ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady is #1

[convertedpatsfan]

Re: OT: ESPN's Total QBR

I didn't want to post the whole list because it is on ESPN Insider, but a small section of the rating has Jamarcus Russell better than a few QBs I don't think he is better than (in the scale, 50 is average, 100 is perfect, large # is # of plays, small # is QBR):

83 2008 JaMarcus Russell OAK 472 34.5
84 2009 Brady Quinn CLE 321 33.2
85 2008 Marc Bulger STL 556 33.0
86 2009 Matthew Stafford DET 460 32.9
87 2009 Marc Bulger STL 309 31.9
88 2009 Kerry Collins TEN 256 31.5
89 2009 Mark Sanchez NYJ 473 30.9
90 2008 Matt Hasselbeck SEA 259 30.9
91 2009 Jake Delhomme CAR 396 30.5
92 2009 Matt Cassel KC 658 30.2
93 2009 Ryan Fitzpatrick BUF 310 29.9
94 2008 Derek Anderson CLE 366 29.6
95 2009 Matt Hasselbeck SEA 592 26.7
96 2010 Brett Favre MIN 459 25.8

edit: apologize for the formatting. I tried to make it columns but forum software ignores my spaces

I'm not sure which of those QBs you're suggesting are better than Russell, but bear in mind this rating is based on single seasons, and Russell actually had a decent year in 2008:

53.8%, 2,423 yards, 6.58 YPA, 13 TDs, 8 INTs, 77.1 rating.

That was Russell's 2nd season in the NFL. I hadn't realized it until I saw it, but it looks an awful lot like Sanchez's 2nd season:

54.8%, 3,291 yards, 6.5 YPA, 17 TDs, 13 INTs, 75.3 rating.

Sanchez did have more than 1/3 more attempts though (507 vs. 368). But Russell's 2008 definitely was better than Sanchez's rookie season with 12 TDs and 20 INTs and a rating of 63.

We could look at all sorts of numbers but I want to focus on TDs and INTs because that's a pretty good indicator of decision-making, as well as rating just because that's an established benchmark (not perfect, but gives a good general idea).

Of other QBs below the Russell line, one might argue Bulger shouldn't be there. But in 2008 and 2009 (both listed under Russell), he threw more INTs than TDs, and had completion percentages under 60%, and ratings under 72.

Matthew Stafford looks solid, but the season listed is his rookie season, where he threw 13 TDs vs 20 INTs and had a rating of 61.0.

Matt Hasselbeck is a much better QB than JaMarcus Russell, but not in 2008 and 2009. In 2008, he had 5 TDs and 10 INTs and a rating of 57.8. In 2009, he had 17 TDs and 17 INTs and a rating of 75.1.

Matt Cassell (name your kid Matt if you want him to grow up to be a QB) is listed for 2009, where he threw 16 TDs and 16 INTs, completed 55% of his passes for a 69.9 rating.

In reviewing those years below the Russell line, none of those QBs had a season better than Russell's 2008. I'm not saying the system is great. I am still reading through it and trying to understand it. But you can't question it's accuracy based on their interpretation of Russell's 2008 season, which was, in fact, better than those listed below it.

 

[Sparetire]

Re: OT: ESPN's Total QBR

While including Brady's 2007 seems unfair to Manning as they didn't include his 2004 record setting season (well until 2007 ), but they did include 2009 when Brady was technically recovering from his ACL injury which takes a couple years. If the math was a straight average, it would seem that Brady had to have a QBR of 86+ to net the 75+ average.

Are you sure brady would have a QBR of 86+? cause in 07 season there was alot of blowouts, and according to the new formula blowouts dont give lots of points such as close games, in opposit of 03, 04 and even 06 season when he had lots of comebacks and close game winning plays.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

QBR penalizes QBs whose teams are strong and seal the game early, making there be no "clutch time"

It also establishes that a QB is somehow better at his job by lobbing a 25 yard pass to a receiver who is tackled immediately, rather than hitting a moving target perfectly in stride on a 10-yard slant for the same 25 yard gain.

Another unstated factor in the silly Manning-Brady debate in the weather factor. I'd bet, like passer rating, Brady is better indoors and outdoors than Manning, but since both are better indoors and Manning plays indoors much more, his rating is artificially inflated.

The best QB performance last year was Tom in a blizzard in Chicago. It won't get the QBR points because the game was settled by halftime, and in a 30 mph wind most passes traveled not a long distance in the air.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

I still don't know get what it measures. Yeah....I read what ESPN said. But it is short on details.

In order for a stat to be meaningful for me I need to be able to watch the game or have the underlying stats and compute it myself. I have no idea how much each component is valued or even all the components. This stat sucks.

 

[FCB02062]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Interesting - Sanchez was 47.4, which if I read the article correctly is less than average, but I think I already knew that.

January 15, 2011, AFC Divisional Playoff Round, Gillette Stadium

WINS LOSSES
Mark Sanchez 1 0
Tom Brady 0 1

This is ALL we should care about. Until Brady proves he can win in the playoffs again (0 for his last 3), Mark Sanchez is the better quarterback IN THE PLAYOFFS. The numbers and results do not lie, Brady's stats in his last 5 or 6 playoffs games have been nothing to write home about. Sanchez, on the other hand, has been downright "Brady-esque", that is, if we're talking about the brady that used to win playoff games.....

 

[brady199]

Re: OT: ESPN's Total QBR

Are you sure brady would have a QBR of 86+? cause in 07 season there was alot of blowouts, and according to the new formula blowouts dont give lots of points such as close games, in opposit of 03, 04 and even 06 season when he had lots of comebacks and close game winning plays.

I, like most don't understand everything about the passer rating or the qbr rating, but Vick's game against Washington on MNF last year which was a total blowout, got Vick the single highest QBR rating in the last 3 years, so I guess Blowouts don't matter as much, if anything, they are more forgiving of an error, since it doesn't really matter as much. I was expecting to see Brady's game against Tenn. in the top 5, I think he threw 6 TD's, but it wasn't listed, I think Cutler had a game with just 2 TD's that somehow made it in the top 5.

 

[Mainefan]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Among other things that count against quarterbacks are the sacks they take and the fumbles they make. Whatever happened to the skill and play of the offensive line (and the other team's defensive line)?

When one DL continually forces more QB fumbles than any other, how can you count the fumbles against the QB without recognizing the skill of the DL.

And as for sacks, does the skill or lack of it of the offensive line have anything to do with sacks? Is it always the QB's fault if he's sacked?

In all, this is a valiant--but ultimately fruitless--attempt to quantify the unquantifiable. It was created by people who think everything can be reduced to numbers. But I'd like to know how many points they give for guts or instinct or competitiveness?

 

[brady199]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Among other things that count against quarterbacks are the sacks they take and the fumbles they make. Whatever happened to the skill and play of the offensive line (and the other team's defensive line)?

When one DL continually forces more QB fumbles than any other, how can you count the fumbles against the QB without recognizing the skill of the DL.

And as for sacks, does the skill or lack of it of the offensive line have anything to do with sacks? Is it always the QB's fault if he's sacked?

In all, this is a valiant--but ultimately fruitless--attempt to quantify the unquantifiable. It was created by people who think everything can be reduced to numbers. But I'd like to know how many points they give for guts or instinct or competitiveness?

Well determining the "skill" of the DL would be difficult and determining the skill of the Offensive Line would be even more difficult and lead to more interpretation and criticism.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Huge flaws + overly complicated system = fail

 

[strngplyr]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Huge flaws + overly complicated system = fail

...kind of agree, what makes it better?

I didn't read too much into HOW they score, but when they talk about clutch plays, is there a mathematical rating or something on that? Or is it somebodies opinion that "that was clutch!!" and he gets more points for it?

I don't think the current passer rating means jack ****, but at least it can't be influenced by someone saying 'play a is more important than play b so reward more points for it'.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: OT: ESPN's Total QBR

Did anyone catch the show ESPN aired on Total QBR (or QBR). I missed most of the official explanation and caught some of the tail end of it where they were trying to compare Manning and Brady's last 3 seasons QBR.

List of 100 entries for QBR

I know they've gotthe data from 2008 onward so that only accounted for 2 seasons for Brady. It seems they went back to pull the 2007 info for Brady to make the 3 year comparison where Manning still came edged out brady with a 3 year average off 77+ to brady's 75+ (both averages being in the MVP range they had assigned).

While including Brady's 2007 seems unfair to Manning as they didn't include his 2004 record setting season (well until 2007 ), but they did include 2009 when Brady was technically recovering from his ACL injury which takes a couple years. If the math was a straight average, it would seem that Brady had to have a QBR of 86+ to net the 75+ average.

My question (I know finally) about QBR is, Does it make it more favorable for a team that is more heavily loaded on offense where the defense gives up more points? If there is a clutch factor, certainly scored of 31-28 have more clutch opportunities than a score of 31-14. Wouldn't this seem a little imbalanced or did they take this into effect? Did those touchdowns that put you over the opponents score come out as clutch (even if the other team still have 0 points at the time)?

One thing that often seems to get looked at is total cap $ spent on offense/defense? if a team is spending 60% of their cap on offense, shouldn't that offense be expected to score more points and the defense give up more points? Does that get factored in?

That's because it doesn't adjust for strength of defense, and Brady faced probably the toughest schedule of pass defenses in recent history in 2009.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

...kind of agree, what makes it better?

I didn't read too much into HOW they score, but when they talk about clutch plays, is there a mathematical rating or something on that? Or is it somebodies opinion that "that was clutch!!" and he gets more points for it?

I don't think the current passer rating means jack ****, but at least it can't be influenced by someone saying 'play a is more important than play b so reward more points for it'.

I don't mind that they weigh things differently in the metric, because that's the point of their metric. I just mind that they decided to go in extreme depth about some things while completely ignoring others. I mean, fumbles? Someone was high as a kite when they put that in the formula.

There's no perfect QB measure. This one may, or may not be better than the current QB rating. I just think it's too arcane to overcome its flaws in a way that the public will find worthwhile.

I could be wrong.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

QBR penalizes QBs whose teams are strong and seal the game early, making there be no "clutch time"

Are you sure about this?

Looking at the top 5 QBR results of 2010, they finished a combined 57-23 (.713), 4 division winners (including the team with the best record in each conference), as well as a wildcard team which won it all (GB).

Look further to QBs 6 through 10 and you find a combined record of 52-28 (.650), with 4 of those teams finishing with double-digit wins (San Diego finished 9-7).

Edit: And actually, after looking at the top 10 QBR seasons in the past 3 years, you find a combined record of 116-44, a .725 win percentage.

January 15, 2011, AFC Divisional Playoff Round, Gillette Stadium

WINS LOSSES
Mark Sanchez 1 0
Tom Brady 0 1

This is ALL we should care about. Until Brady proves he can win in the playoffs again (0 for his last 3), Mark Sanchez is the better quarterback IN THE PLAYOFFS. The numbers and results do not lie, Brady's stats in his last 5 or 6 playoffs games have been nothing to write home about. Sanchez, on the other hand, has been downright "Brady-esque", that is, if we're talking about the brady that used to win playoff games.....

That is all you can care about, but don't be so ridiculous to conclude it's all that matters. What one fan chooses to obsess over doesn't make it true.

Some fans think championships are the truest measure of a QB, and by that measure, you could argue Mark Rypien and Trent Dilfer were better QBs than Dan Marino. You'd be an idiot, but you're more than welcome to make that argument.

But if you're going to call ANY QB on this planet "Brady-esque," you better pick one who has at least, you know, won a Super Bowl. Or actually been there once.

Young Sanchez has elevated his game in the play-offs, and deserves credit for that. But if he were truly "Brady-esque," he would have won a Super Bowl in his second season like Tom did. I'll take the guy with the 3 Super Bowl victories over the kid who hasn't complete 55% of his passes in a season yet, regardless of who had the better game last time.

 

[YearbookCurfew]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

HAHAHAHAHA Sanchez sucks! Brady will always be better

 

[Sparetire]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Why Sanchez is an issue? he must climb a freakin mountain of football to be at brady's level. if you gonna comper a QB to brady do it with manning or brees, not sanchez.

FCB, give me a break.

 

[patfanken]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

Young Sanchez has elevated his game in the play-offs, and deserves credit for that. But if he were truly "Brady-esque," he would have won a Super Bowl in his second season like Tom did. I'll take the guy with the 3 Super Bowl victories over the kid who hasn't complete 55% of his passes in a season yet, regardless of who had the better game last time.

At the discussion with the Jet fan: Why bother. No matter what they tell you, to them, all that matters was that they beat us in the 2010 playoffs. And, god bless their sorry souls, its REALLY all they have to justify rooting for their team the past decade.

They have essentially waited over 40 years for the team they root for to become relevant to anyone else who doesn't live in metro NYC....and isn't a Giants fan. Well they beat the Pats in the game that mattered in 2010. They deserve to gloat....because the way Tanny has gone all in the last 3 years, who knows when the NEXT time the Jets will matter.

As of right now they won't even be as talented as they were last season, while IMHO the Bills, Dolphins, and Pats all got better.

As to the QBR : From what I can can gather this is all about is improving a flawed stat, with another “less” flawed stat. Which is even LESS relevant, since BOTH stats attempt to quantify an INDIVIDUAL player in a game where 23 other players significantly affect the success of the player you are trying to judge.

BOTTOM LINE – congrats, its better than the old stat. But really no stat can measure how an individual performs in a game so reliant how the other 23 players interact. And THAT’S what makes it such a fantastic game to watch.

BTW- one quick question. Does ESPN “own” the stat or can other networks use it

 

[Ring 6]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

January 15, 2011, AFC Divisional Playoff Round, Gillette Stadium

WINS LOSSES
Mark Sanchez 1 0
Tom Brady 0 1

This is ALL we should care about. Until Brady proves he can win in the playoffs again (0 for his last 3), Mark Sanchez is the better quarterback IN THE PLAYOFFS. The numbers and results do not lie, Brady's stats in his last 5 or 6 playoffs games have been nothing to write home about. Sanchez, on the other hand, has been downright "Brady-esque", that is, if we're talking about the brady that used to win playoff games.....

This wins my vote for lowest football iq post of the year

 

[strngplyr]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

This wins my vote for lowest football iq post of the year

Does Brady's game against the Jaguar's fall under 'nothing to write home about?'

 

[FCB02062]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

This wins my vote for lowest football iq post of the year

You must not like winning playoff games and must be satisfied with Brady's failures in his last three playoff games. Were you a big fan of all those Adams Division banners hanging in the old Garden, too?

 

[Sparetire]

Re: ESPN is unveiling a new QB statistic to replace passer rating: naturally, Brady i

You must not like winning playoff games and must be satisfied with Brady's failures in his last three playoff games. Were you a big fan of all those Adams Division banners hanging in the old Garden, too?

According to you, Sanchez is better than brady, manning, brees, ryan and almost every qb in the league except rodgers and Roethlisberger? or did i get you wrong?