Ben McAdoo Presser

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, MasterAwesome said:

Fair enough.  Yes I think it's bad, but I also think emphasizing "what NFL front offices think of you" over actual NFL production puts you in weird territory that leads to conclusions like Sam Darnold (2nd and 4th round pick trade value) > Gardner Minshew (6th round pick trade value) which I think most people would argue is laughable.  And again, if we cut Sam Darnold tomorrow and a team signs him as their back-up QB it isn't gonna make me think any more highly of Darnold than if we cut him tomorrow and nobody picks him up.

Yeah but there will always be dumb teams. The fact that no one hired him and we did.....well.....does you think 31 other teams are dumb?

The Sam Darnold move is a great example of us doing something dumb that zero other teams would have done. 

[CRA]

47 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

Such a weird statement....did you even bother looking any of this up before you formulated this opinion?  We're talking about the 2015 Giants who lost 8 of their 10 games by one score?  That's the team who racked up a bunch of garbage stats to inflate their offensive performance?  Yeah, the team probably sucked cause their defense was ranked 30th/32nd (points/yardage).  I'm sure you will explain to me how that was McAdoo's fault though.  And are we talking about the same "2-time Super Bowl champion Eli" (lol) who went for:

-7766 yards, 44 TDs, 42 INTs, 58.7% completion, 78.3 QB rating in the 2 seasons prior to McAdoo

-8842 yards, 65 TDs, 28 INTs, 62.9% completion, 92.9 QB rating in the 2 seasons under OC McAdoo

That Super Bowl champion Eli?  I would be thrilled if we had 1/10th of this turnaround in QB play with McAdoo.

Didn’t say it was McAdoo’s fault the team sucked overall and only won 6 games in each of those 2 seasons.  But it’s still relevant. 

if you suck and have the offense open for all 4 quarters….it can lead to inflated offensive stats. 

So you don’t want to talk about all 4 years.   Now you want to rule out 2014 too?   You only broke down 2015.   And final score ending within a score also doesn’t tell the whole picture.  You would need to breakdown the late scores that brought it within a score.   Because that’s how you get inflated offense.  Being wide open for 4 quarters while other teams are sitting on the win.  For example, Panthers were up 21 going into the 4th q.     Washington up 17 going to to the 4th in 2015.   Those were some of your close losses you referenced on that lone season. 

* you cut it out of the quote.  But was Mike Shula an excellent OC in 2015? Because he had the #1 scoring O in the NFL?  I don’t think he was excellent.  So I don’t just use a ranking and let it carry all the weight on an OC.  I don’t think McAdoo was great.  Shula most definitely wasn’t.  

[MasterAwesome]

8 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but there will always be dumb teams. The fact that no one hired him and we did.....well.....does you think 31 other teams are dumb?

The Sam Darnold move is a great example of us doing something dumb that zero other teams would have done. 

There was that rumor about the 49ers offering a 1st round pick for Darnold before last year's draft.  And you can certainly argue that we foolishly overpaid for Darnold, but you'd have to agree that Darnold in all likelihood would have fetched more than Gardner Minshew did (6th round pick) in which case my point would still be valid.  That NFL front offices valued Darnold more than Minshew which clearly does not make him the superior QB.

[frankw]

14 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

There was that rumor about the 49ers offering a 1st round pick for Darnold before last year's draft.  And you can certainly argue that we foolishly overpaid for Darnold, but you'd have to agree that Darnold in all likelihood would have fetched more than Gardner Minshew did (6th round pick) in which case my point would still be valid.  That NFL front offices valued Darnold more than Minshew which clearly does not make him the superior QB.

The 49ers rumor is the only thing some of you have to hang your hats on. At the time of our trade what other teams were in negotiations? None? That tells you his value. We bid against ourselves and then picked up that fifth year option like we were big brain status. Whoops!

[kungfoodude]

15 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

There was that rumor about the 49ers offering a 1st round pick for Darnold before last year's draft.  And you can certainly argue that we foolishly overpaid for Darnold, but you'd have to agree that Darnold in all likelihood would have fetched more than Gardner Minshew did (6th round pick) in which case my point would still be valid.  That NFL front offices valued Darnold more than Minshew which clearly does not make him the superior QB.

Rumors aren't facts. 

The "value" on Darnold was established by one specific dumb team. 

Same with the "value" of Matt Rhule when we hired him.

Same dumb team did both of those things. Same dumb team that hired McAdoo.

[MasterAwesome]

8 minutes ago, CRA said:

Didn’t say it was McAdoo’s fault the team sucked overall and only won 6 games in each of those 2 seasons.  But it’s still relevant. 

if you suck and have the offense open for all 4 quarters….it can lead to inflated offensive stats. 

So you don’t want to talk about all 4 years.   Now you want to rule out 2014 too?   You only broke down 2015.   And final score ending within a score also doesn’t tell the whole picture.  You would need to breakdown the late scores that brought it within a score.   Because that’s how you get inflated offense.  Being wide open for 4 quarters while other teams are sitting on the win. 
 

* you cut it out of the quote.  But Mike Shula an excellent OC in 2015? Because he had the #1 scoring O in the NFL? 

First about Shula - remember that "control variable" thing I mentioned?  If we had a different OC in 2014 and largely the same roster (most notably, the QB) and the notable difference was that we hired Shula and then all of a sudden we turned from a mediocre/bad offense to the #1 offense in his first year, then hell yeah I'd give Shula mad props.  I can also speak much more confidently and with nuance about the Panthers than I can about the 2013-2018 or w/e Giants, so this is a poor analogy to ask me to compare our own OC to one of a different team.  I don't presume to have followed the Giants that closely to be able to be able to attribute X% of the Giants' offensive success to McAdoo vs. other variables.  You sure as hell are clueless about the Giants too, considering you baselessly overestimated Coughlin's role in their 2014-2015 offense before I had to refute it with 2 seconds of Google searches.  All I can do is evaluate the Giants' roster/coaching staff pre-McAdoo and post-McAdoo and consider the significant role of an offensive coordinator to a team's offensive output and make an educated guess about how much of a factor McAdoo was specifically to their offensive turnaround.  Manning was a constant, then you're looking at a receiving corps of Hakeem Nicks/Victor Cruz (one of the best 1-2 WR tandems) in 2013 vs. rookie OBJ/Reuben Randle in 2014.  I'd call that a wash.  So from a purely analytical sense from someone who hasn't watched every Giants game for the past 10 years, the evidence looks promising in favor of McAdoo.  That's literally all I've been saying all along...that McAdoo has a small sample size as an NFL OC and it's relatively encouraging.  That's the ridiculously controversial statement that you find to be offensive.  I'm not even predicting McAdoo to be a good OC for us.

As to the bold - yeah I already did that and you're flat out wrong.  In many cases it was opposing teams who were down the whole game only to come back because the Giants went conservative on D (sound familiar?).  It must be nice to say whatever you want and force the opposition to do all the research to refute it.  I've done enough of that so I'll just say you're wrong about this whole "garbage time" narrative...if you want to prove *me* wrong then feel free to actually do some research and come to me with stats.  Here's a simple one - the Giants in 2013 had a 60/40 pass/run ratio.  The Giants in 2014 had a 57/43 pass/run ratio.  So that makes the whole "SUPER BOWL CHAMP Eli Manning airing it out all game" narrative seem a bit questionable.  Were only the 2014 and 2015 Giants in garbage time "airing it out" situations but not the 2013 (7-9) Giants?  Why the huge discrepancy in offensive performance?  I'm also not talking about "all four years" because YOU explicitly started your statement off referencing McAdoo's "pure OC years".

[MasterAwesome]

1 minute ago, frankw said:

The 49ers rumor is the only thing some of you have to hang your hats on. At the time of our trade what other teams were in negotiations? None? That tells you his value. We bid against ourselves and then picked up that fifth year option like we were big brain status. Whoops!

Who is "some of you"?  Are you under the impression that I said anything positive about Darnold at all or the trade?

And if no other team wanted Darnold, we're still ultimately having to bid against the Jets themselves to give them an offer enticing enough to part from him.  Let's say we're theoretically the only team to call the Packers inquiring about Jordan Love.  That doesn't mean we can all of a sudden offer a 2039 7th round pick and they'll be like "well.....I guess that is technically the best offer on the table...".

[MasterAwesome]

35 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Rumors aren't facts. 

The "value" on Darnold was established by one specific dumb team. 

Same with the "value" of Matt Rhule when we hired him.

Same dumb team did both of those things. Same dumb team that hired McAdoo.

So do you truly think there is no team in the NFL who would have offered even a 5th round pick for Darnold last offseason?  I assure you teams would fork up more than a 6th round pick for a talented and young QB coming from a disastrous organization in hopes of a miracle reclamation project.  Now we can say with confidence that Darnold is just bad, but there was at least a legitimate question before last season as to whether Darnold's struggles were entirely his fault or if the Jets set him up for failure.

Keep in mind that the "value" of a player isn't dictated just by outside teams bidding for said player.  It's also established by the team with said player (in this case, the Jets) who is determining the price point in which they are comfortable giving a player up.  No matter how incompetent you and I and everyone else believe the Panthers' FO to be, you would be crazy to believe that the 2nd + 4th price point was our initial willy-nilly offer to the Jets without any kind of back-and-forth negotiations.  That was certainly an overpay and one of the worst trades in team history, but I guarantee you our initial offer was a hell of a lot less than that.  That's just common sense 101 negotiating.  Just like how ruthless businessman Tepper who was trying to chew Rock Hill for every penny he could get, probably didn't just go up to Rhule and say "here's my very first offer: 7 years $62 million!".  But if you genuinely need definitive reporting to substantiate that, then I guess I'm stumped because I don't have that.

Edited June 2, 2022 by MasterAwesome

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, MasterAwesome said:

So do you truly think there is no team in the NFL who would have offered even a 5th round pick for Darnold last offseason?  I assure you teams would fork up more than a 6th round pick for a talented and young QB coming from a disastrous organization in hopes of a miracle reclamation project.  Now we can say with confidence that Darnold is just bad, but there was at least a legitimate question before last season as to whether Darnold's struggles were entirely his fault or if the Jets set him up for failure.

Keep in mind that the "value" of a player isn't dictated just by outside teams bidding for said player.  It's also established by the team with said player (in this case, the Jets) who is determining the price point in which they are comfortable giving a player up.  No matter how incompetent you and I and everyone else believe the Panthers' FO to be, you would be crazy to believe that the 2nd + 4th price point was our initial willy-nilly offer to the Jets without any kind of back-and-forth negotiations.  That was certainly an overpay and one of the worst trades in team history, but I guarantee you our initial offer was a hell of a lot less than that.  That's just common sense 101 negotiating.  Just like how ruthless businessman Tepper who was trying to chew Rock Hill for every penny he could get, probably didn't just go up to Rhule and say "here's my very first offer: 7 years $62 million!".

I don't know if they would have and neither do you. That's ultimately the problem with your example to try and prop up your McAdoo argument. It's a flawed premise because it doesn't have factual support.

Well apparently we did offer that massive deal straight up. Not sure if you remember but Rhule took that deal to the Giants and they immediately balked at trying to outpay us.

So, again, not a great example.

It's also getting a bit off into the weeds to talk Darnold or Rhule when my original point still pretty much stands. It's a big red flag to not be able to get at least a coordinator job in the NFL since 2017. That's a pretty clear indicator of what the league thinks of him. 

Could he turn that around? Sure. A season or two of really good offenses here and certainly. 

[CRA]

56 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

First about Shula - remember that "control variable" thing I mentioned?  If we had a different OC in 2014 and largely the same roster (most notably, the QB) and the notable difference was that we hired Shula and then all of a sudden we turned from a mediocre/bad offense to the #1 offense in his first year, then hell yeah I'd give Shula mad props.  I can also speak much more confidently and with nuance about the Panthers than I can about the 2013-2018 or w/e Giants, so this is a poor analogy to ask me to compare our own OC to one of a different team.  I don't presume to have followed the Giants that closely to be able to be able to attribute X% of the Giants' offensive success to McAdoo vs. other variables.  You sure as hell are clueless about the Giants too, considering you baselessly overestimated Coughlin's role in their 2014-2015 offense before I had to refute it with 2 seconds of Google searches.  All I can do is evaluate the Giants' roster/coaching staff pre-McAdoo and post-McAdoo and consider the significant role of an offensive coordinator to a team's offensive output and make an educated guess about how much of a factor McAdoo was specifically to their offensive turnaround.  Manning was a constant, then you're looking at a receiving corps of Hakeem Nicks/Victor Cruz (one of the best 1-2 WR tandems) in 2013 vs. rookie OBJ/Reuben Randle in 2014.  I'd call that a wash.  So from a purely analytical sense from someone who hasn't watched every Giants game for the past 10 years, the evidence looks promising in favor of McAdoo.  That's literally all I've been saying all along...that McAdoo has a small sample size as an NFL OC and it's relatively encouraging.  That's the ridiculously controversial statement that you find to be offensive.  I'm not even predicting McAdoo to be a good OC for us.

As to the bold - yeah I already did that and you're flat out wrong.  In many cases it was opposing teams who were down the whole game only to come back because the Giants went conservative on D (sound familiar?).  It must be nice to say whatever you want and force the opposition to do all the research to refute it.  I've done enough of that so I'll just say you're wrong about this whole "garbage time" narrative...if you want to prove *me* wrong then feel free to actually do some research and come to me with stats.  Here's a simple one - the Giants in 2013 had a 60/40 pass/run ratio.  The Giants in 2014 had a 57/43 pass/run ratio.  So that makes the whole "SUPER BOWL CHAMP Eli Manning airing it out all game" narrative seem a bit questionable.  Were only the 2014 and 2015 Giants in garbage time "airing it out" situations but not the 2013 (7-9) Giants?  Why the huge discrepancy in offensive performance?  I'm also not talking about "all four years" because YOU explicitly started your statement off referencing McAdoo's "pure OC years".

Well as I said earlier, my brother in law is the massive Giants fan.  I get a lot of my insight from the fact he consumes it all.   And you basically admit to just googling numbers and not actually watching them to form your narrative.  Numbers lie all the time in sports. 

So I’m siding with the Giants fan’s perspective on this one.   

And he had a field day laughing at me when our rockstar OC move was Ben McAdoo.   

I mean no one was talking about a great OC sitting out there year after year somehow being overlooked again and again.  He interviewed with all sorts of bad teams that needed a competent OC year after year….yet no one wanted him.  The NFL also backs my Giant fan brother in laws views on McAdoo.   

now suddenly hanging by a thread Rhule pulls him out of the pile….he is hidden stud OC that demands praise and excitement.   

so if he shouldn’t be viewed as a low end OC (bottom 3rd) based on your research.  Where should a sensible person rank our OC.  That’s you.  Not me.  Tell me that, I told you where I got them ranked.  I think Rhule, McAdoo, Snow all rank in the bottom 3rd.   And I treat them as such.  You are against it.  So instead of being against my thoughts just tell me where I should view McAdoo.  Top half? Middle? Top 10.   I mean better than Joe Brady is already a position I own. 

 

[MasterAwesome]

16 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I don't know if they would have and neither do you. That's ultimately the problem with your example to try and prop up your McAdoo argument. It's a flawed premise because it doesn't have factual support.

Well apparently we did offer that massive deal straight up. Not sure if you remember but Rhule took that deal to the Giants and they immediately balked at trying to outpay us.

So, again, not a great example.

It's also getting a bit off into the weeds to talk Darnold or Rhule when my original point still pretty much stands. It's a big red flag to not be able to get at least a coordinator job in the NFL since 2017. That's a pretty clear indicator of what the league thinks of him. 

Could he turn that around? Sure. A season or two of really good offenses here and certainly. 

My whole point is that whatever league opinion is about a player is immaterial to their actual abilities.  It's often a reflection of their actual abilities, but it's ultimately immaterial.  A player or coach isn't better or worse at their job based upon their perception or perceived value.  Their ability directly affects their perception, but your argument seems to be that it's the other way around.  Malik Willis isn't going to be a worse NFL player because he was drafted in the 2nd round instead of the 1st round. And that's the flaw in your premise.  Perception is part of the overall evaluation because it makes you go back and evaluate a player or coach like "hmm what am I missing here?" which is why I said I do factor it in.  I just think you and CRA making it the crux of your argument about McAdoo seems pretty overblown.  My primary evaluation is: how did McAdoo perform when he was OC of the Giants?  A secondary evaluation of mine is: how was McAdoo perceived in league circles?  You and CRA's primary evaluation is how NFL front offices view him.  I think my approach is more comprehensive and I am honestly not sure why that's a contentious take.

And you've lost me on your Rhule/Giants point.  How do the Giants not matching our offer preclude any negotiations from having happened?  My entire post was emphasizing the fact that negotiations take place between the "buyer" (i.e. the Panthers) and the "seller" (i.e. Rhule in this case).  Are you suggesting negotiations only happen if there's a bidding war?  If I go and interview for a job, there are going to be negotiations between me and the hiring company.  I'm going to evaluate my current situation and decide whether the company's offer is enticing enough for me to leave my current job and accept.  Negotiations aren't contingent upon me taking their offer to other companies to match it.

[MasterAwesome]

17 hours ago, CRA said:

Well as I said earlier, my brother in law is the massive Giants fan.  I get a lot of my insight from the fact he consumes it all.   And you basically admit to just googling numbers and not actually watching them to form your narrative.  Numbers lie all the time in sports. 

So I’m siding with the Giants fan’s perspective on this one.   

And he had a field day laughing at me when our rockstar OC move was Ben McAdoo.   

I mean no one was talking about a great OC sitting out there year after year somehow being overlooked again and again.  He interviewed with all sorts of bad teams that needed a competent OC year after year….yet no one wanted him.  The NFL also backs my Giant fan brother in laws views on McAdoo.   

now suddenly hanging by a thread Rhule pulls him out of the pile….he is hidden stud OC that demands praise and excitement.   

so if he shouldn’t be viewed as a low end OC (bottom 3rd) based on your research.  Where should a sensible person rank our OC.  That’s you.  Not me.  Tell me that, I told you where I got them ranked.  I think Rhule, McAdoo, Snow all rank in the bottom 3rd.   And I treat them as such.  You are against it.  So instead of being against my thoughts just tell me where I should view McAdoo.  Top half? Middle? Top 10.   I mean better than Joe Brady is already a position I own. 

 

I'm not interested in "ranking" our OC...that's silly.  We don't know.  I'm evaluating his body of work and I'm saying it's limited but it's overall encouraging.  That's it.  Pretty uncontroversial IMO to a levelheaded person.  You're the one taking a hard-line stance on McAdoo and I was trying to understand your reasoning for that.  Cause last time we had a discussion where I questioned your reasoning (revolving around Joe Brady), you basically walked back everything you said about him originally.  You went from him being an impressive OC who produced career numbers for our offense, to now holding the opinion that he is even worse than McAdoo who you are already calling a bottom 1/3 OC.  It feels like you generally start with your conclusion already formulated and then try to develop your arguments/premises as you go, rather than the other way around.

Speaking of your reasoning...shame on me for formulating my opinion based on statistics while you adopt your opinion from a single Giants' fan lol.  Imagine taking one random Huddler's opinion and building your entire argument around that.  I mean there are legit some Panthers fans out there who say Cam was a meh QB for us.  "Numbers lie" and yet you've admitted to basically regurgitating what your brother-in-law has told you?  I think we can leave things there...I just wish I had known I was arguing against your brother-in-law by proxy this whole time cause that explains a lot.

[CRA]

If Kyle Shanahan got fired today and wanted to come be our QB coach…..should Matt Rhule hire him? 

I mean it’s hard argue Matt Rhule even liked McAdoo that much.   McAdoo interviewed for the QB coach gig in 2020 and 2021 and Rhule said no thanks.   Seems like that would be a steal for a QB coach if McAdoo was a really viewed as good OC and QB guru. 

Rhule didn’t have a lot of realistic options for OC.   McAdoo was grabbed out of the pile.  Probably the best option of what was realistic.  It wasn’t an attractive gig. And this season looks like a forced and unhappy marriage.  We are the kids they are trying to put a nice face on for.  But kids are generally perceptive enough to see Dave isn’t happy.  Rhule isn’t happy. And this staff seems forced on a bumbling coach….and the new staff was designed to be equipped for Rhule to depart. 

seems like a pointless and wasted year we are about to go through.  Change should of been made.  That’s my perception.  

[kungfoodude]

24 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

My whole point is that whatever league opinion is about a player is immaterial to their actual abilities.  It's often a reflection of their actual abilities, but it's ultimately immaterial.  A player or coach isn't better or worse at their job based upon their perception or perceived value.  Their ability directly affects their perception, but your argument seems to be that it's the other way around.  Malik Willis isn't going to be a worse NFL player because he was drafted in the 2nd round instead of the 1st round. And that's the flaw in your premise.  Perception is part of the overall evaluation because it makes you go back and evaluate a player or coach like "hmm what am I missing here?" which is why I said I do factor it in.  I just think you and CRA making it the crux of your argument about McAdoo seems pretty overblown.  My primary evaluation is: how did McAdoo perform when he was OC of the Giants?  A secondary evaluation of mine is: how was McAdoo perceived in league circles?  You and CRA's primary evaluation is how NFL front offices view him.  I think my approach is more comprehensive and I am honestly not sure why that's a contentious take.

And you've lost me on your Rhule/Giants point.  How do the Giants not matching our offer preclude any negotiations from having happened?  My entire post was emphasizing the fact that negotiations take place between the "buyer" (i.e. the Panthers) and the "seller" (i.e. Rhule in this case).  Are you suggesting negotiations only happen if there's a bidding war?  If I go and interview for a job, there are going to be negotiations between me and the hiring company.  I'm going to evaluate my current situation and decide whether the company's offer is enticing enough for me to leave my current job and accept.  Negotiations aren't contingent upon me taking their offer to other companies to match it.

It's literally a free market system in the NFL. "Value" is very often dictated by abilities, hype, positional value, etc. So, when the market is largely saying they don't want McAdoo, they are saying he doesn't have value. If he in fact were a guy that was perceived as being an offensive genius or even above average OC, he would have been employed by now. You want a good example? Norv Turner. Failed at every head coaching stuff but was almost always an extremely successful OC and never struggled to get a job in that capacity. 

The Rhule/Giants example is just getting off track even further. You tried to use it in the post I was replying to and I just simply responded that regardless of "negotiation" we threw an offer at him VERY quickly after the first interview. I rather doubt how much negotiation based on both the timeline of the meeting to hiring, and also that the other interested party dropped out of the race. I don't really even care about debating this point. It has no bearing on the McAdoo situation at all other than Rhule was a very dumb hire in hindsight and the same dysfunctional organization that hired him also hired McAdoo.

TLDR, he wasn't an attractive candidate to anyone in the NFL other than us and largely because not many coaches with better prospects would choose to come here.