Odd QB rating

[Pats1971]

Ok...this one has got me. Qb rating is roughing based on completion pct, YPA, td's etc etc. So how is the follow statline a higher QB rating then the statline below it. I'm stumped.

70-116 60.3% 892 yards 7.7 YPA 13 td's 3 ints 108 Qb rating

182-267 68.5% 2064 Yards 7.7 YPA 17 td's 3 ints 107 QB rating.

 

[Pats1971]

Wait, I had to go look at the formula to see. It actually calculates TD pct in...So less throws to get a td better. Kinda stupid. So a QB could run the ball down the field and then throw a td at the end and it means he has a better Qb rating. Anyway...

On a similar subject, is there any more stupid stat than QBR? ESPN's little thing they do that nobody knows what they do in order to come up with a number? I have seen some of the weirdest numbers off that.

 

[sean10mm]

Passer rating can produce some wierd results in individual games but is generally a decent approximation. The key thing to understand is that small differences in single game ratings don't actually mean there was a difference in real QB performance.

A formula that smashes a bunch of other numbers together isn't an exact measure of some innate quality like "how good is a QB?" just because you can calculate it out to a bunch of decimal places if you want.

 

[RodThePat]

QBR is much better than passer rating, but both are worse than just going by pure EPA/Play, ANY/A, DYAR/DVOA and weirdly enough PFF grade (best correlation to future QB performance than any other stat). But as was said above, if players are clumped close together in any stat, odds are there isn't a material difference in performance, even in a large enough sample size. Generally at the end of the season you can come up with performance tiers based on where guys ranked in each stat and see who's really playing at a high level.

 

[jah]

QBR is much better than passer rating, but both are worse than just going by pure EPA/Play, ANY/A, DYAR/DVOA and weirdly enough PFF grade (best correlation to future QB performance than any other stat). But as was said above, if players are clumped close together in any stat, odds are there isn't a material difference in performance, even in a large enough sample size. Generally at the end of the season you can come up with performance tiers based on where guys ranked in each stat and see who's really playing at a high level.

What makes QBR better? I'm no passer rating fan, but QBR was invented pretty recently and originally served as a way to work backwards from the conclusion that Peyton Manning > Tom Brady.

 

[sb1]

Broncos vs. Chiefs - NFL Box Score - November 13, 2011 | ESPN

Get box score updates on the Denver Broncos vs. Kansas City Chiefs football game.

www.espn.com

LOL

 

[Pats1971]

What makes QBR better? I'm no passer rating fan, but QBR was invented pretty recently and originally served as a way to work backwards from the conclusion that Peyton Manning > Tom Brady.

Actually QBR was invented I think to make running QB's look better. But that thing is wacky. I have watched games where a QB was flat out bad and would get a higher QBR than a guy who had 300 yards, 70 percent passing and 3 tds with no turnovers. I have no idea what they use.

 

[sb1]

Total quarterback rating - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Pats1971]

Total quarterback rating - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It relies on what someone determines is a certain type of play or not. So its opinion based with a forumula. Yeah no thanks.

 

[Brotherblues]

Actually QBR was invented I think to make running QB's look better. But that thing is wacky. I have watched games where a QB was flat out bad and would get a higher QBR than a guy who had 300 yards, 70 percent passing and 3 tds with no turnovers. I have no idea what they use.

I liked the idea of qbr (including running does give you a more complete and accurate picture of a QB's performance) but the subjective stuff they unnecessarily threw in it was head scratching to say the least. It's why it never took off. Still better than naked passer rating.

 

[Deus Irae]

QBR is much better than passer rating, but both are worse than just going by pure EPA/Play, ANY/A, DYAR/DVOA and weirdly enough PFF grade (best correlation to future QB performance than any other stat). But as was said above, if players are clumped close together in any stat, odds are there isn't a material difference in performance, even in a large enough sample size. Generally at the end of the season you can come up with performance tiers based on where guys ranked in each stat and see who's really playing at a high level.

QBR is hot garbage.






And that's probably an insult to hot garbage.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Passer rating is a very flawed formula. It puts way too much emphasis on completion pct. and basically double dips with completion pct. and yards/attempt. It doesn’t account for sacks, which to me makes it a deal breaker. It does a decent job of putting QBs into tiers but not a good job at ranking within tiers.

I’ve really started to love Adjusted Net Yards/Attempt. It would be nearly perfect other than that it’s a numerical-only stat that can use a box score, so it doesn’t get into strength of defense, game situations, etc.

DVOA is very good and uses all that stuff, except it’s paywalled now.

Also, despite the subjectivity, for whatever reason PFF grades tend to align very well with the way I see QB play. I don’t know their method, but their overall grades tend to get it right more often than other metrics.

I would probably just use some combined score of ANY/A and PFF grades to come up with a ranking.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Ok...this one has got me. Qb rating is roughing based on completion pct, YPA, td's etc etc. So how is the follow statline a higher QB rating then the statline below it. I'm stumped.

70-116 60.3% 892 yards 7.7 YPA 13 td's 3 ints 108 Qb rating

182-267 68.5% 2064 Yards 7.7 YPA 17 td's 3 ints 107 QB rating.

Wow. That 8 point difference in completion percentage didn't help much. But that difference in TDs per attempt is pretty huge. You have to figure that top guy would close to double the other guy's total by throw no. 267. Here's where ratings are stupid. Top guy gets his YPA by hitting fairly often on long balls, it looks like, but sucking ass for general reliability. Bottom guy can still throw the long ball, but he gts his YPA by hitting on 68.5% of all the throws. You want the top guy at the end of a game heaving that hail mary. You want that bottom guy playing all game so you don't have to throw the hail mary.

 

[Pats1971]

Wow. That 8 point difference in completion percentage didn't help much. But that difference in TDs per attempt is pretty huge. You have to figure that top guy would close to double the other guy's total by throw no. 267. Here's where ratings are stupid. Top guy gets his YPA by hitting fairly often on long balls, it looks like, but sucking ass for general reliability. Bottom guy can still throw the long ball, but he gts his YPA by hitting on 68.5% of all the throws. You want the top guy at the end of a game heaving that hail mary. You want that bottom guy playing all game so you don't have to throw the hail mary.

Yeah, normally I dont care, but I just saw these two Qb ratings and said, why in the hell is one higher. By the way if anyone didnt know, that is Brady and Winston. I literally had to go into the formula to find out that TD percentage made the difference, which seems silly if a QB does not throw much, but throws close to the goal line. Which in this case, is exactly what it is. Yards, completion Percentage, int pct, td's, everything favors Brady and they are the same on YPA yet, winston is higher. Just weird.

 

[Pats1971]

Passer rating is a very flawed formula. It puts way too much emphasis on completion pct. and basically double dips with completion pct. and yards/attempt. It doesn’t account for sacks, which to me makes it a deal breaker. It does a decent job of putting QBs into tiers but not a good job at ranking within tiers.

I’ve really started to love Adjusted Net Yards/Attempt. It would be nearly perfect other than that it’s a numerical-only stat that can use a box score, so it doesn’t get into strength of defense, game situations, etc.

DVOA is very good and uses all that stuff, except it’s paywalled now.

Also, despite the subjectivity, for whatever reason PFF grades tend to align very well with the way I see QB play. I don’t know their method, but their overall grades tend to get it right more often than other metrics.

I would probably just use some combined score of ANY/A and PFF grades to come up with a ranking.

I like DVOA as well. PFF is good, but sometimes I see odd players very high, and maybe thats just what it is. Its really hard to fit things in formulas and say this is better then that, because there is so many other things that do not fit the formula.

 

[Deus Irae]

Passer rating is a very flawed formula. It puts way too much emphasis on completion pct. and basically double dips with completion pct. and yards/attempt. It doesn’t account for sacks, which to me makes it a deal breaker. It does a decent job of putting QBs into tiers but not a good job at ranking within tiers.

I’ve really started to love Adjusted Net Yards/Attempt. It would be nearly perfect other than that it’s a numerical-only stat that can use a box score, so it doesn’t get into strength of defense, game situations, etc.

DVOA is very good and uses all that stuff, except it’s paywalled now.

Also, despite the subjectivity, for whatever reason PFF grades tend to align very well with the way I see QB play. I don’t know their method, but their overall grades tend to get it right more often than other metrics.

I would probably just use some combined score of ANY/A and PFF grades to come up with a ranking.

Just to bounce something off this, as a bit of a rebuttal (just for fun, as I use passer rating as a loosely followed guide, not an end-all be-all):


Once you remove those who don't really have enough throws to qualify, the top of the passer ratings list looks like the following:

Russell Wilson
Matthew Stafford
Kyler Murray
Dak Prescott
Jameis Winston
Tom Brady
Joe Burrow
Kirk Cousins
Aaron Rodgers
Josh Allen


With the possible adjustment of replacing one of the above with Lamar Jackson (and Herbert, if you ignore this past week), isn't that a pretty damned accurate list of the QBs playing the best right now?

 

[Pats1971]

Just to bounce something off this, as a bit of a rebuttal (just for fun, as I use passer rating as a loosely followed guide, not an end-all be-all):


Once you remove those who don't really have enough throws to qualify, the top of the passer ratings list looks like the following:

Russell Wilson
Matthew Stafford
Kyler Murray
Dak Prescott
Jameis Winston
Tom Brady
Joe Burrow
Kirk Cousins
Aaron Rodgers
Josh Allen


With the possible adjustment of replacing one of the above with Lamar Jackson (and Herbert, if you ignore this past week), isn't that a pretty damned accurate list of the QBs playing the best right now?

Depends. Some teams are more dependent on the QB than others. The more you throw, the more your QB rating could go down, which is why I look at other factors. If I showed you the PFF grades on the same list, it looks completely different.

 

[Deus Irae]

Depends. Some teams are more dependent on the QB than others. The more you throw, the more your QB rating could go down, which is why I look at other factors. If I showed you the PFF grades on the same list, it looks completely different.

I don't see where your post has anything to do with the post of mine that you quoted.

 

[robbomango]

It's based on efficiency/less is more, low yards per attempt trump completion percentage, INTs etc...
Below is another good example of it, Bradshaw 66% verse Brady 75% comp percentage, 2 less tds and 1 more INT, still resulted in a slightly better rating for Bradshaw.(bolded yds per attempt)

Bradshaw(SB 14) 14 of 21 309yds 2tds 3ints 101.9 rating
Brady(SB 49) 37 of 50 329yds 4tds 2ints 101.1 rating

A QB can be below 50 percent and still post a very high passer rating, see below.

Bradshaw(SB 10) 9 of 19 209yds 2tds 0ints 122.5 rating

21 passes to get 309yds is better than 50 to get to 329yds and so on.

 

[Pats1971]

It's based on efficiency/less is more, low yards per attempt trump completion percentage, INTs etc...
Below is another good example of it, Bradshaw 66% verse Brady 75% comp percentage, 2 less tds and 1 more INT, still resulted in a slightly better rating for Bradshaw.(bolded yds per attempt)

Bradshaw(SB 14) 14 of 21 309yds 2tds 3ints 101.9 rating
Brady(SB 49) 37 of 50 329yds 4tds 2ints 101.1 rating

A QB can be below 50 percent and still post a very high passer rating, see below.

Bradshaw(SB 10) 9 of 19 209yds 2tds 0ints 122.5 rating

21 passes to get 309yds is better than 50 to get to 329yds and so on.

and thus tells me that QB rating has very little to do with winning. lol Yards per pass is more about what happens after the catch is made than the throw itself. The thing that wins, is constant consistency, not a couple big plays and a couple bad plays.