjas]

well, i'll add Lynns turnover for not kicking that FG in the first half and turning it over on downs......we lost by 3 points in OT when we may not have needed to go to OT.

Now that is a valid point which doesn’t show up in the stat column.

[21&500]

An interception at the opponents 5 isnt bad in itself
but it's really bad when you consider the context
Time in the 4th quarter
being in fg range
The first down could have shaved several more minutes down and with a fg would have put us up by 2 scores
assuming we don't score a td
So as much as I love JH, that int was costly
Maybe a math genius here can do the win percentage thing they do in poker, but my guess is that Lynn is right to emphasize turnover differential as much as he does.
I think where many here are far apart is in how much Lynn emphasizes it.
Moving on from Rivers has left a sour taste for many and is leading to one dimensional narratives about Lynn as a coach.