Darnold's QBR was higher than Tannehill's

[iamhubby1]

9 minutes ago, Snake said:

I would say we have one quality starter and he's a rookie. 

 

 Ok then. I believe you are underestimating. But have at it

[SBBlue]

2 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

I'll take the QB with better stats and win loss record with the worst QBR in the league over the guy with worst stats and a better QBR with a worse win loss record.

Between the two, that year, Tannehill is the clear winner. He protected the ball, and did far more on far less attempts than Darnold did.

 Feel free to love on Tannehill all you want.    He's not my QB.

QBR, though imperfect, is a more comprehensive stat of QB performance. 

Tannehill sucked during his Gase years, reaching the very very bottom of the pile in 2018, so much so that he was bested by Darnold the rookie.

 

[Madwolf]

4 minutes ago, SBBlue said:

 Feel free to love on Tannehill all you want.    He's not my QB.

QBR, though imperfect, is a more comprehensive stat of QB performance. 

Tannehill sucked during his Gase years, reaching the very very bottom of the pile in 2018, so much so that he was bested by Darnold the rookie.

 

Yes, QBR is excellent which is why Ryan Mallet has had a better career than Cam Newton, and Andrew Luck. It's also why Charlie Batch is considered to have had the single greatest game from a QB of all time in the game that we all know is so famous now from the year that it happened. You know the one.

[SBBlue]

30 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

Yes, QBR is excellent which is why Ryan Mallet has had a better career than Cam Newton, and Andrew Luck. It's also why Charlie Batch is considered to have had the single greatest game from a QB of all time in the game that we all know is so famous now from the year that it happened. You know the one.

Your beef is not with me.  Its with ESPN.

[CRA]

34 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

Yes, QBR is excellent which is why Ryan Mallet has had a better career than Cam Newton, and Andrew Luck. It's also why Charlie Batch is considered to have had the single greatest game from a QB of all time in the game that we all know is so famous now from the year that it happened. You know the one.

Everyone remembers the greatest QBR game ever played.  187 yards.  2 INTs. 

[Madwolf]

5 minutes ago, SBBlue said:

Your beef is not with me.  Its with ESPN.

No it is with you.

You're using a stat that is clearly not working as intended, to prove your point.

Ryan Mallet wasn't better than all of those QBs in 2015, yet that's what you're arguing. 

[SBBlue]

1 minute ago, Madwolf said:

Ryan Mallet wasn't better than all of those QBs in 2015, yet that's what you're arguing. 

I didn't give Ryan that QBR.  ESPN did.

[Madwolf]

10 minutes ago, SBBlue said:

I didn't give Ryan that QBR.  ESPN did.

And my issue isn't with them giving it. It's using it to say that one QB is better than the other when the stats don't tell that same story.

[glenwo2]

I don't give a rat's ass whose QBR was higher.

All I care about is what Sam can(and hopefully will) do this coming season.

 

 

[SBBlue]

10 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

And my issue isn't with them giving it. It's using it to say that one QB is better than the other when the stats don't tell that same story.

 You just made a bunch of posts trying to discredit QBR and then say you have no issue with it.

How long is this going to go on?

Edited June 8, 2021 by SBBlue

[MasterAwesome]

11 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

And my issue isn't with them giving it. It's using it to say that one QB is better than the other when the stats don't tell that same story.

I’m not gonna make a value statement about how useful QBR is, but just to clarify: QBR is supposed to be more a measure of efficiency than a flat assessment of their statistical performance. It doesn’t really make sense that you’re simply looking at all the statistics that are included in the conventional passer rating (pass yards, TDs, INTs, completion %, etc.) and ignoring every supplemental variable factored into the QBR and being like “see, QBR makes no sense at all”. QBR is supposed to account for things like the strength of the opposing defense, the difficulty of passes, if the QB was pressured during their throw, their rushing stats, whether they’re piling garbage time stats, reducing weight for YAC, etc.

 

You’re just making an apples to oranges evaluation of QBR based exclusively on the criteria for traditional passer rating.

[Snake]

1 hour ago, Madwolf said:

I'd agree there. I'm fairly convinced Horn is going to be a stud, but outside of that I think the jury is out on the rest of the CBs. I think we'll get a serviceable #2 between Jackson and Bouye, but I'm not as comfortable saying that we'll have both a #2 and a Nickle that I'd be comfortable starting against most of the teams we'll see this year.

Yeah way to many questions and that's how bad our CB corps is.

[Madwolf]

3 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I’m not gonna make a value statement about how useful QBR is, but just to clarify: QBR is supposed to be more a measure of efficiency than a flat assessment of their statistical performance. It doesn’t really make sense that you’re simply looking at all the statistics that are included in the conventional passer rating (pass yards, TDs, INTs, completion %, etc.) and ignoring every supplemental variable factored into the QBR and being like “see, QBR makes no sense at all”. QBR is supposed to account for things like the strength of the opposing defense, the difficulty of passes, if the QB was pressured during their throw, their rushing stats, whether they’re piling garbage time stats, reducing weight for YAC, etc.

 

You’re just making an apples to oranges evaluation of QBR based exclusively on the criteria for traditional passer rating.

But QBR routinely fails at what it sets out to do, which is exactly my point. Why is Ryan Mallet rated as higher than the NFL MVP in 2015? Why is Lamar Jackson considered a great QB why Tom Brady shows up in the Top10 once?

[Snake]

1 hour ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

 Ok then. I believe you are underestimating. But have at it

Jackson hasn't really shown her can even be a good #2 yet and after that its even more questions. We are early in a complete rebuild of that unit.