Tom Brady - Projecting the Remaining Years

[ivanvamp]

You can make statistics say whatever you want.
Using percentages is a good way.

Using percentages is very helpful. If you complete 30 passes in a game, is that a good performance? It is if you throw only 35 times. It isn't if you throw 70 times. Percentages matter, Andy.

First and most important point scored
518
513
557

This is a team number, not a QB number, though obviously the QB has a huge part to play in it.

The Td % you seem so wrapped up in?
TDs
36
39
34

TD% isn't the same as TD. The more you throw, the more TDs you should throw. That's why percentages matter. This is elementary stuff.

Hardly a pattern of decline and probably statistically insignificant when matched with points scored.

Yards
3900
5235
4827

Attempts
492
611
637

Again in an offense that was overall roughly equally successful over 3 years comparing % stats when there is a difference of over 25% in lass attempts in apples and oranges.

Passer rating, for all its flaws, is still considered to be the best overall measure of statistical passing performance, especially over larger sample sizes. And his QB rating from 2010-2013 dropped precipitously. Thankfully, it's gone back up and I think he'll still be very good over the next few years.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Not only that, but with each SB ring, the percentage of rings represented by that season is progressively smaller. In 2003, he doubled his ring total, while in 2016-17, he only increased it by 20%. Next year winning the SB will only increase the total by what, 17%?

You can look at this stat for every Super Bowl that Tom Brady has won. Incredibly, it is a constant: The increase in Super Bowls won is progressively less proportionately important with every Super Bowl win. The trend is undeniable

 

[PatsBoy12]

Didn't he start deflating footballs after 2013?

 

[ivanvamp]

Brady is the outlier to the traditional thought of QBs hitting the wall at his age.

In a few years when other QBs adopt his training and diet methods he won't be.

The comparison with Manning is not applicable. Manning had a neck injury to go along with his age.

This is a good point, and you may be right. Though the lengths to which Brady goes in this regard are just completely off the charts.

One other thing I didn't mention was that the way QBs are protected in today's game, compared with how they were treated when Fouts, Kelly, Marino, Montana, etc., played, is very different, and *should* lend to more QBs playing well later on in their careers.

But right now, Brady is the total outlier, and because he's an outlier, making projections on his future is much more difficult. In my analysis I tried to take into account the historical pattern of even HOF level QBs, but also the fact that Brady is unique.

I think it's silly to expect him to fall off a cliff, barring injury, but I also think it's silly to expect him to be performing at age 43 like he did this past year. SOME decline is inevitable, unless he's truly a cyborg.

 

[Nunchucks]

Then why didnt Brady miss a down after Chancellor destroyed his leg?

Because he is tough and wouldn't let the injury bother him, especially with all that adrenaline running through the system..That hit nagged him through the rest of the season.

 

[Ring 6]

Using percentages is very helpful. If you complete 30 passes in a game, is that a good performance? It is if you throw only 35 times. It isn't if you throw 70 times. Percentages matter, Andy.

Except all you used are percentages and I showed why that is wrong and misleading.

This is a team number, not a QB number, though obviously the QB has a huge part to play in it.

So td pass percent is more indicative to you of whether a QB declined than how many points he put in the board? Come on. Now you are defying common sense to try to defend your point.

TD% isn't the same as TD. The more you throw, the more TDs you should throw. That's why percentages matter. This is elementary stuff.

No it's not the same it's more important.
How many TDs you score is more important than how many passes you threw to get there.
By your argument a QB who completes 6/8 for 70 yards on a td drive with 3 runs for 10 yards is worse than one who conformed 3/4 for 35 yards with 6 runs s for 45 yards.

Passer rating, for all its flaws, is still considered to be the best overall measure of statistical passing performance, especially over larger sample sizes.

By who? Passer rating is a TERRIBLR gauge of QB play particularly within close differences.
Just because it's the only formula someone created doesn't mean it's good.

And his QB rating from 2010-2013 dropped precipitously. Thankfully, it's gone back up and I think he'll still be very good over the next few years.

Again QB rating is not a good gauge of QB play and 2010 vs 2011 and 2012 were not comparable offenses in terms of aided or hurting the QB rating stat by design.
Still there is a variance of less than 7% per year. 7% difference in a FORMULA that was created almost randomly and has drastic flaws is statistically insignificant even before you look into the style of offense which is a huge contributor to QB rating

 

[DefenseRules]

What is wrong with you people?

 

[tasmlab]

I am guessing he will play until he is 43. At some point, your body just doesn't recover from bumps and bruises as quickly. You have to do more to retain muscle mass and bone density. It is science.

Your eyes get worse too, but I'm not sure if that would translate much on the football field. He might need readers/glasses to read plays off of the wrist band thing. He can pick some up at CVS for $15 though.

 

[Bonzo]

Something tells me we're about to get an injection of athleticism at WR, which will give Brady an amazing arsenal to work with down the final stretch of his career. My guess is we'll get one of Cooks/Jackson/Woods/Floyd to complement Hogan/Mitchell on the outside. Add that to Edelman in the slot, Gronk + Bennett/Rookie, healthy White & Lewis out of the backfield. That's just a filthy stable of receivers.

So, health and O-line willing, Brady could be poised for his best years yet.

 

[patfanken]

Thank you Ivancamp for a well thought out presentation of the path Brady has taken over the last several years. However I think both you and Andy have gotten too caught up into the minutia of what defines "declining production", and have missed the underlying question of what lies ahead for Brady and for how long.

I think you FIRST have to define what (at this stage of his career) makes Tom Brady an elite QB, and then project those assets to determine just how long Brady can stay at or near his current level.

His number 1 asset is his mind and has been since he's been in the league. His ability to process the chaos in front of him and consistently make the right decisions has been apparent since he took over in 2001. Now you add 17 years of experience and, on the mental side of the game, you have the best QB in the history of the league.

I don't believe there has ever been a QB who has had Brady's processing skills, COMBINED with the amount of experience he's had. There is no reason that for the next 3-5 years we should see ANY diminishment of that part of his game.

Now we get to the physical side of the game. This is the part where we WILL definitely see decline as Brady ages. It's just how it is. His velocity of his throws will diminsh, as well as his ability to move in the pocket. The BIG question is just WHEN we should expect to see that decline. But the fact is that as of right now, Brady's mechanics and footwork are actually better than just a few years ago. He has a better arm than the one he came into the league with, and shows no signs of reduced velocity of this throws. In fact he's improved his deep ball accuracy a lot over recent years.

But that being said, on the conservative side, I'd think 2 years sounds about right. I don't think that there are many among us, based on what we've seen over the last few years, that would think that Brady won't be an elite QB for at least the next 2 years.

Brady's 3rd biggest assets are BB/McDaniels, and the system he's played in his entire career. Given this "system", Brady's processing skills and experience are magnified because he KNOWS on any given play where his blockers and receivers are going to be and that they will be flexible enough to adjust to the changes he might have to make on the LOS. Just think about how FEW QB's have ever enjoyed this kind of continuity for so long, and how it plays into Brady's biggest assets and thus extends his potential for productive play.

I think the next issue that needs to be discussed is the whole "cliff" debate. I find it ridiculous that anyone would think that Brady production would suddenly "fall off a cliff" when his "support system" of his mind, processing skills, and team system would so mitigate against such a precipitous decline.

You can also see how BB is begining to move to make sure that as Brady's physical skills decline, he will have improved players to surround him and make sure that there is no "cliff". And to make sure that the Pats will always be in the hunt for a championship.

Brady'numbers at the start of his career, when the Pats won 3 superbowls, with Brady as a "manager". This was a time when Brady wasn't expected to "carry:" the team. Since 2007 THAT perception has obviously change. Now as Brady goes, so go the Pats. So when we start to see physical and numerical proof that Brady is in physical decline, the decline will be slow enough that the Pats chances of winning might not dimish at the same rate, as Ivancamp pointed out in his treatise

So based on that, I can easily seeing Brady as have a 2-3 year run as an elite QB, and another 2 years as a very good one. The only reason that this scenario might not come to pass is either a massive injury or if Brady loses his competitve drive.

I also feel that the day Brady feels he can't be ELITE any more, he'll hang them up, so IMHO, we will only have to "endure" one year of the "just very good" Brady

 

[moosekill]

I am sorry but the statistics you use from the Brady "declining years" are very misleading. First of all, football is a team game, the quality of his offensive line, his wide receivers, his tight ends and his running backs all effect the ability of the quarterback to put up numbers. Looking at any QB numbers or ratings without taking those into account invalidate any statistics you are putting up there. Furthermore, even if you simply say those numbers did decline, how much did they truly decline? When you use statistics to look at these numbers you have to understand that there is an acceptable statistical variance around those numbers. One drop, one less touchdown, one time the backup QB goes in because of a big lead and plays the entire fourth quarter will affect those numbers. The variance in those numbers is so small that somehow representing them as a decline is foolish. Furthermore, you don't even attempt to adjust the numbers based upon the quality of the teams that they played that season.

In short, you should take a simple statistics course at the local college before you attempt to use statistics to prove your point or you look like an idiot.

 

[ivanvamp]

I am sorry but the statistics you use from the Brady "declining years" are very misleading. First of all, football is a team game, the quality of his offensive line, his wide receivers, his tight ends and his running backs all effect the ability of the quarterback to put up numbers. Looking at any QB numbers or ratings without taking those into account invalidate any statistics you are putting up there. Furthermore, even if you simply say those numbers did decline, how much did they truly decline? When you use statistics to look at these numbers you have to understand that there is an acceptable statistical variance around those numbers. One drop, one less touchdown, one time the backup QB goes in because of a big lead and plays the entire fourth quarter will affect those numbers. The variance in those numbers is so small that somehow representing them as a decline is foolish. Furthermore, you don't even attempt to adjust the numbers based upon the quality of the teams that they played that season.

In short, you should take a simple statistics course at the local college before you attempt to use statistics to prove your point or you look like an idiot.

Right. Because people criticized this for being too long as it is and you want a master's thesis.

Get real.

 

[BobDigital]

Best guess?

Brady 40 - 2017 - 36 TDs 6 Ints 4700 yards 107 QB rating - SB win and league MVP but Gronk wins SB MVP. Brady has a very good year. Comes a bit down to earth from his 2016 regular season (no 14:1 TD/Int ratio this time) run but another solid playoff run and SB win. He beats Denver/Oakland/Dallas.

Brady 41 - 2018 - 32 TDs 5 Ints 4500 yards 102 QB rating - Pats transition more to a running offense. They find a back in the draft they really like in 2017 and he steps up this year and the OL really comes together at this point. However Raiders beat the Pats this year and Dallas beats them. Another key thing is this year the Pats draft a QB in round 1 to be the heir.

Brady 42 - 2019 - 35 TDs 9 Ints 4500 yards 100 QB rating - Mitchell is now the clear #1 WR and Edelman has the Troy Brown role of clutch catches here and there. The defense after a down year in 2018 due to a lot of youth but comes back well in 2019. Brady starting to show signs of age this year. Still a top QB but Brady lays an egg in the playoffs going 1 and done for the first time in a while

Brady 43 - 2020 - 32 TDs 12 Ints 4300 yards 98 QB rating. Brady has regressed now. He has 3-4 just bad games this year and can't seem to be consistent. Still can look like the GOAT some weeks though. Wearing down as the season goes on. They still get the first seed and with a complete team that can run and play D they still have a shot but not the favorite. The bye week is a godsend here. Brady looks like himself again with some time off and gets a lucky AFFCG opponent and suddenly another bye week to rest for the super bowl. He faces Dallas who are a juggernaut at this point and going for 2 in 3 years. Brady has the worst super bowl of his career (or since 2001 depending on how you look at it). However he gets the Peyton Manning treatment and is carried to victory by his team. The only super bowl they ever win feeling comfortable in the 4th oddly enough. (Heck they owe him one).

Brady 44 - 2021- 25 TDs 16 Ints 3500 yards. Brady should quit going out on top in 2020 but he doesn't. He leads the Pats to 9-7 and they miss the playoffs. Loses most of his 2nd half games. He shows a few flashes but just can't do it anymore. Doesn't have the fast ball and the middle gets clogged too often. Goes out with a loss to miss the playoffs. Brady is the ultimate winner but won't go out winning I think. He needs to be put on his back and know he can't do it anymore to stop. The 2nd half of this year stops him even though he tries to come back next year but decides against it and BB makes clear privately he is going to the young QB.

All said and done 7 SB wins 9 appearances. Finishes with every record but total yards barely being edged out by Brees.

Hope the next QB is good.

 

[moosekill]

Right. Because people criticized this for being too long as it is and you want a master's thesis.

Get real.

No, I am telling you you are wrong, you don't understand statistics and you made a stupid post. Making it longer won't make it correct, it will still be wrong.

 

[Jangles]

The fact is, his statistics were down from 2010 to 2012. And even worse in 2013, which you don't want to count for some reason.

He likes to pretend things he disagrees with don't exist. I don't think he's all there

 

[ivanvamp]

No, I am telling you you are wrong, you don't understand statistics and you made a stupid post. Making it longer won't make it correct, it will still be wrong.

You haven't demonstrated why I'm wrong. In order to do that, you'd need to account for all kinds of variables, most of which YOU ARE COMPLETELY CLUELESS ABOUT. And that would make the proof a LOT longer.

For example, it's not just enough to "know" the caliber of the opposition. To really do that, you'd need to know the caliber of the opposition, as if there was an objective way to measure it (heck, there are raging debates in this very forum over whether points allowed or yards allowed is the best way to measure the quality of a defense), calculate which players IN THE WEEK THE PATRIOTS PLAYED THEM were healthy or not healthy (Seattle's defense minus Earl Thomas is vastly different than their defense with him in there, for example), understand the game plan the Patriots were using, know which plays were called, know who is at fault if Brady throws an out pattern three yards away from the receiver (did Brady make a bad throw or did the receiver run a bad route?), the caliber of players on the Patriots' team, the exact game situation, and about a million other things.

Which, of course, you cannot possibly do.

So nice effort trying to sound really smart. I readily admit that I could be wrong. I'm just giving the basic level statistics that most people use and which are readily available. To do the kind of analysis that you really are calling for would indeed require knowledge that none of us has, and a master's level kind of research and thesis.

Good luck with that.

 

[moosekill]

Perhaps if you typed more words it would make you feel smarter. The changes are small enough to be insignificant, they don't take into account that it is a team game played against other teams, and those same numbers reversed themselves over the past three years, probably because he had better players around him.

You could type another page of words to make yourself feel better, if you would like, it doesn't really change anything.

 

[ivanvamp]

Perhaps if you typed more words it would make you feel smarter. The changes are small enough to be insignificant, they don't take into account that it is a team game played against other teams, and those same numbers reversed themselves over the past three years, probably because he had better players around him.

You could type another page of words to make yourself feel better, if you would like, it doesn't really change anything.

And you could post this again and again and it doesn't make you right, nor prove you are right. You made an assertion that I'm wrong. If you wish to do so, demonstrate it instead of making a claim and not backing it up. I explained what you'd really need to do in order to TRULY understand exactly what's going on.

Something tells me you're not up to that.

 

[patsfan13]

Well the other data point I saw mentioned is that over the past 3 years his strnegth has INCREASED as well as his speed. That is crazy. So I would expect that we will see some decreases in strength prior to a decline. His mental game in terms of seeing the field and D is off the charts and shouldn't decline for another 10 yeasr I will assume his body goes before that.

Whatever his training regimen is, it appears to be working very well. That BTW is part of the legacy he wants to build that we fans are mostly oblivious to. HE believes in the work TB12 is doing to change how athletes train. I think we underestimate how important that is to TB12, that is the post career he is working for.

 

[NormZauchin]

Right on the money. My understanding is that both Brees and Rodgers are adopting Brady's approach to training. I doubt anyone would go to the lengths Brady does, right down to his pajamas, but the emphasis on core, pliability, yoga, and resistance bands over weights is something many QB's are going to move to, and we can expect them to last longer if they do the other work ( film and mechanics) that Brady does.

Is Mark Sanchez adopting Brady's approach?