Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

When looking to make a QB comparison for Gabbert look nor farther than...


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#16 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,105 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:12 PM

If anything Losman is closer to Clausen than Gabbert. I am not saying that because of I like Gabbert more than both of the others, I am just saying that losman and clausen have similar height and weight as well as arm strength.


Interestingly they both struggled under pressure as well in college. In 2009 Clausen was 66% overall in completions but he dropped to 52% on third down. Likewise Gabbert was at 63% for the year and 44% on third down. Clausen continued to do so in the pros. Frankly I think Gabbert might struggle in the pros as well. One of the biggest positive for Newton was that under pressure his completion percentage went up not down. Overall on third down he was at 58% versus 66% overall which was not a big drop off. When blitzed by 5 guys or more it went up to 76%.

Maybe it is me but I saw enough 3rd down blitzes which turned into sacks or throw aways to last several years. Unfortunately picking Gabbert might very well end up being more of the same. More of a feeling than anything I can prove one way or the other.

#17 PackPanther

PackPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:21 PM

Interestingly they both struggled under pressure as well in college. In 2009 Clausen was 66% overall in completions but he dropped to 52% on third down. Likewise Gabbert was at 63% for the year and 44% on third down. Clausen continued to do so in the pros. Frankly I think Gabbert might struggle in the pros as well. One of the biggest positive for Newton was that under pressure his completion percentage went up not down. Overall on third down he was at 58% versus 66% overall which was not a big drop off. When blitzed by 5 guys or more it went up to 76%.

Maybe it is me but I saw enough 3rd down blitzes which turned into sacks or throw aways to last several years. Unfortunately picking Gabbert might very well end up being more of the same. More of a feeling than anything I can prove one way or the other.


This is a very hard thing to compare though. Gabbert was in an offense in which they threw 99% of the time and were in the shotgun 100% of the time. As a result two incompletions on first and second and they were at 3rd and 10. However when they did get first downs it was on other downs. so its like Gabbert was making 3rd down throws on 2nd and 1st down.

meanwhile in Cams offense they were moving the ball with a more balanced offense( it could even be said a very run first offense) so people werent sure when we was going to throw. Because of the running game it wasnt feast or famine.

#18 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,368 posts

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:31 PM

This is a very hard thing to compare though. Gabbert was in an offense in which they threw 99% of the time and were in the shotgun 100% of the time. As a result two incompletions on first and second and they were at 3rd and 10. However when they did get first downs it was on other downs. so its like Gabbert was making 3rd down throws on 2nd and 1st down.

meanwhile in Cams offense they were moving the ball with a more balanced offense( it could even be said a very run first offense) so people werent sure when we was going to throw. Because of the running game it wasnt feast or famine.


they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats

#19 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,951 posts

Posted 27 March 2011 - 09:13 PM

they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats


edit: nevermind, misread the previous post!

Edited by mav1234, 27 March 2011 - 09:16 PM.


#20 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,105 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 27 March 2011 - 10:12 PM

they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats


There you go introducing facts into the discussion. Totally ruined the fairy tale he was weaving.

#21 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,951 posts

Posted 27 March 2011 - 11:29 PM

There you go introducing facts into the discussion. Totally ruined the fairy tale he was weaving.


Oh come on. While the previous poster was incorrect, Mizzou had to pass on a ton of 3rd and very longs, many, many more than Auburn. So sure, they ran it a ton, and they were moderately effective (4.6 YPA on the year which was 'only' 1.5 YPA below Auburns)...

but the problem with a lot of these statistical comparisons showing "poise under pressure" when you look at down and distance is that you ignore game factors... for instance, who is winning? who is losing? what's the score? what needs to be done?

ultimately, I can tell you this: Gabbert has lead his team to victory when behind with his arm primarily. He makes plays when he needs to any way he can - his legs arguably won them the game against Oklahoma - and he's a great field general. He has things to work on, because if he didn't, he'd go #1... but the same is true of Cam Newton. Neither are perfect.

Edited by mav1234, 27 March 2011 - 11:35 PM.


#22 Dr. Blotter

Dr. Blotter

    Huddle Nobody

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,154 posts
  • LocationSt. Louis, MO

Posted 27 March 2011 - 11:33 PM

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mav1234 again."

#23 Verge

Verge

    Huddle Troll Legend

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 12:50 AM

Losman: 6'2, 217, never hit over 60% when he started a full season, strong arm, low accuracy, in his best year had a 7.3 yards per throw. Threw 33 td passes and never had great intangibles.

Gabbert: 6'4, 234, hit 63.4% in his final year, strong arm, great accuracy, in his best year threw 8.07 yards per throw, has all the intangibles.

No comparison what so ever.

#24 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,105 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 28 March 2011 - 12:53 AM

Oh come on. While the previous poster was incorrect, Mizzou had to pass on a ton of 3rd and very longs, many, many more than Auburn. So sure, they ran it a ton, and they were moderately effective (4.6 YPA on the year which was 'only' 1.5 YPA below Auburns)...

but the problem with a lot of these statistical comparisons showing "poise under pressure" when you look at down and distance is that you ignore game factors... for instance, who is winning? who is losing? what's the score? what needs to be done?

ultimately, I can tell you this: Gabbert has lead his team to victory when behind with his arm primarily. He makes plays when he needs to any way he can - his legs arguably won them the game against Oklahoma - and he's a great field general. He has things to work on, because if he didn't, he'd go #1... but the same is true of Cam Newton. Neither are perfect.


First of all they threw 475 times, 190 on first down, 164 times on second down and 115 on third down. Of third and more than 7 he was 27 of 66 for 40% with 2 TDs and 3 Ints. So your ton of times is actually about 15% of the time.

When they were ahead 15 points he threw 5 TDs and 3 Picks, when the game was close- winning by 7 or less points he had 1 Td and 2 picks. When they were behind by less than 7 he had 4 TDS and 3 picks.

When the game is on the line he is average or below at best.

#25 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,951 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 01:21 AM

First of all they threw 475 times, 190 on first down, 164 times on second down and 115 on third down. Of third and more than 7 he was 27 of 66 for 40% with 2 TDs and 3 Ints. So your ton of times is actually about 15% of the time.

When they were ahead 15 points he threw 5 TDs and 3 Picks, when the game was close- winning by 7 or less points he had 1 Td and 2 picks. When they were behind by less than 7 he had 4 TDS and 3 picks.

When the game is on the line he is average or below at best.


ESPN's splits claim differently, so maybe we're looking at something else. I certainly remember him taking the lead more times than once with his arm, but... Seems like our splits are quite different.

ESPN claims when he won by up to 7 he had 7 TDs and only 1 INT...

Another reason not to trust stats I guess :D

Edited by mav1234, 28 March 2011 - 01:36 AM.


#26 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,105 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 28 March 2011 - 01:26 AM

You must have been looking at Newton's stats. Here are Gabberts- 4TDs and 3 Ints when behind by 7 or less.

http://www.cfbstats....ituational.html

#27 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,951 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 01:31 AM

You must have been looking at Newton's stats. Here are Gabberts- 4TDs and 3 Ints when behind by 7 or less.

http://www.cfbstats....ituational.html


edit: uhh, I'm confused as poo and going to bed. ESPN is making my head hurt.

http://sports.espn.g...81364&year=2010

very different from there; at first I thought it was something it wasn't... now I'm just confused and tired. Good night.

Edited by mav1234, 28 March 2011 - 01:47 AM.


#28 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,951 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 01:46 AM

I don't think anyone would realistically debate that Gabbert had better stats than Cam Newton - or than anyone really - but I also don't see how Gabbert's stats show someone who is incapable of playing under pressure game situations... which was the entire reason we got into this argument. Now, if your entire argument is that "Newton does it better," well, that's fine... that's your opinion... Newton was stellar in college when things got tough. All I can tell you is that Gabbert was able to lead his team to some pretty big come from behind wins in the past two years. He fell short three times this year. At least once, he lost them the game. Sucks, but that doesn't mean he'll be a bad QB in the NFL.

College stats ultimately tell you next to nothing about how a player will do... what is more important are the tools and skills they are showing in college, and how those will transition.

I don't see Gabbert's stats as being a red flag for a team drafting him where he should be drafted... but then again, I also don't think he should go #1 overall.

Edited by mav1234, 28 March 2011 - 01:48 AM.


#29 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    No please, tell me more about this Amway....sounds promising

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,964 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 28 March 2011 - 06:58 AM

Derek Anderson...size and arm ..poor footwork and pocket presence.

#30 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,444 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:39 AM

Losman: 6'2, 217, never hit over 60% when he started a full season, strong arm, low accuracy, in his best year had a 7.3 yards per throw. Threw 33 td passes and never had great intangibles.

Gabbert: 6'4, 234, hit 63.4% in his final year, strong arm, great accuracy, in his best year threw 8.07 yards per throw, has all the intangibles.

No comparison what so ever.



I am looking at college career, not best season, as any scout will do.


Over their career the have completion %'s very close to each other.

Their TD to INT ratio is exactly the same, although Losman threw many more TD's.


I am not knocking Gabbert, just stating that in most years a player that threw for 16 TD's and 9 INT's in a spread offense would not be considered for the no. 1 overall selection.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.