Rattler's Jump Pass (1 Viewer)

[tyler735]

Deliberately perverse comparison here, but couldn't we have made all the same rationalisations for Ian Book when he was pressed into service?

Coaches and pivotal players missing thanks to COVID and injuries etc. And yet, what I recall was a fairly overwhelming chorus of 'He ain't it' - feels like everyone had enough to make an early judgement on him then ...

Disclaimer: I don't have a horse in this QB race. I think they're all subpar on the roster we have now. But if we're going to discuss 'needing to see more', let's say least be consistent in how we treat the evaluation.

The biggest difference between Book and Rattler is arm talent. Nobody should question that Rattler has a top level NFL arm in terms of velocity and the ability to throw off platform from different arm angles. Book had a peashooter of an arm. It was obvious in college and even more glaring in his time with the Saints. In other words, one player has “potential” tools to be a quality NFL starter and the other had a backup at best caliber arm. Great arm strength isn’t the be all end all on its own, but it certainly disqualify someone that doesn’t have an NFL caliber arm.

 

[DaFranchise80]

Fans see Daniels, Stroud, etc and think they are the rule and not the exception. Most rookie QBs are going to struggle early in their careers (see Brees, Manning, etc).

 

[TribuneUK]

The biggest difference between Book and Rattler is arm talent. Nobody should question that Rattler has a top level NFL arm in terms of velocity and the ability to throw off platform from different arm angles. Book had a peashooter of an arm. It was obvious in college and even more glaring in his time with the Saints. In other words, one player has “potential” tools to be a quality NFL starter and the other had a backup at best caliber arm. Great arm strength isn’t the be all end all on its own, but it certainly disqualify someone that doesn’t have an NFL caliber arm.

You have to acknowledge the physical potential, agreed. But I also perceive a natural trend among us as fans to 'see the potential' and disregard negative flags / performance for our favourites, with the latter being greeted by the 'need to see more' rationale. Hence the reason I picked a fairly extreme comparison where, if someone 'saw the potential' in Book, they could call on similar excuses.

 

[tyler735]

You have to acknowledge the physical potential, agreed. But I also perceive a natural trend among us as fans to 'see the potential' and disregard negative flags / performance for our favourites, with the latter being greeted by the 'need to see more' rationale. Hence the reason I picked a fairly extreme comparison where, if someone 'saw the potential' in Book, they could call on similar excuses.

There are certainly times when that happens among fans for sure. I just don't see this situation with Rattler as one of those times quite yet. Like I've said in previous posts, I just want to see how Rattler does in a game that should have a "neutral" game script (if not slightly favor us) like this game vs the Raiders. It's the type of game that should offer a better idea of how Rattler can manage a game behind center for us when he isn't instantly forced to "play catch up" against a superior team while working with our "B" team on offense.

Prior to the Green Bay game, I made a post with a comparison of how Carr and Rattler had done this season against teams with winning records at the time. The stats weren't that much different between the 2 of them. Which is another reason to see how Rattler looks in a game vs an average/bad team, which the Raiders will be the first team he plays that isn't a playoff caliber team.

 

[TribuneUK]

There are certainly times when that happens among fans for sure. I just don't see this situation with Rattler as one of those times quite yet. Like I've said in previous posts, I just want to see how Rattler does in a game that should have a "neutral" game script (if not slightly favor us) like this game vs the Raiders. It's the type of game that should offer a better idea of how Rattler can manage a game behind center for us when he isn't instantly forced to "play catch up" against a superior team while working with our "B" team on offense.

Prior to the Green Bay game, I made a post with a comparison of how Carr and Rattler had done this season against teams with winning records at the time. The stats weren't that much different between the 2 of them. Which is another reason to see how Rattler looks in a game vs an average/bad team, which the Raiders will be the first team he plays that isn't a playoff caliber team.

Yeah, I can see the merit in that argument. Of course, I'll be interested to see how he does (hopefully well) and how critically and fairly he will then be assessed by the fanbase.

If it's a poor/limited performance, do his boosters get to disregard it and point to their preferred positive sample of other games as being more telling of future performance?

If it's a good/solid performance, do his detractors get to downplay it as a limited sample and say that they now 'need to see more' before they're convinced?

It can all just feel rather subjective.