Tuesday, November 17, 2009

What to make of Shinskie's stats?

Last year when Jags kept excusing Chris Crane's play because he was a "rookie" I felt it was a cop out. This season I am more willing to accept the "rookie" tag as an excuse for Shinskie. Crane had four years in the program and two with Logan. Shinskie was in Spring Training in Florida this March while our team was installing Tranq's offense. There is a difference. My concern with Shinskie though is that we seen progression followed by regression. I was hoping for the learning curve to be on a steep uptick by now. But let's not use eye balls to decide where Shinskie is. Instead I will dig up a chart from last year. It is not totally apples to apples since Shinskie had cameo appearances outside of his seven starts that are in his stats below but does give a good benchmark of where he is relative to our past QBs.
QBW-LAttemptsComp Pct YardsPassing TDsINTsRushing TDs
Brian St. Pierre6-118055%1,1861560
Quinton Porter4-318259%1,2931451
Paul Peterson6-119461%1,4961360
Matt Ryan6-124659%1,621975
Chris Crane6-120057%1,2496109
Dave Shinskie5-220353%1,4951291


Does this confirm what many of us are "seeing?" I would say that based on the stats you can say that Shinskie's not as accurate as he needs to be. He is aggressive though and willing and capably of going long.

This weekend Shinskie will face a very good defense with a ball hawking reputation. Let's hope he has another progression and is ready for the challenge. To win the division we can't have "rookie" mistakes.

Labels: , , ,

20 Comments:

At 12:45 PM, Blogger Laxman said...

would love to see Foley's stats there as well. I recall Foley in his first year as looking completely terrified at times, having happy feet and making poor decisions. Foley went on to become a very good college QB.

 
At 1:02 PM, Blogger mod34b said...

interesting.

is this chart comparing the stats for each QB in his first year as a starter?

If so, is Shinskie the only true freshman starter on the list?

But you are right, Shinskie does seem to have regressed. I seriously wonder if the home vs away differences are related to the field surface for him and the receivers. aside from the comfort of being home, is his footing more sure on home turf and the recievers cuts more precise and predictable for Shinskie (e.g., better timing) at home.

Got any home only stats for our homer Shinskie?

 
At 1:02 PM, Blogger Patrick said...

I'm not worried at all about Shinskie. He gets rattled too easily, something that will fade with experience.

When he struggles early on the road, those struggles tend to compound. He is on a little firmer footing at home.

He can make all the throws. He clearly can manage the offense. And he's leading his first football team in 7 years; he's bound to get knocked off the rails at times.

If that doesn't improve next year, then there's cause for worry. But I think there's a difference between regressing and getting rattled. He's not becoming worse week to week, he just has peaks and valleys. As he gets older, those peaks will be higher, and the distance between them will be shorter. He's a damn strong QB, who has been in the system for less than five months.

 
At 1:14 PM, Blogger Danny Boy said...

Despite his age, we all have to remember that Shinskie is a true freshman. However, the one area that his age and experience should have an effect is shakiness on foreign turf. He has 5+ years of pitching in opposing ballparks. Is a Single A ballpark the same as Lane Stadium? No, but he should be more familiar with hostile confines than most other true freshmen.

Bill, have you come across a home/away breakdown of Shinskie's minor league stats? I'd love to see if this was a problem that plagued him throughout his career.

 
At 1:17 PM, Blogger Groundhog said...

shinskie does look way too rattled on the road and i hope those nerves don't also show up at a "neutral" site for our bowl game. i would like to place some of the blame on the offensive playcalling for making him force these 15-20 yard strikes under pressure, instead of mixing in more screen passes or dumping it off to the fullback. but watching the TV broadcast, i can never really tell what his other receiving options are.

 
At 1:52 PM, Blogger Brablc said...

The one aspect that I haven't seen much improvement in Shinskie is his checkdowns. He still is stareing down his receivers way too often (ala the endzone pick against Virginia)

Until he works on going through his progressions I don't see him as the answer at QB.

 
At 2:15 PM, Blogger Claver2010 said...

Shinskie has been a puzzling case throughout the year.

WF: 18-29 228 3-1.
Very good first start, spread the ball around, had 2 75+ yard rushers in that game.
FSU: 12-21 203 2-0.
Another solid game, bolstered again by almost 200 yards rushing.
VT: 1-12 4 0-2.
Completed more passes to the other team than his team, looked completely lost. Only 45 yards rushing.
NCST: 13-25 187 2-0.
Decent bounce back but it was against one of the worst D's he will face all year.
ND: 17-35 279 1-3 (1 fumble).
Not great, stretched the ball downfield against a bad D, but when you get 4 TOs from the QB it'll be tough to win.
CMU: 18-28 262 1-0.
Solid bounce back, very slow first half turned it on in the 2nd, against a crappy D again though.
UVA: 12-26 147 1-2.
Another poor performance on the road. Locked in on receivers and had turnovers in the red zone.

He has been consistently inconsistent. His best two games, IMO, were his first two as a starter. Since those two games, he is completing under 50%, averaging under 150 yards, and has more picks than TDs. He has shown promise but as ATL has referenced NEEDS to work on his checkdowns (and more importantly avoid locking in on one receiver) and screens.

 
At 2:19 PM, Blogger mod10aeagle said...

Were any of the other QBs working with a new OC? I think you have to consider the whole offense, not just the QB, in this instance. With a new OC, every player is learning new stuff, which is bound to cause some stumbles in a freshman QB's development. Having said that, I'm eager to see evidence that Shinskie is getting quicker at reading the D and checking down.
Remember Ryan's pick-sixes from deep in BC territory? It was practically a habit with him, kind of like Shinskie launching the ball up for grabs.

 
At 2:30 PM, Blogger mod34b said...

Claver --

Good points. But I think another big factor is that we no longer have any imagination rushing. Harris has over 90% of the runs as of late. Not too hard to defend that rushing scheme. Without real "pop" in our running game, the passing game gets tough, as Shinskie has seen.

Look at the rushing trend here:

UVA

(93%) M. Harris 38 carries 151 yards
J. McCluskey 1 carry 12 yards
R. Gunnell 2 carries 5 yqrds


C. michigan

(90%) M. Harris 27/136 yds
J. McCluskey 3/ 7 yds
R. Gunnell 1/3 yds


ND
(88%)M. Harris 22/38 yds
J. McCluskey 3/15 yds

NCSU

(67%) M. Harris 27 /264 yds
R. Finch 7 /30 yds
J. Haden 2/ 7 yds
J. McCluskey 1/0 yds
J. Smith 3/0 yds


VTech

(45%) M. Harris 11/43
R. Finch 8/14
J. Haden 5/8


FSU

(71%) M. Harris 25/179
J. Haden 9/31
J. Smith 1/0

Wake

J. Haden 17/93
(59%) M. Harris 25/76

We really need Finch back and need some more creativity with the run. It amazing we've come this far, but we will need some surprises to keep the fierce UNC defense off balance.

Too bad Haden didn't have the stones to stick it out.

 
At 4:37 PM, Blogger Big Jack Krack said...

Mod - I agree that it would have been nice to have Haden available and in there against UNC, along side Harris - or to spell him.

Harris up the middle probably won't work against the Tar Heels. That's why I mentioned in another post that I'm hopeful Tranq will have saved some special plays for UNC. We are way too predictable.

Go BC - Payback UNC

 
At 7:42 PM, Blogger bcphilly said...

HD gives us the same respect that Rodney Dangerfield got ... none ... she says on her blog that NC defense will eat up our offense and further states that anything can happen when NC meets NC STATE , huh ? ... in other words the wolfpack is a more formidable opponent than we are ? ... i stick by my earlier assessment , she's a binich that ought to get her head out of her binich arse ...

 
At 8:36 PM, Blogger Matt said...

An extra hour before the game? Not going to solve all the problems, but a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned...

http://bceagles.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/111709aaa.html

Hopefully next year will show us a lot more steps in the right direction...

 
At 8:52 PM, Blogger Harry Collins said...

Off subject - does anyone know why Sanders and Raji are not playing in the St Francis hoops game tonight? I am having shudders thinking about the night I learned Akida McLean and Sean Williams got booted off a Final Four contender a few years ago.

 
At 9:19 PM, Blogger mmason said...

The number that just leaps out on the stat breakdown is Ryan's 246 pass attempts! I watched some of those games, and remember that TOB always gave the understudy QB a bunch of series during the later quarters, which usually involved hand-offs and easy passes underneath to the tight ends. But TOB didn't do that too often with Ryan, did he? Plus: Every time I see Peterson stats I marvel at how good that poor guy really was...he was way beyond mere numbers. He always played the game--and that's a big part of Shinskie's problem--I never get the sense that he's "playing" the game outside of the game plan. It's making plays that would really change his level of threat after the snap.

Shinskie clearly has loads of exceptions to his situation, beyond age and coming in with a platooned real game tryout. He literally didn't throw a pass under any conditions for 7 years. It's like taking up golf again after never touching the clubs for that long. Very unusual. Most rooks come in after playing high school ball for 4 years and have their stroke down. Not Shin.
But my question with Uncle Dave is his staring down the receiver when he knows that he cannot do that and expect success. The checkdowns have to be rehearsed in practice conditions, no? Is he really learning anything about technique?
Should he tuck it and run more? Should we be passing on 3rd and 2 or 3 with Shin? Are the opponents finally seeing the flaws he has on film and getting closer to burning him? What do you guys see happening on that part of his game, wek to week?

 
At 10:12 PM, Blogger Erik said...

Who thinks Roche (over Raji?) should start the first game of the Island Jam. Maybe no more games after that, but why not - top scorer and senior captain. Make the others prove, in their minutes, they should be the starter.

9 for 11 from 3pt, averaging 25 per game. Ride the hot hand.

 
At 10:17 PM, Blogger CT said...

"Finally" seeing his flaws? Um, were they not out in the open pretty early after he took over?

This season is warm-up for the next two. It's get-Dave-some-practice-before-Montel-graduates time. Sure, he's rusty. He's inconsistent. We've talked about this before. He needs game experience. Speed experience. Unlike Allen Iverson, he needs practice. He's your typical freshman QB.

My biggest problem with the run game, and with a 1,000 yd rusher I don't have many, is the predictable two tight end to one side formation that announces the play. I wish there was more misdirection, fake to the fullback, pitch out to the halfback type of plays, but maybe I'm quibbling. I actually enjoy watching BC's offense more than Florida's, if that makes sense. Not because I'm a homer. But b/c UF's offense is so boring, running some variation of the spread option over and over...it makes me appreciate Harris all the more.

BC should have an outlet on every pass play. A comfort zone for Dave. A RB, TE, or short in route by the WR. Sometimes it seems we ask him to make difficult throws and those seem to be the ones that get picked. Because they worked in practice so many times, he thinks they might work in the game. Just a guess.

Foley was, before Ryan, the best pro-style QB to be at BC that I know of. He was so much fun to watch.

As to the bball question...I thought the suspensions were for two games? Am I wrong?

Don't know much about UNC except for their big guys on the d-line. Ga. Tech had some trouble early on with them, and they haven't had trouble with anyone, outside of UM. On the road, not good. At home...who really knows? Maybe our defense wins this one.

 
At 10:49 PM, Blogger Matt said...

anyone think shamari enjoyed his 20 pt performance in the 42 pt loss to duke?

 
At 9:16 AM, Blogger Erik said...

Maybe, he seems to like minutes more than glory.

 
At 9:47 AM, Blogger Claver2010 said...

Maybe he prefers being near his kids?

 
At 12:15 PM, Blogger mod34b said...

Looks like no Finch this week.

He is supposed to comeback on Sunday Nov. 22 -- day after the UNC game.

This means UNC should be able to stop the one-dimensional run game and force Shinskie to pass in the face of an intense pass rush and a ball-hawking secondary. OMG! Let's hope for some rapid growth by Dave.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home