Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

A different way to interpret QB statistics

Brandon

By Brandon,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Brandon Newbie

Brandon

Posted
Posted

One's perception of reality and true reality are often quite different beasts from one another. Many times we judge players on the total summation of their statistics, the ranting or raving of the talking heads, or in some cases just based on what we really want a player to be in our minds. In no position is this effect more apparent then when it comes to the often controversial topic of quarterbacks. The most important attribute in a QB is often whether or not they are a consistently good impact on a team or not.

The best way to go about determining this is to look at each individual game, and use those stats (QB rating in this particular case) to extrapolate exactly how consistent some of these QB's were. This eliminates a few exceptionally good or bad games from skewing a whole season's worth of stats. Most importantly it keeps teams which are heavily run or pass biased from punishing or bolstering their quarterback's stats, because we tend to overlook some games because the end result with a full season's stats may just be too good to be true. Why does it matter? For years there have been players getting far too much or too little credit based on perception rather than reality, and this is merely a tool to help paint a clearer picture.

The stat weighting is as follows, if a quarterback produces a game with a QB rating of 70 or lower, they will have 2 points deducted from their final tally. The reasoning behind this is that 70 tends to be the difference between an average/mediocre performance and a negative performance. If said quarterback has a game with a QB rating in excess of 100, they will receive one point back to help balance out any bad games or to further enhance their standing as a good impact on a team. With injuries at the QB position being so impactful any QB who plays in all 16 games will receive a further 2 points. If a quarterback happens to miss one or more games their point total will be multiplied out until it is equivalent to having played 16 games in that season. However, any quarterback who fails to play in at least half of the games in a season will not be included. Without anymore waiting let's get onto the results:

1. Phillip Rivers (Chargers): 6.0pts (16 games 10-3)

2. Chad Pennington (Dolphins): 6.0pts (16 games, 8-2)

2. Aaron Rodgers (Packers): 6.0pts (16 games, 8-2)

4. Kurt Warner (Cardinals): 4.0pts (16 games 6-2)

5. Peyton Manning (Colts): 3.0pts (16 games, 7-3)

5. Matt Cassell (Chiefs): 3.0pts (16 games, 7-3)

7. Jake Delhomme (Panthers): 2.0pts (16 games, 6-3)

8. Tony Romo (Cowboys) 1.14pts (14 games 7-3)

9. Jay Cutler (Bears): 1.0pts (16 games, 5-3)

10. Donovan McNabb (Eagles): 0.0pts (16 games, 4-3)

11. Eli Manning (Giants): -1.0pts (16 games, 3-3)

12. Matt Schaub (Texans): -1.2pts (13 games 5-3)

13. Shaun HIll (49ers): -1.8pts (9 games 3-2)

14. Matt Ryan (Falcons): -2.0pts (16 games, 6-5)

15. Jason Campbell (Redskins): -2.0pts (16 games, 4-4)

16. Drew Brees (Saints): -3.0pts (16 games 7-6)

17. Ben Roethlisberger (Steelers): -4.0pts (16 games, 4-5)

17. Kerry Collins (Titans): -4.0pts (16 games, 4-5)

19. Trent Edwards (Bills): -4.6pts (14 games, 4-4)

20. David Garrard (Jaguars): -6.0pts (16 games, 4-6)

21. Kyle Orton (Broncos): -6.4pts (15 games 2-4)

22. Joe Flacco (Ravens): -7.0pts (16 games, 5-7)

23. Jamarcus Russell (Raiders): -9.6pts (15 games 3-6)

24. Marc Bulger (Rams): -9.6pts (15 games, 1-5)

25. Derek Anderson (Browns): -11.2pts (10 games, 1-4)

Tom Brady (Patriots): Null, sample size too small

Daunte Culpepper (Lions): Null, sample size too small

Matt Hasselbeck (Seahawks): Null, sample size too small

Carson Palmer (Bengals): Null, sample size too small

Sage Rosenfels (Vikings): Null, sample size too small

Josh Freeman (Buccaneers): Null, rookie

Mark Sanchez (Jets): Null, rookie

All told it's plain that while this isn't a measure of whether a QB is good or not, it will go a long way towards clearing up whether or not a quarterback is as good or bad as you thought.

By the way I will be putting out a preseason power ranking next week for those who are interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted

By the way I will be putting out a preseason power ranking next week for those who are interested.

I know that I can probably speak for everyone around here when I say that I will be waiting with baited breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carolinarolls Newbie

carolinarolls

Posted
Posted

I know that I can probably speak for everyone around here when I say that I will be waiting with baited breath.

bated

as in abated meaning shortened or lessened.

we bait hooks for fish and all sorts of traps for all sorts of prey. We even visit bait shops but we do not bait our breath nor can we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • BEASTfromdaEAST
      D-Mo on FA & some of my general thoughts

      By BEASTfromdaEAST · Posted

      Sorry man you lost me at "Teppers have evolved as owners". Limped into playoffs at 8-9 not even above .500 Tepper is trash as an owner bro and that's not even a discussion at this point. 37-83 w/l ratio. Nuff said.... Morgan tho, he's cooking and it ain't cuz of Teppers leadership
    • TD alt
      D-Mo on FA & some of my general thoughts

      By TD alt · Posted

      After listening to Morgan's presser twice, I came away with some key beliefs. First of all, I don't think he's a bullshitter. What you see is what you get. When he says something, he means it.  The Teppers really have evolved as owners. Morgan has mentioned how they're easy to work with--a pleasure to work with a few times now. There seems to be a good relationship between all of them (and include Dave Canales on that). We'll see if it lasts. Yes, no one wanted to come to Carolina with the previous management, but that seems to have changed. The team signed arguably the top Edge, LB and OT on the market, two of them on pretty good deals and one on what I'll say is "not a bad one." And, credit Sunshine Dave "Flowers and Cotton Candy" Canales for helping to change the culture. Morgan mentioned getting guys--and I'm paraphrasing--that are not only great football players but great people. Don't look for us to be acquiring any James Pearce types anytime soon, just saying. We'll see if that holds true in the future. Dan Morgan really has set up the Panthers to take the BPA/BAP. He mentioned it at least a couple of times, and he doesn't seem pressured to pinpoint a particular position. He just wants quality players that will help the team. This is how it's going to be (to your joy or dismay, probably for as long as he's here), and personally I love it. Many of us know how Morgan was when he played: aggressive! That's what he's going to be when making acquisitions. He explicitly said it, and emphasized it. All avenues are open (think FA, waivers...the draft)! Personally, as long as it's controlled aggression and not reckless aggression, I love it.  On KP: "Mobility is big in this league."  He basically says if another QB is the BPA while drafting--we're going by our board, people--we're going to add them.        ...  
    • TLGPanthersFan
      Canes vs Leafs 7pm

      By TLGPanthersFan · Posted

      Canes are so fascinating. Despite inconsistent defense and poor goalie play they keep winning. 
×
×
  • Create New...