Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by 49ers81:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
I do and never said fumbling isn't something we should avoid. I'm pointing out it's incredibly misleading to just throw a stat like that out with no other context. Makes it seem like he's fumbling every other time he gets hit.
That's why I posted other qb's #'s. Go look them up for yourself.
The top 20 guys with the most career fumbles are all quarterbacks. 5 of which are HOF and a number of future HOF.
Just throwing a stat like that and then talking about a RB benched for fumbles is disingenuous.
I edited but you replied before you saw it.
The other QB #s you posted I didnt understand and still dont. Jimmy fumbles more than all of them (aside from being fractions of a percent better than Watson, who fumbles at a much lower rate when factoring in attempts).
If you think me talking about RBs being benched for fumbles is disingenuous, then you were simply way too quick to come to Jimmy's defense because you COMPLETELY misunderstood the point of why I even brought it up. I brought it up because a couple posters essentially believe that as long as the 49ers recovered the ball, the fumbles should be ignored. Fumble recoveries (as I am sure you know) are largely due to luck. Just because we recovered a majority of them, doesnt mean the fumbling isnt a problem....which, again, is why I mentioned RBs being benched for fumbling regardless of who recovered.
My point is that talking about RB's getting benched for fumbling is similar to a qb getting credited for fumbles is disingenuous.
It's not a qualitative stat. It'd be like someone talking about Trey's comp % in pre-season without mentioning all the drops. It's misleading and disingenuous.
It's also why I was responding to French. He's said its crazy that people would brush off 17 fumbles in 30 games(really 32). Watson has 30 in 54 and I've never heard anyone talk about Watson having a fumbling problem.
It's because everyone understands that's a stat that doesn't mean much considering that many fumbles credited are not actually fumbles.
Kurt Warner has 104 fumbles in 124 career games. He's in the HOF and I've never heard of Warner having a fumbling problem.
Must've been so crazy how during all those HOF seasons no one was worried about his fumbles.
Still missing the point with the first bolded.
You must not have paid attention with the second bolded. Warner was criticized his entire career about being loose with the ball and fumbling too much.
Again, you are totally missing the point in this discussion. No one is being disingenious. You are just not happy with the content of what is being discussed. Jimmy turns the ball over too much (interceptions and fumbling the ball). Not sure how any unbiased person would go to such lengths to disagree with that. He does. We just have to hope our defense is good enough to combat that.
*sigh*
Ok, it's quite ironic that you would utilizing this logic and then call me biased.
Your thesis: Jimmy turns the ball over too much.
Evidence:INT's+fumbles
Counter: not nearly as many lost fumbles so it's not as big a problem as it's being made out to be.
Your counter: it's a coin flip on fumbles lost, so yes, still a problem.
My issue: using fumbles as a qualitative state to correlate turnovers from the QB position is misleading because fumbles credited to the QB are not actually all fumbles by the QB.
Your response: that line of logic is biased.
RE: Warner, according to the fumbles per game, he had a fulble in nearly 84% of his games. If it's as big a problem as y'all are making it, he wouldn't have been HOF.
John Elway had 137 fumbles in 234 career games or almost 59% of games.
Jimmy is 53%. Better than 2 guys in the HOF with 3 trophies.
So, again, trying to argue about fumbles as a stat isn't worth anything. That's people who have an issue with Jimmy grasping at something to make him look bad. Thr fact that you are defending this stat to much shows how biased you are.
I will say to this what I said in response to a post above but which you might have a better grasp of since it seems to have gone above the head of the other poster. Jimmy has had a lot of turnovers and certainly seems to have lost his fair share of fumbles, and you would certainly hope that ball security is a point of emphasis this year. But, at the end of the day, how many games have those turnovers actually cost the team?
I used this example in another post. Against the Rams in 2019 the team was behind with time running out in the 4th quarter. Jimmy threw a pick at the Ram's end of the field with something like 3 or 4 minutes left. Game over, right? Nope. The defense got the ball back and Jimmy drove the team down the field with the help of two 3rd and 16 completions on consecutive series and put them in a position for the game winning field goal.
Then there was the strip sack for a TD in the first Seattle game that same year. Game over, right? Nope. hard fought contest until they end with the Niners playing without George Kittle. Jimmy drives them down the field with very little time on the clock and puts them in position to kick the winning field which their replacement kicker shanks as time runs out.
None of this means that Jimmy shouldn't continue to strive to limit these kind of things but the fact remains he has usually been able to overcome them during the course of the game, which is usually the hallmark of a pretty good QB
Doesn't the bolded example kind of imply that the defense deserves a ton of credit for getting the ball back in the first place?
Absolutely but the argument guys like you make is that wins are a "team" stat, not a QB stat. So in this instance Jimmy made a mistake, the defense did its job, Jimmy came on again and did his job through some exceptional crunch time throws, and put the kicker in a position to do his job and the "team" wins the game. You guys can't keep having it both ways and say that "its a team win when it suits my purposes to say so but it's Jimmy's fault otherwise".
Go, Trey, Go! (just so I can't be accused of talking only about Jimmy in the Trey Lance thread)
