Wild Card QB Performance Rankings

[electro's horse]

22 minutes ago, amcoolio said:

I'll bite. I wouldn't trade Bryce for Lawrence, there is just something fundamentally broken with that guy and we would be pulling our hair out just as much if not more if Trevor was our QB. I'd rather just hope and pray with Bryce. And despite the SB MVP, I would not trade him for Hurts becuase I think Hurts cannot pass at all anymore and his career is about to crater. Stroud is a toss up, he looks broken too, gets off to very slow starts, and isn't nearly as clutch as Bryce but I would probably take Stroud becuase of his arm and size and age. Nix would be the next hesitation. But the rest are clearly better, though Stafford only has 1 or 2 good seasons left

Hurts and Lawrence both look like damaged goods. Stroud just does not have an offensive line at all, and he was going up against a good defense in the Steelers. I'd say he'd probably look better against the Patriots, but Collins probably isn't going to be playing.

[PootieNunu]

4 hours ago, amcoolio said:

I'll bite. I wouldn't trade Bryce for Lawrence, there is just something fundamentally broken with that guy and we would be pulling our hair out just as much if not more if Trevor was our QB. I'd rather just hope and pray with Bryce. And despite the SB MVP, I would not trade him for Hurts becuase I think Hurts cannot pass at all anymore and his career is about to crater. Stroud is a toss up, he looks broken too, gets off to very slow starts, and isn't nearly as clutch as Bryce but I would probably take Stroud becuase of his arm and size and age. Nix would be the next hesitation. But the rest are clearly better, though Stafford only has 1 or 2 good seasons left

Lawrence has better numbers than Bryce.

Stroud is a no brainer.

Hurts is the closest to Bryce as a passer but he adds rushing TDs and yards. 

Nix has also been a better passer and added 400 rushing and 4-5 tds on the ground. 

[HPPantherzfan]

10 hours ago, thebdawg said:

His shtick, the I hate Bryce shtick. We have a small number of fans in the stands screaming how bad our qb sucks when he misses a pass, while the rest of us are having a great time supporting our team in the playoffs.

You don’t go scream about how poo you think your quarterback is in a stadium full of fans cheering for the team and him. It’s fuging weird.

Not trying to get in the middle of y’all’s thing here but you can cheer for your team and still know that your starting QB is dog water.  Really not that weird.

[TD alt]

12 hours ago, Jaxel said:

The thing is, traditional passer rating only accounts for pass accuracy, interceptions and touchdowns. It doesn't take into account, for example, that CJ Stroud had 5 fumbles. Or that Matt Stafford went through a large stretch of game where he had 12 incompletions and interception and a near 2nd dropped interception before he started moving the ball when we went semi-prevent. It also doesn't account for runs and running touchdowns. 

In addition, things like time-to-throw are difficult to measure. A QB running for his life is gonna higher TTT stat because he's maybe rolling out the pocket, or escaping a pressure. If you watched Herbert on Sunday, a lot of people would say his line was a turnstile, but he had the highest time to throw.

QBR does take a lot of that into account, so the Total QBR vs the Passer Rating is never gonna match up exactly. 

This forum is largely anti-Bryce though, so if his passer rating for 101.5 because he threw 3 TDs and had 1 int, but had 5 fumbles, people would point at the low QBR and say... SEE! I told you, passer rating doesn't tell the story!!

If a QB has an INT and five fumbles, he deserves to be criticized. 

People can criticize passe rating and QBR all they like. All I know is that looking at the all-time lists, you'll see that some pretty good QBs lead both. In that same vein, I absolutely want my QB to be able to pass the ball efficiently. If he can run, that's great too, but a QB's primary job is to pass. 

[Luciu5]

14 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

epa .02

COIE -1.8

YAC 47%

 

yeah buddy keep planting that bryce flag,  this comical

What does this mean and why did you choose these stats to make a point?

epa - numerous playoff QB's with worse

CPOE - numerous playoff QB's far worse

YAC - middle of the pack

I understand the point you want to make, I just don't think these specific stats make that point for you. Based on these, BY is better than about half the other playoff QB's. 

[Navy_football]

10 hours ago, strato said:

This drop thing… really debatable. Depends on your perspective. That last ball was a tough catch that didn’t get caught. I don’t know that I would call it all on Horn as if it hit him perfectly and he blew it. 

No offense, I really am not being confrontational here. But I don't think any WR in the NFL or college or even high school would have defined that as a tough catch. If you can only catch a ball that is perfectly passed then you're not a WR? You're an athlete that goes out for passes. The TD winning catch by the Rams TE was exponentially more difficult with many more variables involved. All Jimmy had to do was catch a ball that was within the frame of his body. I think he catches that 19 out of 20 times. But that was the 1 out of 20 he didn't. 

[strato]

1 hour ago, Navy_football said:

No offense, I really am not being confrontational here. But I don't think any WR in the NFL or college or even high school would have defined that as a tough catch. If you can only catch a ball that is perfectly passed then you're not a WR? You're an athlete that goes out for passes. The TD winning catch by the Rams TE was exponentially more difficult with many more variables involved. All Jimmy had to do was catch a ball that was within the frame of his body. I think he catches that 19 out of 20 times. But that was the 1 out of 20 he didn't. 

Well I never played WR but a ball at my knees is not a gimme for me. So I figured same for them. I am not never wrong. 
And yeah that Rams TD, throw and catch was pretty perfect. You can’t hardly defend that. 

Edited 2 hours ago by strato

[kungfoodude]

18 hours ago, TD alt said:

I mean, QBR is the one that is less subjective (basically the one that really matters). 

Total QBR is adjusted and based upon who you're playing.

Bryce did well, relative to who we were playing (and relative to what he normally does), but don't mistake it for a season's work.

QBR is the worst one because it hides behind the cloak of being "proprietary." 

ESPN does not publish what the actual basis of QBR is. There is no way for other analytics guys to even critique the math/methodology involved because no one outside ESPN knows what it is.

[mav1234]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

QBR is the worst one because it hides behind the cloak of being "proprietary." 

ESPN does not publish what the actual basis of QBR is. There is no way for other analytics guys to even critique the math/methodology involved because no one outside ESPN knows what it is.

Id prefer a QBR measure that just included fumbles and rushing yards / TDs... I think that is the major limitation of QB rating as it stands, the modern game does include more from QBs than passing.

But ESPN QBR is like a mashup of PFF rating and real stats disguised as an objective measure.

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

Id prefer a QBR measure that just included fumbles and rushing yards / TDs... I think that is the major limitation of QB rating as it stands, the modern game does include more from QBs than passing.

But ESPN QBR is like a mashup of PFF rating and real stats disguised as an objective measure.

QBR as an idea to incorporate rushing effectiveness was a good concept. Without being able to see behind the curtain, it's hard to know if it is accomplishing that or not.

I would say Nate Silver's QBERT has the potential to be a much better metric than QBR. At least his methodology is transparent, anyway. 

[strato]

4 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

Id prefer a QBR measure that just included fumbles and rushing yards / TDs... I think that is the major limitation of QB rating as it stands, the modern game does include more from QBs than passing.

But ESPN QBR is like a mashup of PFF rating and real stats disguised as an objective measure.

The game has changed so much that running is an asset and not discouraged any more. It used to be all arm, pocket, you don’t want the backyard stuff. Because those guys are generally not great as pocket passers. 
 

So yeah I think ratings should account for it. 

[frankw]

1 hour ago, strato said:

Well I never played WR but a ball at my knees is not a gimme for me. So I figured same for them. I am not never wrong. 
And yeah that Rams TD, throw and catch was pretty perfect. You can’t hardly defend that. 

If Cam Newton had thrown a pass like that at the receivers knees with the game on the line in the playoffs we'd be hearing about it all offseason and it damn sure wouldn't matter that the WR was a rookie.

No standards here anymore.

[fanpanther]

2 hours ago, Navy_football said:

No offense, I really am not being confrontational here. But I don't think any WR in the NFL or college or even high school would have defined that as a tough catch. If you can only catch a ball that is perfectly passed then you're not a WR? You're an athlete that goes out for passes. The TD winning catch by the Rams TE was exponentially more difficult with many more variables involved. All Jimmy had to do was catch a ball that was within the frame of his body. I think he catches that 19 out of 20 times. But that was the 1 out of 20 he didn't. 

That rams td was an amazing highlight catch and throw.

[TD alt]

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

QBR is the worst one because it hides behind the cloak of being "proprietary." 

ESPN does not publish what the actual basis of QBR is. There is no way for other analytics guys to even critique the math/methodology involved because no one outside ESPN knows what it is.

Why do you guys keep saying this? I already know this. My post was in terms of the chart and the OP's point which was mainly based upon Bryce's "Total QBR." Even if you dislike QBR, you must dislike Total QBR either the same or worse because it's more subjective, as it's based upon opponents.

I generally don't believe that you can use any of these rankings or stats within a vacuum, but at least I know what passer rating is based on, and I can always peruse raw stats by myself. All of these metrics, stats and ultimately rankings should be juxtaposed against contextual perspectives in my opinion, otherwise you can come away with some wildly varied, or even misguided, opinions and judgements.

 

Edited 34 minutes ago by TD alt