My POV of Sam Bradford

[Nick_Weasel]

Alright fine, since the OP asked. I was responding to this quote:

At any rate you might consider selling some options like a covered call for some income and/or buying a put for downside protection....Just a thought.

Was just going to point out that from put-call parity selling a covered call and selling a put are identical transactions, so selling a covered call and buying a put simply cancel each other (unless you're talking about different strike prices). Like I said, way off topic - I'll let those more creative than me determine how to relate this to Bradford's performance.

[Rambos]

It would be interssting how ELI Manning would have faired in his first few years. The guy has two superbowl rings and still struggles it seems every other weekend.

It seems like some of you expect perfection out of QB position. Not sure anyone can live up to those expecations not even your Peyton's or Tom's can...

The fact of the matter is, if you look at Eli numbers in his first three years Bradford has better numbers.

If you compare them this year it's very close.

Eli


TDS 20 INT 15 YDS 3,590 RTG 84.0

Bradford

TDS 18 INT 11 YDS 3,254 RTG 83.3

The big difference is one plays on a team that has talent that just won a SB vs a rebuilding team with 16 rookies on it.

[citr92]

i see bradford bashers blame losses solely on bradford, which is ridiculous, not to mention the expectations of a guy in his third year...

it doesn't help that people around him play inconsistently unless they're steven jackson or danny amendola

yes, bradford has had plenty of plays that were questionable, but again, 3rd year qb with his third system

yet he never has thrown a string of interceptions in multiple games in a row
he's been admirable in the 4th quarter and overtime, he tends to do better with a faster O, rather than trying to play slow and drain the clock, but that's another thread

honestly, i haven't seen any ridiculous bradford praisers either, i haven't seen one poster who said that the rams won because of bradford only, and like i said before, i've only seen bashers blame the loss solely on bradford, so one extreme seems to be greater than the other

[RAMarkable]

Alright fine, since the OP asked. I was responding to this quote:



Was just going to point out that from put-call parity selling a covered call and selling a put are identical transactions, so selling a covered call and buying a put simply cancel each other (unless you're talking about different strike prices). Like I said, way off topic - I'll let those more creative than me determine how to relate this to Bradford's performance.

Nick:

Here is the situation as I see it from Rockin's post. He has opened a substantial position in a stock that is not performing as hoped. I have suggested that he consider selling some covered calls to generate some income while the stock is shlepping sideways.

I also recommended that he consider buying puts to act as portfolio insurance in the unhappy event that the stock share price decides to nose dive and lose even more money.

These two positions could act as a straddle or saddle (some of you finance types fill me in) and help reduce the risk in his currently unprofitable position

As far as the strikes for the covered call and put are concerned they would almost certainly be different but that would, of course, depend on many other factors.

As far as how all of this applies to Sam Bradford and the Rams I kinda figured that buying a put would be somewhat like drafting a QB in the middle rounds to ameliorate risk. This player could develop as a potential backup or even replacement should Sam not work out. Think of how the Redskins picked Kirk Cousins in the 4th round even though they had just taken Griffin in the first. Also, the Pats took Ryan Mallet in the 3rd as a developmental QB and to backup Brady.

Heh...if the Rams did go this route I can hear the howling now. But we should remember that they, like all For Profit businesses, are simply trying to manage their risk. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

Still not sure how a covered call option can be used as an analogy for a football equation but hopefully brighter minds than mine can come up with a scenario.

P.S. Rockin, I am not at all concerned about the alleged "fiscal cliff." I think it is a bunch of malarkey and don't pay much attention to arguments that are tantamount to a cafeteria food fight. There will be money to be made no matter how it goes.....



WHAT SAY YE?

[r8rh8rmike]

And Sams success is dependent on the rest of the team because he is not elite. Elite QB's make their team better, QB's like Sam need everything in the world to be good.

Was Steve Young an elite QB? He certainly didn't light it up his first few years in Tampa Bay, or make those around him better. He was in a bad situation with weak support, and he floundered. He went to a great situation in SF and became a HOFer.

[AvengerRam]

Was Steve Young an elite QB? He certainly didn't light it up his first few years in Tampa Bay, or make those around him better. He was in a bad situation with weak support, and he floundered. He went to a great situation in SF and became a HOFer.

Yeah... but a QB who has 31 TDs, 46 Ints., a passer rating just above 77 and a record as a starter of 14-24 in his first three years will never be elite.

Wait a second... those aren't Sam's numbers...

Those are Troy Aikman's.

Never mind.

[Rambos]

It's not often I find people, telling others to not give up on Bradford, optimistic. Because every time they do that, they rip on about 10 offensive Rams players (and sometimes 11 defensive players) to come to his rescue. It is the bad coaching, it is horrible receiver play, bad o-line, old running back. The defense let Peterson run wild, so it's not really Bradfords fault, even though he gave up the same amount of points as he scored in the first 3 quarters of the game.

It gets frustrating to see people in here making it 21 other Rams players fault every time he has a bad game - and then turn around a say: "I told you so", every time the Rams win. Don't mind you that win is build on a sound defensive performances (The Bills game).

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. We have been ranked bottom 6th on offense in all seasons with Bradford at the helm.
He is not bad. He is average. On a less then average Rams offense. But average wasn't what the doctor ordered. You can get average for far less then 12 million a year.

However as the OP said. You give him a season more to prove he can be more than average. Show us he can improve even more, has he have improved this year. You can't move on from him. Yet. But that doesn't mean you can't call him average, when he is playing average. Or call him out when he is playing poorly.

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. The Rams are playing bad offensive football right now. This season! It's the present that is dragging people down.

If you wanna talk about optimism and playoffs next year, we could start up a thread talking about how our defense is putting up a top 10 season (with some breakdowns along the way), build up of young and promising players - and are maybe only two safeties and a little seasoning away from being something special.

Help me out here what do you expect from him exactly?

Should he be good enough to take this team to the playoff this year?

Should he be leading the NFL in TD passes?

Should he have the highest QB rating?

Help me understand your exceptions. What exactly is it that he's not doing to meet your exceptions?

Not too many here on this board or in the media that are saying Bradford's play is holding the Rams back. I can read plenty where Mark Sanchez and many other QB's may lose or have lost their jobs.

[RockinRam]

i see bradford bashers blame losses solely on bradford, which is ridiculous, not to mention the expectations of a guy in his third year...

I have not seen this. As far as I know, people have attributed the losses to Bradford's performance more than another player's, but I have not seen someone outright say a loss was SOLELY Bradford's fault. I would like to see your evidence on this.

it doesn't help that people around him play inconsistently unless they're steven jackson or danny amendola

Hmm. Couldn't you turn that logic around and say that Kendricks or Givens or Pettis or Gibson are underperforming because of inconsistent QB play? I think so.

Nick:

Here is the situation as I see it from Rockin's post. He has opened a substantial position in a stock that is not performing as hoped. I have suggested that he consider selling some covered calls to generate some income while the stock is shlepping sideways.

I also recommended that he consider buying puts to act as portfolio insurance in the unhappy event that the stock share price decides to nose dive and lose even more money.

These two positions could act as a straddle or saddle (some of you finance types fill me in) and help reduce the risk in his currently unprofitable position

As far as the strikes for the covered call and put are concerned they would almost certainly be different but that would, of course, depend on many other factors.

As far as how all of this applies to Sam Bradford and the Rams I kinda figured that buying a put would be somewhat like drafting a QB in the middle rounds to ameliorate risk. This player could develop as a potential backup or even replacement should Sam not work out. Think of how the Redskins picked Kirk Cousins in the 4th round even though they had just taken Griffin in the first. Also, the Pats took Ryan Mallet in the 3rd as a developmental QB and to backup Brady.

Heh...if the Rams did go this route I can hear the howling now. But we should remember that they, like all For Profit businesses, are simply trying to manage their risk. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

Still not sure how a covered call option can be used as an analogy for a football equation but hopefully brighter minds than mine can come up with a scenario.

P.S. Rockin, I am not at all concerned about the alleged "fiscal cliff." I think it is a bunch of malarkey and don't pay much attention to arguments that are tantamount to a cafeteria food fight. There will be money to be made no matter how it goes.....



WHAT SAY YE?

Very intuitive. I like it. And yes drafting a QB in the middle rounds would be in a sense "hedging" our investment in Bradford.

Also, I'm glad you think that way about the fiscal cliff. There is a ton of money that will be made no matter what happens. It just so happens that the average investor reads the cow crap on the internet telling them to panic, so they panic. With that panic comes the hysteria of suddenly making bad investments from following the media and if you play it right...

[CRAZYHORNS]

Help me out here what do you expect from him exactly?

Should he be good enough to take this team to the playoff this year?

Should he be leading the NFL in TD passes?

Should he have the highest QB rating?

Help me understand your exceptions. What exactly is it that he's not doing to meet your exceptions?

Not too many here on this board or in the media that are saying Bradford's play is holding the Rams back. I can read plenty where Mark Sanchez and many other QB's may lose or have lost their jobs.

I think Expectations is the Key. It seems that RockinRam has very high expecations and unfortunately not sure they can ever be met in the 1st year of FIsher Regime and the youth on the current roster. But I do believe it will continue to develop and as the team gains more confidence so will Bradford.

Go Rams