What would you say... | Page 3 | 49ers Webzone Forum

Ceadderman · 2009-12-24T22:52:01-08:00

If I told you that Alex is having a better statistical season than Rodgers. Bare with me now. This is analytically speaking of course. But the numbers speak for themselves and I've even provided how I came about them. The bolded below are the analytical statistics. Enjoy. "1st of all Rodgers has played the ENTIRE season. He has at the moment 28 TDs' 7 INTs' 4k yards(less but not by much) with a 102.4 passer Rating. Smith has 16/12 2k(same as with Rodgers of course) and a 78.5 rating. Now the obvious thing that should jump out at me is what? Ohhhhh that's right GAMES STARTED. Rodgers=15 Smith=7 Moving on... Rodgers had an ONE Offense and only ONE. Smith worked TWO. Or tried to work the first one which was not going anywhere with the OTHER Starter. Rodgers has been sacked 49 times. We got to him... TWICE. Smith has been sacked 18 times. Green Bay got him... 3 times. In THAT game... Rodgers threw ZERO INT while Smith threw 1. A whole ONE turnover on Smith's part. And that was him trying to force the ball to make a play. In any case Smith up until the last game was not a huge turn over machine. 7 games 12 Turnovers SHOW that. He's averaging under TWO a game. Now how many of those were because the Receiver tipped it up or quit on the play? Take those away and Smith's QBP increases dramatically. In fact, if you extrapolate Smith's numbers they ALSO go up. let's see he doesn't average but 200 yards right? 8 games x 200 is 1600 yards. 1600+2k is 3600. He averages at least 2 TDs' a game. That's (16x2)+16 that 's 48 TDs' But have to minus 1 per game that we ran Power I. So that's 40. But also his sacks go up as well. So Shaun Hill got sacked how many times. mmmm hmmm that would be... 18 times. Alex is a more mobile guy so I'll give him the benefit of escaping less than 1 an game. So we'll call it good at 13 sacks added. So that would be 31 sacks on the season to date. He has 12 INTs' on the season and averaging 1.6 INTs' a game x 8 that's 24.8 INTs' to date. Now if Smith had PLAYED all 15 games without having to suffer through the Shaun Hill experiment along with the rest of us, his numbers would look like this... Alex Smith 40 TDs'/ 24.8 INT 3600 yards and 31 Sacks. Now granted Rodgers has been sacked a hell of alot more and has done more but the Packers Run Game is well I think that it's not as good as ours. So they throw more. And he's using the WCO. So one would EXPECT the numbers to be different. STATISTICALLY speaking Smith is BETTER than Rodgers NOT worse." Note to the Mods: Please do not lock this thread. I worked hard to get rational numbers so everyone can SEE what we have in Alex Smith. I'm tired of the whole Smith debate. We need to move on and address the other issues imho. Smith is NOT the problem. *Edit*I edited this removing the personal conversation. No statistic was change in this process.*ediT* ~Ceadder

Dec 25, 2009 at 11:05 AM

#31

wrongway9erfan
Veteran
Posts: 87

Originally posted by crzy:
Right off the bat, Ceadderman's extrapolations are complete fiction.

Alex Smith started EIGHT games this year, not seven.

@Ind,
TEN,
CHI,
@GNB,
Jac,
@SEA,
Ari,
@PHI

To be fair, I should throw out the Houston Texans stats as well. The Texans prepared for Shaun Hill all week. Alex had the advantage of playing against a defense who didn't even know who he was. Mario Williams was quoted that week as saying that he didn't even know who #11 was.

Let's focus on the eight starts then .

Eight Starts
1692 Passing Yards
13 TD's
11 INT's.
59.4% Completion Percentage
74.9 QB Rating
5.81 Yards per Attempt

Full 16 game extrapolation
3384 Passing Yards
26 TD's
22 INT
59.4% Completion Percentage
74.9 QB Rating
5.81 Yards per Attempt

Better than Aaron Rodgers

Thank you crzy!! I thought maybe I took some bad acid or something after reading Ceadder "the spin doctors" take on Smith's stats. There is no way you compare Rodgers and Smith's stats and have Smith on top. That's ridiculous and there are medications for such delusions. There is a word called extrapolation--hopefully in the future he will refer to it and make the proper calculations.

Dec 25, 2009 at 11:09 AM

#32

VA9erfan
Veteran
Posts: 2,805

Originally posted by Niners99:
or you could stop comparing the two, because they wouldve been the exact same things if their roles/situations were reversed. book it.

rodgers to the 49ers, smith to the packers. same draft slots.

Smith gets the 3 years behind Brett Favre to learn. Smith is part of a winning organization with alot of talent, and a solid coaching staff preaching a consistent message. Smith gets 3 years to learn, he steps in, immediately has Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, and Ryan Grant to help him out.

Rodgers on the other hand, goes to us. because of how dire our 2005 QB situation is, he gets thrown into the fire right away. his line is so bad hes on his back after 2 steps back on every play. every ball he throws is while running backwards/falling over. he then makes progress, but the very next year he is flattened by a 2 ton oaf, misses 2 seasons.

they have similar talent levels, it was ALL in the opportunity and situation. Smith got the big bucks, but he entered a disaster area of a team. rodgers free fell, but he ended up in a winning situation behind a HOF QB.

ive seen Rodgers play enough to see his flaws. he holds onto the ball too long. his line might suck, but he makes them look alot worse by not understanding the basics of quick thinking in the pocket.

Smith has so much experience flat on his back early on, i think hes now done a good job at learning how to protect the football, have that timer in his head to know when to get rid of the ball, and when its best to throw the ball away rather than force it.

Dec 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM

#33

crzy
Hall of Fame
Posts: 40,285

Aaron Rodgers would have succeeded in San Francisco under the same circumstances that Alex Smith faced.

Why?

Because Aaron Rodgers is talented, and Alex Smith is not.

And Alex Smith would have failed in Green Bay.

[ Edited by crzy on Dec 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM ]

Dec 25, 2009 at 11:23 AM

#34

SonocoNinerFan
Veteran
Posts: 17,610

Great thread. Full of cooked statistics and unprovable statements . . .

Dec 25, 2009 at 11:33 AM

#35

prime21
Veteran
Posts: 1,062

Great Stats! Too bad we didnt squeeze out more wins with #s like that!

Dec 25, 2009 at 4:26 PM

#36

WheresWaldo
Member
Posts: 2,440

Who cares? I'd still take Rodgers over Alex in a heartbeat.

Dec 25, 2009 at 4:48 PM

#37

Leathaface
Veteran
Posts: 16,753

Ceadder, always comes through with the LOL for me.

Dec 25, 2009 at 5:12 PM

#38

WheresWaldo
Member
Posts: 2,440

To the people saying KEEP HIM! ZOMGGGG HE MUST BE BETTER THAN RODGERS! You homers would probably rather have Alex than Rodgers. hahahahah point and laugh

Dec 25, 2009 at 5:57 PM

#39

amir_tn80
Veteran
Posts: 1,864

I would say lay off the crack and quit wasting your time on the internet coming up with BS mathematical formulas trying to prove Alex Smith is better than a pro-bowl level quarterback. I can do the same kinda nonsensical crap to prove Jason Campbell is better than Peyton Manning. Ask any football expert who they would take in between Alex Smith or Aaron Rogers and they would just point at you and laugh.

Dec 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

#40

YungAce
Veteran
Posts: 46,920

nice post man

Dec 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

#41

backontop
Veteran
Posts: 14,346

Originally posted by WheresWaldo:
Who cares? I'd still take Rodgers over Alex in a heartbeat.

I hear the packers are looking for more fans.

Dec 25, 2009 at 7:03 PM

#42

OtisDriftwood
Veteran
Posts: 1,146

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Originally posted by ptinerocket:
I don't like the comparison simply because smith didn't play the other games, he coulda've sucked really hard or put up peyton/brees numbers

You can't handle what I'm saying based on that it's a statistcal analysis?

Way to go.

~Ceadder

plus we won most of the games Hill started so we'd probably won those games by more and smith woulda done better then hill.

Dec 25, 2009 at 7:14 PM

#43

chico49erfan
Veteran
Posts: 13,961

Originally posted by VA9erfan:
Originally posted by Niners99:
or you could stop comparing the two, because they wouldve been the exact same things if their roles/situations were reversed. book it.

rodgers to the 49ers, smith to the packers. same draft slots.

Smith gets the 3 years behind Brett Favre to learn. Smith is part of a winning organization with alot of talent, and a solid coaching staff preaching a consistent message. Smith gets 3 years to learn, he steps in, immediately has Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, and Ryan Grant to help him out.

Rodgers on the other hand, goes to us. because of how dire our 2005 QB situation is, he gets thrown into the fire right away. his line is so bad hes on his back after 2 steps back on every play. every ball he throws is while running backwards/falling over. he then makes progress, but the very next year he is flattened by a 2 ton oaf, misses 2 seasons.

they have similar talent levels, it was ALL in the opportunity and situation. Smith got the big bucks, but he entered a disaster area of a team. rodgers free fell, but he ended up in a winning situation behind a HOF QB.

ive seen Rodgers play enough to see his flaws. he holds onto the ball too long. his line might suck, but he makes them look alot worse by not understanding the basics of quick thinking in the pocket.

Smith has so much experience flat on his back early on, i think hes now done a good job at learning how to protect the football, have that timer in his head to know when to get rid of the ball, and when its best to throw the ball away rather than force it.

sometime logic in NinerTalk seems out of place. Niners99 well said man. To be able to sit behind and pick the brain of a HOF QB instead of starting instantly above and beyond paved the way for Rodgers to be good in his first starts. Talent-wise? The packers shat on us when he AR started. Hopefully we have a good draft, get a good line, a better 2ndary -- and then maybe we can start comparing.

Dec 25, 2009 at 7:16 PM

#44

BringBackTO
Veteran
Posts: 944

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Great thread. Full of cooked statistics and unprovable statements . . .

Agreed.

You know if the 49ers only scored 8 more points they'd have won two more games and then and then and then................................................

At the end of the day Smith will go into next season ranked in the bottom tier by most NON 49er fans and it will be his job to prove the country wrong. I hope he does but I wouldn't bet the farm or even a couple of bales of hay on it.

Dec 25, 2009 at 8:02 PM

#45

excelsior
Veteran
Posts: 1,432

Let's throw Vince Young into the conversation for just a minute. He is a promising young QB, appearing to have moved ahead of Alex in the QB ratings.

THIS JUST IN: Against SD, Young just passed 8 for 21, 89yds, 0 TDs, 2 INTs - a robust QB rating of 11.9.

It is very hard for young QBs to excel consistently. Rodgers seems the only QB drafted in the last five years to be doing very well. What does this tell us? It tells us that drafting a new QB in the first round most likely would represent another four or five years of frustration and hair-pulling.