Post Mortem: Sea v KC & The Sunshine Band

[Michael K.]

You are either saying that AA was saying they can have ZERO turnovers, you are a terrible communicator, or intentionally being a jack ass. Either way, my argument is not a strawman. Regardless of which of those three things it is you are doing, it's fucked up. If it was a strawman, I'd KNOW what you are fucking trying to say and I'd be taking it to the mass extreme. You continue to quote NO TURNOVERS. I continued to explain that we are talking about the stupid turnovers and the ones that change ball games. You continue to argue some point that makes no sense.

So, it's not a strawman, and you are an asshat.

[Donn Beach]

You are either saying that AA was saying they can have ZERO turnovers, you are a terrible communicator, or intentionally being a jack ass. Either way, my argument is not a strawman. Regardless of which of those three things it is you are doing, it's fucked up. If it was a strawman, I'd KNOW what you are fucking trying to say and I'd be taking it to the mass extreme. You continue to quote NO TURNOVERS. I continued to explain that we are talking about the stupid turnovers and the ones that change ball games. You continue to argue some point that makes no sense.

So, it's not a strawman, and you are an asshat.

He said no turnovers and I replied to it, where's the hard part? If he didn't really mean no turnovers okay. Love it when the name start coming out, that's when you're really getting frustrated

[Nwadventure]

Its one thing to have a fluke bad handoff, tipped pass or a punch-out on a RB to jar the ball loose but this years team is creating some serious self-inflicted turnovers with poor play and decision making-

It needs to end. Period

[Donn Beach]

They do have a tool to rate the relative impact of turnovers. So even turnover ratio is old fashioned these days

Yes, Expected Points Added (EPA) is exactly the metric that grades the relative impact of individual turnovers.

Before EPA became the analytic standard, traditional box scores treated every turnover equally—a deep interception on 3rd-and-20 was counted the exact same way as a red-zone fumble. EPA completely changed this by calculating the specific on-scoreboard value shift of a play based on down, distance, field position, and time remaining.

Because EPA measures the difference between your expected points before a play and your expected points after it, it proves mathematically that some turnovers are drastically worse than others

And a tool that measures the relationship between aggressive play and the danger of turnovers. Modern anylitcs favors pretty aggressive play I guess

The definitive industry tool used to plot and visualize the relationship between high-reward aggressive play and high-risk turnover behavior is the Pro Football Focus (PFF) Data Viz Builder (or Scatter Builder), specifically utilizing their signature Big-Time Throw (BTT) Rate vs. Turnover-Worthy Play (TWP) Rate
This specific visualization serves as the gold standard for measuring a quarterback's risk-reward profile and splits passing playstyles into four distinct behavioral quadrants

.

Darnold graded elite last season even though he led the league in turnovers, but yeah, so far has regressed pretty badly. I wonder how common that is?

In the context of the PFF Big-Time Throw (BTT) vs. Turnover-Worthy Play (TWP) scatter plot, Seattle Seahawks quarterback Sam Darnold lands squarely in the bottom-left quadrant (Low BTT Rate, High TWP Rate).
While Darnold had an elite, MVP-caliber campaign during his Super Bowl-winning 2025 season, his profile on the risk-reward spectrum has regressed heavily. His charting reflects a player who is struggling to push the ball downfield productively under pressure, yet is still exposed to highly penalized turnover mistakes

So yeah, he needs to cut down on turnovers but more accurately he needs a better relationship between his turnovers and explosive plays

[Donn Beach]

I wonder what JS is thinking, looking at his anylitcal tools terms of Darnold. Terms of his re-signing him. How he views the regression

[Michael K.]

So yeah, he needs to cut down on turnovers but more accurately he needs a better relationship between his turnovers and explosive plays

I disagree.

He was 31/45 with 379 yards and 4 TDs against Washington. Pretty explosive. His ridiculous mistakes cost them the game and handed the Commanders there only win of the season. They lost this year to a QB that was 17/27 for 107 yards. Darnold threw two picks late, we lost. Not because the other QB balanced his explosive plays with his mistakes, but because Darnold continued to make costly mistakes.

We outgained the Donkeys 353 to 168, had 24 1st downs to their 13, converted 7 of 17 3rd downs to their 3 of 14. But? In a game with two elite defense, the QB that didn't put the ball in harms way won despite running what looked like a fucking Pop Warner offense.

Your debate is meritless. But keep digging holes. The only loss that might have been a win if he had a few more explosives was the 49er game. Yet again, they win easily if they don't hand the 49ers 21 1st half points off pathetic mistakes.

Sam needs to not lose games. He is having a hard time doing that. But continue to make excuses and claim all he needs is a few more explosives. Stop throwing out quotes from shit you don't source and start watching football games. Don't throw a BAD pick six? We beat Washington. Don't fumble in the endzone or throw a bad pick in the first half? We beat the 9ers. Don't throw a pick to not only end the fourth quarter but on your first possession in OT? You beat the Broncos.

Easy as that. THIS defense doesn't need him or the offense to be more explosive. They need them to stop being fucking stupid!

[Michael K.]

I wonder what JS is thinking, looking at his anylitcal tools terms of Darnold. Terms of his re-signing him. How he views the regression

You ever watch what the Manager on Major League does with Roger Dorns' contract? I bet that is very similar to what MM thinks about analyticals when figuring out if he needs to pay Sam or not.

[auroraave]

You are either saying that AA was saying they can have ZERO turnovers, you are a terrible communicator, or intentionally being a jack ass. Either way, my argument is not a strawman. Regardless of which of those three things it is you are doing, it's fucked up. If it was a strawman, I'd KNOW what you are fucking trying to say and I'd be taking it to the mass extreme. You continue to quote NO TURNOVERS. I continued to explain that we are talking about the stupid turnovers and the ones that change ball games. You continue to argue some point that makes no sense.

So, it's not a strawman, and you are an asshat.

He said no turnovers and I replied to it, where's the hard part? If he didn't really mean no turnovers okay. Love it when the name start coming out, that's when you're really getting frustrated

The goal? Zero turnovers. The reality? You are going to have turnovers. Ideal situation? Minimize turnovers and self inflicted wounds and you win most games. I was not suggesting a team go a whole season with no turnovers - that's absurd. Seattle has had a slew of horrible turnovers - unforced. Give a defense credit when they make a play - but Sam and the RB's need to keep TO's to a minimum - one a game in someting that can be overcome, but fumbles in endzones and Sam's horrific int's need to go. This team is minimum 6-1 w/out those.

Let's not forget zero turnovers for the entire playoffs last year.

[Michael K.]

The goal? Zero turnovers. The reality? You are going to have turnovers. Ideal situation? Minimize turnovers and self inflicted wounds and you win most games. I was not suggesting a team go a whole season with no turnovers - that's absurd. Seattle has had a slew of horrible turnovers - unforced. Give a defense credit when they make a play - but Sam and the RB's need to keep TO's to a minimum - one a game in someting that can be overcome, but fumbles in endzones and Sam's horrific int's need to go. This team is minimum 6-1 w/out those.

Let's not forget zero turnovers for the entire playoffs last year.

Exactly. Donn attacking your "no turnovers" comment is like believing the guy at Thanksgiving dinner when he pushed back his chair and says "I'm never eating again!"

[Donn Beach]

Well the Seahawks won a SB last season while leading the league in turnovers. TOs aren't good but on the other hand, I don't think you play just to avoid them, its controlled aggression

That's an attack? give me a break Michael. You're Mr sensitive now, better go find your safe space