Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

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


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
34 replies to this topic

#25 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,152
  • Reputation: 2,341
HUDDLER

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

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,652
  • Reputation: 2,299
HUDDLER

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

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,152
  • Reputation: 2,341
HUDDLER

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

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,152
  • Reputation: 2,341
HUDDLER

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

    Dey Hate Us Because They Aint Us!

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,864
  • Reputation: 2,255
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 06:58 AM

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

#30 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • Joined: 12-December 08
  • posts: 9,331
  • Reputation: 1,510
SUPPORTER

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.

#31 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,652
  • Reputation: 2,299
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:41 AM

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.


I could be wrong but the difference is that ESPN must be reporting how he did in games where they won by less than 7 points. THe other is reported how he did when his team was leading by less than 7 points. At least that is how I read it. Again stats can say what you want them to, for sure.

#32 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,652
  • Reputation: 2,299
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:45 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.


I think there are red flags about Gabberts ability to handle pressure. The evidence agrees this year. Will it be a big problem going forward. I think so but you don't. Who knows really. That is why the draft isn't an exact science and these debates persist and will even when they are drafted. I guess in 2 or 3 years we will know the answer to this one.

#33 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,152
  • Reputation: 2,341
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 09:19 AM

I could be wrong but the difference is that ESPN must be reporting how he did in games where they won by less than 7 points. THe other is reported how he did when his team was leading by less than 7 points. At least that is how I read it. Again stats can say what you want them to, for sure.


that doesn't make sense since they had no tie games. not sure. stats are stupid.

I think there are red flags about Gabberts ability to handle pressure. The evidence agrees this year. Will it be a big problem going forward. I think so but you don't. Who knows really. That is why the draft isn't an exact science and these debates persist and will even when they are drafted. I guess in 2 or 3 years we will know the answer to this one.


I don't think it'll be a huge problem going forward. I don't think he has problems in big games. I think the problems he has relate to pocket presence... and it's something you have to be concerned about and it is probably the biggest reason not to take him #1 overall. I think it's something that does not doom his career, especially if he ends up in the right situation where the coaches teach him how to generate a better mental clock, similar to how StL did with Bradford.

#34 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,652
  • Reputation: 2,299
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 10:01 AM

that doesn't make sense since they had no tie games. not sure. stats are stupid.



I don't think it'll be a huge problem going forward. I don't think he has problems in big games. I think the problems he has relate to pocket presence... and it's something you have to be concerned about and it is probably the biggest reason not to take him #1 overall. I think it's something that does not doom his career, especially if he ends up in the right situation where the coaches teach him how to generate a better mental clock, similar to how StL did with Bradford.


The easy thing is put him in a west coast offense where everything is timing and quick drops and throws to spots. Given he will run a vertical passing attack with play action it might not be the best system for him much like Clausen struggled in davidson's scheme. You have to match up the Qb to the system for it really to click.

#35 Jerry

Jerry

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-March 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 123
  • Reputation: 0
HUDDLER

Posted 28 March 2011 - 03:34 PM

J.P. Losman


Gabberts college numbers are really really close to that of Losman, just goes to show you what kind of draft this is for QB's.


Child Please.