I said I wouldn’t jump in but the thread is falling so I get to pounce on it. So..here’s my thing on Bradford. I put it up before but it got lost in the shifting sands of board moving.
My bold and reckless claim is that Bradford has already “made it” and if he plays at less than his previous level, it will be a regression.
That’s not saying he can’t improve. He can. They need to throw more and more successfully in the 11-20 yard range, for example. And he needs to improve his performance under pressure (though he already plays well against the blitz). (Against the blitz in 2013 he had a 69.6% completion percentage which is 2nd only to Peyton Manning).
And they really do need a consistent, reliable, productive game-in and game-out receiver. I don’t even mean a star. Just someone who can catch 70 balls a year at least and get 1000 yards.
BUT–in terms of all you need to compete, and have a winning record? Bradford has already proven to me that he can uphold his part of the bargain. Or better–Bradford has already done it.
I base that on this–a very simple formula (which some might remember).
If you look at the Fisher Rams and just count the games where they have 2 key things, he has played well on average.
Those 2 things are:
1. a relatively healthy OL. At worst, just a couple of short-term injury replacements (like when they replaced Dahl for a couple of games in the 2nd half of 2012)… all lines go through that, more or less. But it can’t be the kind of OL Armaggedon Rams fans have seen all too often, like from the 1st half of 2012 (where they had 3 injury replacements, including both LOT and OC, which is deadly). Now why do I have this criterion? The “relatively healthy” OL criterion? Because NO qb plays well if the OL falls apart (beyond ordinary level of a couple of injuries).
2. A running threat. I only say that because he didn’t play as well early in 2013 when Richardson could not run. Now to be fair, some rare qbs CAN excel without a running threat. The majority of good qbs can’t. (And I mean the vast majority of GOOD qbs…not talking about game managers like Alex Smith). Either way, this feeds into a clear Bradford strength–play action. Bradford is one of the 3-4 best play action qbs in the game. (In 2013, Brafdford’s completion percentage on play action was 9th in the league. That’s better than Roethlisberger, Stafford, Kaepernick, Brady, Flacco, Romo, Foles, Wilson, Cutler, and Luck.) And btw I am not saying he plays well when they run well. I am saying he plays well when the defense knows the RB is a threat and accounts for him–and sometimes shuts him down. It’s not running yards, though that never hurts, it’s the THREAT of a run that counts here.
If you look at the Fisher Rams, Bradford has at least 11 games that meet both conditions–the 2nd half of 2012 (when they got the OL starters back) and the final 3 games of 2013 (when Stacy took over for Richardson). (You could count up to 14 games but then the criteria get fuzzier). He did not play as well in all of them, but on average he played well with those things–better than he did without those things. And btw those 11 games include 8 against top 12 defenses. Or if you prefer, 7 against top 8 defenses. Or if you still prefer, 6 again top 7 defenses.
How well did he play?
In those games he averages a 64.3% completion percentage, 2 TDs, 0.63 INTs, & a 100.7 qb rating.
There’s other stuff.
If you look at big passing plays of 25+ yards, Bradford’s 2013 numbers across 16 games would have ranked him 9th in the league, ahead of Palmer, Rodgers, Romo, Brady, Kaepernick, Luck, and Newton.
On long passes (which is different from big plays of 25+ yards cause the former includes RAC)….Bradford’s 1.42 attempts a game is just a hair behind Brady and more than Rodgers, Romo, Wilson, Kaepernick, Luck, Manning, Smith, Ryan, Stafford, and Rivers.
So I am saying he was already playing well enough to be legitimately considered a good tier 2 qb. Like I said. IMO if he DOESN’T play that well in 2014, I will consider it a regression.
.
.
Agamemnon
