is it silly? those holes were huge. of course it's unknowable but we can still make discussions about counterfactuals and their likelihoods.
Thoughts/Impressions on “The Dynasty” Apple TV Series
- Thread starter Dewey's 'stache
- Start date
I think it's pretty easy to state a replacement level player could have reproduced that performance considering Michel's career pretty much showed him to be a replacement level player whose production was greatly dependent on his OL.
Bill got LeGarette Blount for essentially free, twice, and he kicked ass. They could have found a different RB.
Also it's fucking Lamar Jackson.
So for everyone on the Michel didn't move the needle train - you would be willing to go back and take Jackson at 32 and risk 2018 not happening?
We could even give this player a name: say, "Damien Harris." That has a nice ring to it.
We don't even know if Lamar would have worked in New England. By all accounts, Harbaugh completely changed Baltimore's entire offensive philosophy specifically to accommodate Jackson's unique skill set. It was a smart move by him (like him or not, he's a really good coach, which makes their decisions this past playoffs to barely run the ball...inexplicable), but not every coach would be willing to do that.
We also have no idea how it would have impacted Brady from an emotional / psychological perspective. Maybe it would have worked the same as Jimmy. Or maybe he would have been pissed that they didn't use a first round pick on immediate help and everything would have gone south quicker, there is no 2018 title, and he leaves that offseason instead.
McDaniels was able to put together a pretty interesting offense around Cam Newton in the first few weeks of 2020 (before he got Covid and the wheels came off) on what was essentially short notice. Given a few years, I think they could have reoriented things around a mobile QB.
I'm not 100% in either camp, but I don't understand taking the blue pill with hindsight.
We know Jackson is a more valuable player, but we also know that he played a non-zero roll in a championship. So that championship is 100% probability in the do nothing scenario. If you replay that season with Harris instead of Michel, one camp might say there is 15% chance and the other camp might say 85%. I don't think you could credibly argue 100%. A lot has to go right to win a championship and Michel did some of it.
So then we look at the other seasons. With full hindsight, which seasons do we think we would have a measurable chance at winning the SB if we had Jackson instead, and what do we think those probabilities add up to? What were the Raven's odds in those years with Jackson?
PTSD from learning about Leibniz' best of all possible worlds theory right now.
I’m curious how one would quantify the likelihood of a replacement level player duplicating Michel’s performance in the 2018 playoffs? If the likelihood is anything other than 0% I would be surprised. Yes I do think it is a silly conversation but it is more entertaining than whatever I’m supposed to be doing at work.
Oh 0% my bad. yes we were definitely talking about mimicking exactly every single run down to the yard.I’m curious how one would quantify the likelihood of a replacement level player duplicating Michel’s performance in the 2018 playoffs? If the likelihood is anything other than 0% I would be surprised. Yes I do think it is a silly conversation but it is more entertaining than whatever I’m supposed to be doing at work.
I don't know how Lamar Jackson would have fit instead of Sony Michel.
But I'm pretty damn confident that Nick Chubb would have been able to not only match Sony's production, but blow it away.
So does that make the likelihood from my standpoint -10%?
But I'm pretty damn confident that Nick Chubb would have been able to not only match Sony's production, but blow it away.
So does that make the likelihood from my standpoint -10%?
Except Michel did those things, he did set a record for TDs by a RB in one postseason, and he did play a huge part in Ring number 6, and we saw those things happen in real time.
There's no way I would ever, ever, ever go back and make another pick. They won the SB because that pick was huge that year.
They could have also picked him instead of Wynn. And Wynn sat out 2018 with the achilles injury then sucked thereafter. So that's a pretty easy one to replace!
Brady said a lot of positive things about Lamar in 2018. I don't think he would have viewed him as a threat. Their styles are very different and Lamar would not have been ready in Year 1.
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/tom-brady-throws-support-behind-lamar-jackson-hes-a-beast/
Obviously the team would be in a much better position at the QB position then they are now with Jackson but there are still questions about his ability as a "pocket passer" and he has shown a propensity to come up small in big games. This may change in the future but it's not like he's currently the missing factor in additional championships.
Like, remember the last two big runs in the Super Bowl, one by Sony and one by Burkhead? Yes very large holes for both of those guys to run through. But also, Sony did a great job making sure he didn't fumble at the end of his run. Maybe Chubb makes the same run, but fumbles. Who knows.
The point is, we can speculate all we want about what someone else *might* have done, but we know what Sony *did* do - and what he did was instrumental to their Super Bowl championship.
Yes. A lot like the "it is us against the world" mentality that John Thompson instilled in his Georgetown teams even when they were most definitely the Goliath in a given season/matchup. It is a motivational tool that works really well for some, obviously.
It's kind of funny that those plays happened against the Pats, but the reality of course is that there is basically a very small difference between them as fumble prone.
Chubb averages 1 fumble for every 199.7 touches in his career (7 fumbles on 1,398 touches).
Sony averaged 1 fumble for every 238 touches in his career (4 fumbles on 952 touches).
For the record, Chubb has only played in two playoffs games in his career. In those, he had 31 carries, 153 yards, another 6 catches for 73 yards and 1td.
I'm not suggesting Chubb is fumble prone. I'm just saying that of course it's possible that he fumbles in the same situation where Sony did not. We know Sony did not, because that actually happened. While Chubb is a better overall player, it's possible he fumbles and the Pats lose. It's the hypothetical vs. the actual reality.
And Sony's playoff games in New England in that first run were 71 carries for 336 yards and 6 TDs. And he had 1 catch for 9 yards.
There's no doubt Chubb has had the better career. But it's hard to overstate how fucking good Michel was in that postseason. He was an absolute beast.
There's no doubt Chubb has had the better career. But it's hard to overstate how fucking good Michel was in that postseason. He was an absolute beast.
I don't disagree. It's also possible instead of making a 15 yard run, like Sony does with a huge hole, Chubb busts one to the house too. That season, Sony's longest run (before his 40 yarder in the playoffs) was 34 yards and he averaged 4.5ypc. Chubb that season (also his rookie obviously) was busting runs for 63, 41, 92, 40 and about a dozen others of 20+.
Let's also not forget that Chubb was doing this on the Browns team with very little firepower that defenses had to focus on, while Sony was running through holes that were created by the gravity that Brady, White, Edelman, Gronk demanded from the defense.
I loved Sony that year, but if the question is could a replacement level back have done what he did that season, my answer is absolutely. I used to call Legarrette Blount "Mr. Minimum" around here too, because IMO, he you could always count on him to get you the minimum amount of yards that a play was designed to get. Nothing more, nothing less. Sony was a lot like that, and frankly, I see a lot of similarities with Rhamondre too. Guys like Chubb (when he was healthy) and CMC are taking those 15 yard holes and turning them into 40-50 yard runs.
Of course, it's all hypothetical, but if we're going to argue that he could have fumbled, we could also argue he might taken it to the house because while he was slightly more likely to fumble than Sony, he was also a lot more likely to turn those 331 yards over 3 games into 450 yards...
Right all kinds of hypotheticals. But we know that in real life, Sony was absolutely fantastic. That really happened.
The run I'll always remember Sony making was a 30 yarder in the Rams SB late in the game while up 10-3 with the Pats pinned very deep in their own end (2 yard line?) That run nearly ensured the Pats would get some sort of points on that drive and nailed the game shut.
It was after the Gilmore pick. It was like 2nd and 9 and he bust one for 30+. Then Burkhead ripped one of similar length a play or two later that got them into field goal range.
Edit: Both runs were 26 yards. The Michel run was on 2nd and 9 from the NE 5. The Burkhead one was on 2nd and 7 from the NE 41 after an illegal use of hands penalty on LAR and then a 3-yard Michel run on first down.
Yes. Jackson is incredible, what the hell is this question, did you see the QB play the last 4 years?
So you'd risk us only having 5 titles, so that Lamar could make us a little better the last 4 years and we'd still only have 5 titles?
I can ask you in reverse, what the hell is this question that you'd risk us not having 6 titles?
This entire discussion is fucking insane. Maybe random RB X runs better than Michel. Maybe he runs worse. Maybe they trade for or sign someone else. Maybe they run different plays with different personnel. Maybe any one of infinite other possibilities comes to pass.
Unless you think that the Patriots’ odds of winning before a given game started would have been materially different with a different running back’s range of reasonably expected values, you’re basically engaging in super weird post hoc ergo propter hoc analysis on par with attributing wins to eating a lucky breakfast. Lamar Jackson would have been a better pick like water is wet.
Unless you think that the Patriots’ odds of winning before a given game started would have been materially different with a different running back’s range of reasonably expected values, you’re basically engaging in super weird post hoc ergo propter hoc analysis on par with attributing wins to eating a lucky breakfast. Lamar Jackson would have been a better pick like water is wet.
Bit off track, but I'd suggest I'd Rather be Wright: Memoirs of an Itinerant Tackle for a similar parallel in written form to discuss Lombardi in long form. He comes across as caring and devoted, but a bit neurotic in it. Also has a profile of Bear Bryant among others.
Because I see the risk as very minimal and we'd have a much better chance at titles for all of Lamar's career.
Because we got a guy the next year that played about as well and took over from Michel, because the offensive line was similarly good and that is the main thing that determines success of running backs. It is a demonstration of the fungibility of Michel; they couldn't have gotten Harris specifically but any number of RBs that they could have acquired would almost certainly have also performed well as long as they didn't fumble.
If we had Lamar we wouldn't have the 3rd pick. This is stupid and I'm done here.
No, my point is that if we end up with a guy who is as good as or better than Lamar, would you still want to go back in time and change the pick? Where I'm going is, it's not like Lamar has won a title (or even an AFC title) with much better Ravens teams than the Patriot teams of the last 5 years. So, if we end up with someone who is on his level, we'd still have the guaranteed six titles, and we'd have a good QB going forward. IOW, not taking Lamar wouldn't have cost us anything, aside from 4 years of bad-mediocre QB play.
Yes, if we end up somehow taking a QB who will have 3 MVPs at age 26 instead of Lamar's 2, it will have been worth it.
Getting back to the series, it’s an interesting “what if?” to consider what would’ve happened had Kraft not told Bill they weren’t trading Brady. Maybe Lamar doesn’t even enter the equation because Jimmy is QB in 2018 a la Rodgers/Love succeeding Favre/Rodgers. Or maybe they keep both for one year at that enormous combined cap figure that was reported on breathlessly at the time.
Relatedly, Shank is back early from heart surgery today to mince Kraft for his apparent heavy hand in the series. Shaughnessy was somewhat critical of the Jeff Benedict book when it came out in 2020, calling it “well-researched” but too slanted toward Kraft’s POV (not helped by Kraft giving copies of the book to season ticket holders). He’s doubling down now in the wake of the series and Bill’s departure, reserving a lot of his venom for Jonathan.
I’m actually reading the Benedict book now. The first several chapters are def. a very sunny version of the Kraft Origin Story – he meet cutes Myra and asks her to marry her on their first date, takes his boys out of Hebrew school to games because he’s a great dad, becomes a successful, charminginternational businessman, is a super genius to acquire the stadium and parking when the team is in bankruptcy, navigates the Kiam/Orthwein situations brilliantly to put himself in a position to buy the team. Then, as owner he hires two Black men to run the front office, and upsets Parcells because he forced him to stand behind the marquee quarterback and make his players contribute to charity and the community. I haven’t gotten to the actual breakup with Tuna yet but there certainly hasn’t been much in the way of criticism so far.
That said, I’m not sure any of it is wrong per se. Kraft was indeed exceptionally shrewd when it came to buying the team. He did actually hire Bobby Grier and Andre Tippett into senior FO roles before that was done in the league. Parcells was a giant, drama queen bully who put himself before the teams he coached. And, Kraft did turn down compensation for Christian Peter. None of those things are really debatable.
It’s also an interesting story worth telling – I was imagining how a longer or different series (or maybe a different edit that they did) might’ve dug into this in the early episodes more – how arguably the most dysfunctional team in all of professional sports became the poster child for success. Kraft may not be perfect—certainly less perfect than he was perhaps portrayed—but I would’ve enjoyed seeing that.
Relatedly, Shank is back early from heart surgery today to mince Kraft for his apparent heavy hand in the series. Shaughnessy was somewhat critical of the Jeff Benedict book when it came out in 2020, calling it “well-researched” but too slanted toward Kraft’s POV (not helped by Kraft giving copies of the book to season ticket holders). He’s doubling down now in the wake of the series and Bill’s departure, reserving a lot of his venom for Jonathan.
I’m actually reading the Benedict book now. The first several chapters are def. a very sunny version of the Kraft Origin Story – he meet cutes Myra and asks her to marry her on their first date, takes his boys out of Hebrew school to games because he’s a great dad, becomes a successful, charminginternational businessman, is a super genius to acquire the stadium and parking when the team is in bankruptcy, navigates the Kiam/Orthwein situations brilliantly to put himself in a position to buy the team. Then, as owner he hires two Black men to run the front office, and upsets Parcells because he forced him to stand behind the marquee quarterback and make his players contribute to charity and the community. I haven’t gotten to the actual breakup with Tuna yet but there certainly hasn’t been much in the way of criticism so far.
That said, I’m not sure any of it is wrong per se. Kraft was indeed exceptionally shrewd when it came to buying the team. He did actually hire Bobby Grier and Andre Tippett into senior FO roles before that was done in the league. Parcells was a giant, drama queen bully who put himself before the teams he coached. And, Kraft did turn down compensation for Christian Peter. None of those things are really debatable.
It’s also an interesting story worth telling – I was imagining how a longer or different series (or maybe a different edit that they did) might’ve dug into this in the early episodes more – how arguably the most dysfunctional team in all of professional sports became the poster child for success. Kraft may not be perfect—certainly less perfect than he was perhaps portrayed—but I would’ve enjoyed seeing that.
I normally refuse to read Shank, but I gave this one a shot and the curly-haired b@$tard did a nice job. I actually have less respect for Bob Kraft today than I did before this doc aired, and clearly I'm not alone. This thing backfired big-time on ol' RKK. He didn't get the happy ending he paid for.
It was a really good piece. I haven't watched the doc because why would I? But I'm perhaps the premiere long time advocate here for the idea that Bob Kraft is not a particularly good person and I do think this bolsters my case. It's not that having to much ego is a mortal sin, but it's not a great look. He's been an excellent NFL owner to date, and keen TB and BB together for that long is, in part, a function of effective ownership. But we'll see what happens without them.
From everything I've heard about the Doc, Kraft deserves to be rhetorically slashed for it, and Shank showed what the best version of him can do with a set of knives.
I haven't seen any of the series, but have heard quite about it in the media. Honestly, I'm a little surprised Kraft so blatantly threw BB under the bus on things like the Malcolm Butler thing. To say "it wasn't a football thing" and that BB wasn't doing things that were in the best interest of the team, that's really pretty harsh criticism.
I agree, and it makes me wonder why on EARTH Bill would want to come back for, say, Brady's HOF day, or anything like honoring BB himself. Most people would think, "Well, they'll calm down, let bygones be bygones, move on, he'll come back." But this is Bill Belichick. Will he?
Would it shock you in the least if the organization slimed Belichick pretty bad with other owners this offseason?
No. I can’t believe the other orgs all listened. Honestly, the only person who’s rep has improved post Kraft, bb, tb is Brady.
I think people are predisposed to think a lot of things about Belichick. Pushes rules. Thinks he is too smart for the room. Can be a bully. Stubborn. Whatever.
But nobody is going to buy a claim that Belichick makes decisions other than for what he believes is the best interests of the club. Whatever one can say about him, if you are going to make that claim you really better have receipts. He may get it wrong, but I don’t think anyone in football would believe that wasn’t always his long-term intention without something other than speculation.
But nobody is going to buy a claim that Belichick makes decisions other than for what he believes is the best interests of the club. Whatever one can say about him, if you are going to make that claim you really better have receipts. He may get it wrong, but I don’t think anyone in football would believe that wasn’t always his long-term intention without something other than speculation.
This is the outlier, but given that (a) we have no idea what really happened, and (b) the entirety of the rest of BB's HC career with the Patriots is that he does what he thinks is best for the team, I have to believe that even in the Butler case, he did what he thought was best for the team.
As difficult as that is for me to fathom.