ESPN: Debunking the Dak contract debate

[SteveTheCowboy]

Box score stats don't tell the whole story but analytics do. They both say the offense carried this team with zero help from defense and special teams all year long.

Can you tell me what you mean by "analytics"? I assume it's "analyzing" stats.....if so ...how does one do that? By carefully VIEWING the plays the stats are showing? Eye test?

Not interested in arguing, but civil conversation would be cool.

 

[G2]

Debatable if he's better than Wentz.
If you did a poll league-wide it would be interesting.
But most think he's passed up the overpaid Goff.

Availability alone puts Prescott over Goff.

 

[CouchCoach]

It doesn't matter if they are "worth what they're getting." No team or player is in the business of offering lowball contracts to correct other teams' overpayments.

They're comps b/c they got contracts at around the same time and are close to the same age. It's dumb to compare his contract to the likes of Brees, Brady and Rodgers.

But aren't some doing just that? He's not worth Rodgers or Wilson money is what some are positioning.

The most humorous part of this is not one poster here knows the overall effect on the cap of signing him. They hand wring that the team can't build around him, is that really an issue? They shop off off the rack for FA players, they're not players in the early going.

This is the biggest bunch of nothing that has dominated this forum, it isn't about the money. Either posters feel he can get the job done or he can't, who in the hell cares what they pay him?

I don't see any other options at this time so either do the 4 year deal, which is standard now, or back off and let him play on the tag and try again next off season.

 

[glimmerman]

Do the 4 year deal, don’t give up tag rights and you have control over him for 6 years, if you want it. If it’s the number of years that is the issue, and not the amount per year, pay him and move on. If he wants an untenable amount per year then make him play on the tag and start looking for a QB.

This should be a business decision on both ends, not an emotional exercise. I think Dak should not underestimate the value to him outside of football that being the QB of the Cowboys brings to the table. Winning also brings value. There aren’t 5 teams in football that are close to the Cowboys in both.

I think this is all but worked out but in true JJ fashion it will come down to the wire of the 15th. Then it’s a big splash and maybe the signing on his yacht. Lol.

 

[DFWJC]

They didn't have a shot at him, had he fallen to 17th, they probably would have taken him.

And he has the same durability issue as Wentz.

I was referring to future players who might be able to give DCs headaches, that's all.

 

[CouchCoach]

I was referring to future players who might be able to give DCs headaches, that's all.

Missed that, thought you meant they could have had him.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

But "tHe EyE tEsT"

my eyes hurt reading your response

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

The last paragraph perfectly describes why he shouldn't get the contract he's wanting.
Did you notice he wasn't lumped in with the top 5?
Even more telling he wasn't mentioned in the top 3.
Dak is wanting a contract that pays him over his pay grade.
Thats the problem.
All the so called (Dak haters) just want him to be payed accordingly.
Other than that the Dak jock sniffers don't have a legitimate argument.

but a year from now, his contract will be in the 5-10 range.....you are not thinking ahead...you are only thinking now.

 

[Jake]

Long, in-depth, fantastic read. Bill Barnwell’s articles are always extremely well-researched.

It’s full of facts and stats... which means the anti-Dak crew either won’t be smart enough to grasp it or they won’t have the integrity to give it an honest read.

For everyone else, enjoy!

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...ract-debate-facts-fiction-why-cowboys-pay-him

While he's not Mahomes, the preponderance of evidence suggests he's a top-10 quarterback and somewhere in the six-to-eight range. The idea that the Cowboys can just replace him with a cheaper option and get similar production is not supported by evidence or history.

When someone makes a decision based on feelz all the facts in the world won't change it, but it's a good read.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Can you tell me what you mean by "analytics"? I assume it's "analyzing" stats.....if so ...how does one do that? By carefully VIEWING the plays the stats are showing? Eye test?

Not interested in arguing, but civil conversation would be cool.

More in depth stats. Not just basic box score stats. A lot of sites use this now. Like Football outsiders. Our defense was 9th in scoring which is good. But that doesn't tell the whole story. Their efficiency was actually 19th. Efficiency is a factor of points per drive, yards per drive, plays per drive, turnovers, negative plays, etc. Watching the games you knew our defense was not a top 10 defense as our 9th in scoring would suggest.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Using Wentz and Goff as the baseline is a false comparison. Neither is worth their current contracts and neither is a QB that is going to bring a franchise long term playoff success. And the most telling comparison in this long article is how Dak played against winning teams that had more than 10 wins: Dak performed worse than both Wentz and Goff by a significant margin. It confirms that he is a good bus driver but he does not lead or lift a team to victory against good teams. Period. Which puts the onus on the rest of the team to get us wins against good teams. He should be paid like a good bus driver, not a franchise QB. And should the team even settle for a bus driver.

I read and article, that teams will and should give and have given contracts to QBs because it gives them a chance....Brees is often considered a top 5, top 3 QB, but he hasn't been to the superbowl in years, but its about having the chance and giving yourself a chance...its the easiest path to superbowl….

 

[CouchCoach]

I think this is all but worked out but in true JJ fashion it will come down to the wire of the 15th. Then it’s a big splash and maybe the signing on his yacht. Lol.

That's why this saga has been played out. See any other teams, in any sport, pulling this stunt just to get coverage?

Everything this clown does has to be played out in the media.

 

[glimmerman]

Do the 4 year deal, don’t give up tag rights and you have control over him for 6 years, if you want it. If it’s the number of years that is the issue, and not the amount per year, pay him and move on. If he wants an untenable amount per year then make him play on the tag and start looking for a QB.

This should be a business decision on both ends, not an emotional exercise. I think Dak should not underestimate the value to him outside of football that being the QB of the Cowboys brings to the table. Winning also brings value. There aren’t 5 teams in football that are close to the Cowboys in both.

Exactly. Just do the deal and let’s move on. I think it’s done. We will wait till 15th.

 

[CouchCoach]

I was referring to future players who might be able to give DCs headaches, that's all.

He's the biggest risk that's been picked by any team in quite some time. They're hoping for that Mahomes or Wilson magic with him, if he can stay healthy.

The problem with Tua and to a certain degree, Burrow as well, are the teams they played on. LSU set the record, as well as the SEC with Bama, for picks and that would be a bit of an alarm for me.

 

[CouchCoach]

Exactly. Just do the deal and let’s move on. I think it’s done. We will wait till 15th.

Hell, it's been done since last year, they knew exactly what they were going to have to pay and had already accepted that. Another team would have already signed him or just backed off but then they do not seek the coverage.

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

"He's just an average/replaceable player"

What the hell, where?

 

[cern]

it's not a debate. it's a negotiation. a very tough one for both sides. but it'll get settled in the end.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Availability alone puts Prescott over Goff.

I'm not necessarily diagre

More in depth stats. Not just basic box score stats. A lot of sites use this now. Like Football outsiders. Our defense was 9th in scoring which is good. But that doesn't tell the whole story. Their efficiency was actually 19th. Efficiency is a factor of points per drive, yards per drive, plays per drive, turnovers, negative plays, etc. Watching the games you knew our defense was not a top 10 defense as our 9th in scoring would suggest.

I don't think that was my original point. But thanks for explaining "analytics" is just more stats.

I disagree that just trotting out stats alone is a good thing. VISUALLY breaking down plays, maybe some graphics like route running and ball trajectory?

I was making an assumption you were mocking people that claim to "eye test". Using observation of plays rather than stats?

But we HAVE to do that. A stat might show that a pass was incomplete....but if you don't use your eyes....you may never know exactly WHY.

So I say "eye test" is an important function in not only enjoying football (sports, anything), but also in breaking down hard stats. A guy did it in another thread, I will see if I can find it. Of course he was responding to an obviously silly premise about Pollard being better than Gallup. The gentleman broke down why the passing stats might APPEAR to be better, by using visual observation...the dreaded "eye test" that the stat is misleading and being used for the wrong conclusion.

I think your last sentence might be what I am talking about. "Watching".

Now if I got you wrong about your " but...eYe TeSt" comment....well...sorry!

 

[CouchCoach]

"He's just an average/replaceable player"

What the hell, where?

But wait, isn't that because of the team he's played on?

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

So the (dak haters) are just too dumb to understand the market of the NFL?

Correct, and aren't good evaluators of talent either.