WEEK 18: STAMPEDERS at Alouettes

[JayP]

Originally Posted by troutman

I did not say that. I think "clutch" and "choke" are both myths. Large enough sample sizes bear this out. Given enough games, players will approach their normal averages.

And even if it did in any sense it'd be almost impossible to distinguish the difference between choking and statistical anomalies due to small sample sizes. I think players can choke on occasion and in certain instances, but it's pretty hard to believe that players at the pro level can play at a high level one day and then just can't do it every single time the games start to matter. Players with traits like that would get weeded out pretty quickly at the amateur level.

The thing about clutch and choking that most people overlook is how dependent on teammates and the opposition is to any one player's success. Let's say Burris has an awful playoff game. Did his receivers get separation and fight for tough catches? Did his O-Line provide him adequate protection? Did his running backs battle for those extra few first down yards? Did his defense put him in an early hole which affected the offensive gameplan to one that favors the opposition's defense? Answers to questions like that are just as important to evaluating an individual player as just looking at the player himself. Players are very much a product of the situations they're placed in.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by moon

I am not going to get in another Burris argument here because it is clear that people are going to continue to crap on him no matter what happens.

The point of that post was to show once again the crap that Burris gets while other guys are constantly let off the hook for their mistakes/dumb plays.

Calvillo is a stupid Riders penalty away from being 2-6 in Grey Cups but constantly gets talked up as being great. He has had equally, if not more, stacked teams playing in the pathetic East and yet somehow he is always let off the hook for his screw-ups. I am not saying Burris is as good as Calvillo but it is funny how much extra crap Burris gets and how he always has everything good he has done taken away because of the so-called great teams he plays with.

Tate has thrown some terrible interceptions and they are tossed off as nothing. Burris makes a throw where the receiver gives up on the play or the DB makes a great play and he is an idiot for throwing the ball.

I think the throw Burris under the bus mentality has given a lot of fans the excuse of blaming losses on him rather than the real issue in my view which is it doesn't matter if Tate, Burris or God himself plays QB for this team if the defense doesn't improve especially late in games with a 7 point or less lead.

I think you have "no matter what happens" mixed up with "an ongoing turnover machine that can't read defenses quickly".

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don't think I said that. I think "clutch" and "choke" are both myths. Large enough sample sizes bear this out. Given enough games, players will approach their normal averages.

I think this is wrong. I believe you are treating all games as a single sample set.

However the concept of 'choke' or 'clutch' is the relationship between performance in important games vs (relatively speaking) unimportant games. I know enough about football that playoffs are a different animal that require more preparation going in. Hockey seems similar ... more energy goes into scheming versus a particular opponent.

what people call 'clutch' is actually a player (QB's are the easiest to observe) being better prepared. And if Henry is 2 things, he's a good athlete and inadequately prepared. Well that, and he overthrows wide open targets alot.

Who knows how Tate will pan out, but even in the first two games he's making reads that Burris rarely did.

[Flickered Flame]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Who knows how Tate will pan out, but even in the first two games he's making reads that Burris rarely did.

And for me that's the big difference so far. There have been several plays in Tate's first 2 starts where I found myself thinking, Burris wouldn't have made that play. The other big difference for me is that Tate is willing to take shots down the field and Burris rarely took those shots this year. Look at Sunday's game, Tate went to Forzani for a couple of big plays, Burris didn't even really attempt those passes this year.

Tate hasn't been perfect but he has got the job down and is 2-0 as a starter and based on what this season has brought between 3 teams in the west playoffs, Tate gives the Stamps as good as shot as the Lions or Esks, mainly because all 3 teams are so wildly inconsistent.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I think this is wrong. I believe you are treating all games as a single sample set.

What? You have no idea what I am saying. Search out the "clutch is myth" thread.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by troutman

What? You have no idea what I am saying. Search out the "clutch is myth" thread.

I had not seen that thread until you pointed it out, so I just read it. it studied baseball. where the play on the field doesn't change greatly from game to game. Unlike hockey or to a larger degree football where the pace and intensity increase significantly.

Comparing that thread to this one seems like apples and oranges to me.

I think I understood what you are saying and comparing stats from July and the CFL western final just seems wrong to me. They play a very different game in Nov. vs July.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Who knows how Tate will pan out, but even in the first two games he's making reads that Burris rarely did.

Those reads on his INT's are the same reads that got Burris thrown under the bus by many on here.

[Sainters7]

^^^
True but he's also still inexperienced and learning to play the position, its expected for someone like that. Check out Aaron Rodgers from even 2-3 seasons ago, dude was a pick machine (and no I'm not comparing Tate to A-Rodg. Just sayin).

I still remember watching Calvillo back when he was a Ti-Cat, I remember thinking he was arguably the worst CFL QB I had ever seen. Funny then to see what he's turned into now, having that memory. It takes years to learn how to play the QB position properly at the pro level. Growing pains are most definitely expected.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by moon

Those reads on his INT's are the same reads that got Burris thrown under the bus by many on here.

Tate was playing his first two games as a starter, Burris is a 36 year old veteran of 10 CFL seasons.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Tate was playing his first two games as a starter, Burris is a 36 year old veteran of 10 CFL seasons.

And which QB gives you the best chance to win, right now?

[Cheese]

I think its a coin toss trout...although my gut feels that they will reinstate Burris before the playoffs.

[Flickered Flame]

Originally Posted by troutman

And which QB gives you the best chance to win, right now?

Tate.

[moon]

Originally Posted by troutman

And which QB gives you the best chance to win, right now?

Burris now and next season.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by troutman

And which QB gives you the best chance to win, right now?

I have no faith in Burris to get the job done anymore.

Tate at this point is a big question mark as well, but IMO give him the chance and start the learning curve early. There will be some growing pains for sure, but over the next couple seasons it will be worth it.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by moon

Burris now and next season.

I'd agree with you if there wasn't the factor that the team has given up on Burris and Burris has given up on the team. If Burris can't stop being butthurt enough to fall forward on top of the ball without losing it on 3rd down I'd have a different outlook.

Also rewatch that first Cornish TD where Burris pitched him the ball. That toss was so poor that it could have easily been a 109 yard fumble recovery TD for the Als. These are simple execution things that a QB who is playing for his team would have put in the effort over the prior two weeks to perfect in practice. Instead I imagine Burris' focus is on regaining a starting role for himself either by taking it back from Tate or getting it somewhere else.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Cheese

I think its a coin toss trout...although my gut feels that they will reinstate Burris before the playoffs.

I think they will start Tate, but he better be on a short leash.

Tate will be the future QB for the Stamps, but right now, Burris is the better QB IMO. He was MOP last year. Tate is green - some of his big plays have been kind of dodgy IMO - flutter balls that his receivers made great plays on.

Huff must have Hank's attention now - I expect Burris to come out blazing. Burris also adds the dimension of being able to run.

[Cheese]

I agree on the arm strength argument...Tate just doesn't have the ability that Hank does, heck Huff probably can throw it better.
Tate does bring the intangible right now, teams don't have a complete book on him yet and that "might" be enough....but I have my doubts the "team" has what it takes. Hope Im wrong.

[octothorp]

Burris has the better arm, but it's really looked suspect this year. So many underthrown balls especially to the wide sidelines; yet from some of his downfield throws, he clearly still has the strength. I don't know, maybe he just needs to put a little extra zip into the ball at this point in his career, and I think this ends up just being a blip for Burris.

Tate, on the other hand, seems to have a very good understanding of exactly his arm-strength, and I've counted only one badly underthrown ball (I think it was to Lewis early on in the Sask game). His interceptions have typically come from not reading the defense correctly, but he's still putting it where he wants. Rookie mistakes in his case.

But I'll take good reads over arm strength when it comes to aging (let's say, mid 30s and later) QBs. Hank isn't a particularly cerebral QB, and I'm not convinced (in fact I doubt) he's going to age like a Cavillo or Allen or Dickenson. But with Burris still having good years ahead of him, there will be a market for his services. If someone is going to give up an impact defensive player and a high draft pick, I'd be all over it.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by troutman

I think they will start Tate, but he better be on a short leash.

Tate will be the future QB for the Stamps, but right now, Burris is the better QB IMO. He was MOP last year. Tate is green - some of his big plays have been kind of dodgy IMO - flutter balls that his receivers made great plays on.

Huff must have Hank's attention now - I expect Burris to come out blazing. Burris also adds the dimension of being able to run.

If Huff didn't have his attn in Montreal he never will.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

As an opposing fan, I'm more afraid of Burris right now. I know he's been off and on this year and is prone to blatant stupid mistakes but he's got all the tools, just maybe not all the smarts.

Tate is the QB of the future but he's still largely unproven.

If my team was in the playoffs, and obviously they aren't, I'd much rather face Tate. Again, maybe that's just because I know what Burris can do and Tate is new to his role as starter and I'm underestimating him. Nevertheless, I would not want to face Burris right now due to his potential. When he's on, he can be a force out there. I'd count on being able to rattle Tate and/or him making a few rookie mistakes when the pressure is on.