Not Necessarily Panthers Related but....

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, Panthera onca said:

Probably if you use it, percentage of wins in the games played along with percentage of seasons the team makes the playoffs. Your point about being on bad teams is very valid but that would affect all of the other criteria as well.

Okay, but how do you translate that to each round? What is the threshold for a "successful" 1st rounder? 2nd? Etc?

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

Completion percentage and TD:Int ratio should be applied across the board regardless of draft position.  There shouldn't be grading on a curve of actual stats depending on round drafted.  50% completion is a$$ no matter what round a QB was taken.  You could argue the inverse, that would make a bigger bust for say a first round QB.

I suppose I would ask, if you are a HOF/All Pro/Pro Bowl guy, wouldn't that largely exclude players with low completion percentage?

Brett Favre(he wouldn't be eligible for this due to timeline) has a very poor TD:INT ratio and he is a SB Champion, HOFer, All Pro, Pro Bowler, etc. He ticks every box on that list. 

So, I would ask for a reasonable way of using those stats to determine "success" for each round. In theory, if a guy has a great completion percentage and TD:INT ratio but his career is 3 games started and less than two years in the NFL, would that be successful?

[Basbear]

GOAT Score} = 0.30 \times \text{Efficiency Index} + 0.25 \times \text{Peak Performance Index} + 0.20 \times \text{Playoff Index} + 0.15 \times \text{Longevity Index} + 0.10 \times \text{Awards & Legacy Index}

 

I get Tom brady for any and all best QB formulas......

[kungfoodude]

15 minutes ago, Panthera onca said:

Probably if you use it, percentage of wins in the games played along with percentage of seasons the team makes the playoffs. Your point about being on bad teams is very valid but that would affect all of the other criteria as well.

How would you structure that? What are the thresholds for "success?"

13 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Completion percentage and TD:Int ratio should be applied across the board regardless of draft position.  There shouldn't be grading on a curve of actual stats depending on round drafted.  50% completion is a$$ no matter what round a QB was taken.  You could argue the inverse, that would make a bigger bust for say a first round QB.

What what does that structure look like? What are the thresholds?

8 minutes ago, Basbear said:

Are you asking which NFL stats can be used for making the perfect QB?

Can I ask how many stats categories do you have and what they are??

 

I say this before the numbers are formulated, there's nearly always out-liners. Panthers had plenty of them believe it or not- Cam being the biggest, like if you value comp% Cam was bad most career, but still won and got to the SB. Teddy2gloves is a comp% God, but never won much outside the special season incoming but his leg exploded. 

 

Wins vs winning teams

Wins after loses

 

Heres more ideas for you to read as others have attacks this as well-   https://www.natesilver.net/p/best-quarterbacks-of-all-time-qbert-elway

 

good luck!

No, I am asking given draft position(round based) what are good baselines for a "successful" pick?

It's not so much actually grading QB's as grading QB CAREERS based on what round they were taken in.

I am not against incorporating other criteria or changing mine but I want input into what that looks like. So, say completion%, which was mentioned. Does a 1st round pick need to have a higher career completion percentage than a 2nd/3rd/etc? If so. what is the threshold for that? 

I am 100% trying to make a solid model but I do need defineable input that I can add.

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, Basbear said:

GOAT Score} = 0.30 \times \text{Efficiency Index} + 0.25 \times \text{Peak Performance Index} + 0.20 \times \text{Playoff Index} + 0.15 \times \text{Longevity Index} + 0.10 \times \text{Awards & Legacy Index}

 

I get Tom brady for any and all best QB formulas......

But are you gauging QB success or QB DRAFT PICK success?

I am not trying to make something that guages QB careers. I am trying to make something that judges QB careers SOLELY as a function of draft position. 

[Basbear]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

How would you structure that? What are the thresholds for "success?"

What what does that structure look like? What are the thresholds?

No, I am asking given draft position(round based) what are good baselines for a "successful" pick?

It's not so much actually grading QB's as grading QB CAREERS based on what round they were taken in.

I am not against incorporating other criteria or changing mine but I want input into what that looks like. So, say completion%, which was mentioned. Does a 1st round pick need to have a higher career completion percentage than a 2nd/3rd/etc? If so. what is the threshold for that? 

I am 100% trying to make a solid model but I do need defineable input that I can add.

Wish I could help you more, that link should offer some of what you want indirectly. 

Plus I am having trouble figuring out how to help as well. 

Bad news, but good baselines for a "successful pick" mainly could be being picked by a "successful" team/city/coaching staff. That's odd and awful, but its a major factor and maybe the main one. 

I can not tell you a first rounder needs to have more than 5.1% higher comp% than a 4th. With different teams, leagues, systems, staffs, etc. Theres some wacky numbers for winning that do happen, same for losing too. 

Again where you go and who is there have the biggest effect. 

Here is another piece, it does a better job of what I am trying to say. Basically Brain Hoyer was a UDFA and his agent told him that he is going to sign with the Pats. He thought it not the right move, but it ended up being the move that allowed him to stay and start in a league he had no business doing for the time he did. 

[kungfoodude]

FWIW, I am not trying to shut down all this great input, I am just asking for workable solutions to add it to the spreadsheet.

 

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, Basbear said:

Wish I could help you more, that link should offer some of what you want indirectly. 

Plus I am having trouble figuring out how to help as well. 

Bad news, but good baselines for a "successful pick" mainly could be being picked by a "successful" team/city/coaching staff. That's odd and awful, but its a major factor and maybe the main one. 

I can not tell you a first rounder needs to have more than 5.1% higher comp% than a 4th. With different teams, leagues, systems, staffs, etc. Theres some wacky numbers for winning that do happen, same for losing too. 

Again where you go and who is there have the biggest effect. 

Here is another piece, it does a better job of what I am trying to say. Basically Brain Hoyer was a UDFA and his agent told him that he is going to sign with the Pats. He thought it not the right move, but it ended up being the move that allowed him to stay and start in a league he had no business doing for the time he did. 

Silver's QBERT?? I subscribe to his Substack but what he is doing there is fairly different than what I am trying to accomplish.

I am less focused on the "pure" stats than the results since this is a "success" metric. 

Pure stats can favor unsuccessful players or successful players or vice versa. 

Also, I don't care even a little bit about UDFA'S. I can use that as a draft success metric. They weren't drafted. They are irrelevant factors.

[45catfan]

Team success as starting QB criteria: winning record seasons/playoff appearances/playoff wins

Career completion percentage: >57, 58-60, 61-63, 64-66, <67

TD/Int ratio: >1:1, 1:1, 2:1, 3:1+

[Jon Snow]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

FWIW, I am not trying to shut down all this great input, I am just asking for workable solutions to add it to the spreadsheet.

 

Im not sure there are workable solutions. A large factor in a selection is pure luck. And as Basbear just said it really comes down to the team and coaches they are paired with. Im not sure how you factor something like that in.

[Basbear]

https://www.metrowestdailynews.com/story/sports/nfl/2015/12/10/hoyer-has-respect-pats/32891436007/

 

forgot to drop the link

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

Team success as starting QB criteria: winning record seasons/playoff appearances/playoff wins

Career completion percentage: >57, 58-60, 61-63, 64-66, <67

TD/Int ratio: >1:1, 1:1, 2:1, 3:1+

Is this broken down by round?

Lower to higher like the OP?

2 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Im not sure there are workable solutions. A large factor in a selection is pure luck. And as Basbear just said it really comes down to the team and coaches they are paired with. Im not sure how you factor something like that in.

I am not grading on luck. I am grading based on "Was this QB successful based on round drafted in?"

That's why I am not being super specific because I don't think that will ultimately work. If I say that only QB's that have 3 SB appearances are "successful" I am literally excluding almost all the HOF players at the position. Similarly, if I say that only players with 3+ TD:INT ratio are "successful" I might be eliminating most of the HOF and almost all of the SB Champs. 

 

I am not against any input but it has to scale well across all rounds and be reasonably definable. That is how I came up with the criteria I did.

1. Accolades

2. Longevity 

3. Time as an NFL Starter

This should basically control for a lot of purely stats driven factors.

I say that because, if you aren't successful, you aren't going to garner many of the "accolades." Nor will you be in the league long or be a starter for long. 

That is the basis of what I have so far. 

[Basbear]

Dang, kungfoo everything I want to give its hard to rank/gauge/grade.... Its like the old deal - "How do you measure "heart"?"

Leadership, dealing with adversity, ball placement.

 

Joe Burrow is a great QB to copy for all traits, he took a loser and made a winner. That's the hardest part....

[45catfan]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Is this broken down by round?

Lower to higher like the OP?

I am not grading on luck. I am grading based on "Was this QB successful based on round drafted in?"

That's why I am not being super specific because I don't think that will ultimately work. If I say that only QB's that have 3 SB appearances are "successful" I am literally excluding almost all the HOF players at the position. Similarly, if I say that only players with 3+ TD:INT ratio are "successful" I might be eliminating most of the HOF and almost all of the SB Champs. 

 

I am not against any input but it has to scale well across all rounds and be reasonably definable. That is how I came up with the criteria I did.

1. Accolades

2. Longevity 

3. Time as an NFL Starter

This should basically control for a lot of purely stats driven factors.

I say that because, if you aren't successful, you aren't going to garner many of the "accolades." Nor will you be in the league long or be a starter for long. 

That is the basis of what I have so far. 

Yes, it can absolutely be broken down by round.  The lower the round drafted and higher the criteria met, the more success that draft pick is.

[kungfoodude]

7 minutes ago, Basbear said:

Dang, kungfoo everything I want to give its hard to rank/gauge/grade.... Its like the old deal - "How do you measure "heart"?"

Leadership, dealing with adversity, ball placement.

 

Joe Burrow is a great QB to copy for all traits, he took a loser and made a winner. That's the hardest part....

I think you are hyperfocused on the QB aspect and not the QB success in relationship to round drafted.

I am not sympathetic to those aspects of a player but you are looking at things that are not only insanely hard ro quantify but extremely subjective. I need a lot of structure and input to even begin to have a workable solution for that kind of thing. I am absolutely open but I wouldn't even know where to start on those criteria.

Also, for Burrow, he took an occasional winner and made it into an occasional winner. He has accomplished(outside stats) an insanely low amount for his draft position. 

5 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Yes, it can absolutely be broken down by round.  The lower the round drafted and higher the criteria met, the more success that draft pick is.

I can see that but based on the things you provided, what round relates to which? Fire it back to me with a Round: Minimum X

Also, consider that I am building this model on a "Any of the above." Would you modify that as a "has to meet X?"