JoeSteeler
Footballguy
not sure. that's why im asking
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
QB Russell Wilson, NYG (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter ImTheScientist
- Start date
Inspiration
Footballguy
I just don't see there being alot of interest in Flynn. I see him as a Kyle Orton type in the sense that he would be an upgrade for a handful of teams in the league, but because he lacks franchise QB talent, those teams are ultimately hesitant to give up on their current starter in favor of him.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
Kyle Orton is light years better than Flynn. Im guessing he ends up back with GB and DangeRuss starts for 10-15 years in Seattle
sho nuff
Footballguy
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
Based on 93 starts over the last 9 years to 16. Based on 69 career NFL starts to 2.
I-LoveRB's
Footballguy
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
What are Wilson's chances of getting to 26 passing TDs?
lod01
Footballguy
And the shortest. The guy can do it all.Russell Wilson is the tallest rookie QB to win his first 5 home games in the last 40 years.
Hooper31
Footballguy
Researchers at the University of Washington are forcing Russell Wilson to watch a continual string of emotional stirring films so that they may harvest his tears for experimental purposes.
It can be neither confirmed or denied that Gridiron Gang has netted the highest yield.
It can be neither confirmed or denied that Gridiron Gang has netted the highest yield.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
fridayfrenzy
Footballguy
To add to that...Russell Wilson is currently 10th all-time for passing TDs in a rookie season...with 6 games left to go.Peyton Manning has 26 TDs for #1 overall and Cam Newton is #2 with 21 TDs.
Last edited by a moderator:
fridayfrenzy
Footballguy
Nice article pumping RW's tires.http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/wheres-the-hype-russell-wilson-nfls-best-rookie-qb-so-far/19228/
Last edited by a moderator:
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Wilson is having a very nice rookie year no doubt. But it is clear that at this stage he is a highly effective/efficient game managing QB. Now before anyone says that I am being critical of Wilson I am most definitely not. I am not saying Wilson can't be more or won't evolve into more than a very good game managing QB but right now he is getting the Alex Smith treatment from this coaching staff and it is working.
Wilson is averaging 15.7 compeltions a game. That really is not very good at all. I mean Gabbert is avearging 17.7 completions a game. Alex Smith this is completing 18.4 passes per game. I know it is just one stat but it does tell a story. There is nothing about 15.7 completions a game that screams great. It is clearly game manager territory. Last game for example Wilson had 12 completions (Sanchez was awful and he completed 9 passes). Wilson was efficient in the game as he threw for 2 td's but he was only asked to attempt 19 passes.
Whether the Seahawk fans want to admit it or not, Wilson is not yet asked to do as much as the other rookie QB's or the average NFL qb. It is not a hit on Wilson it is more a factor of what Seattle feels gives them the best chance to win. At this stage it is run Lynch a lot, allow Wilson to not turn the ball over and be efficient, and let our defense do their work.
The other rookie QB's are being asked to attempt more passes and are completing more passes than Wilson at this stage. Many teams would love consistent defense and running game that Seattle has had this year. Once again this formula does not work if Wilson is not efficient so he definitely needs the credit there.
Luck for example has had one game where he completed 16 passes as his low. Luck is averaging 23 completions a game. Obvioulsy Luck is being asked to do a lot more than Wilson at this stage. The offense clearly revolves around Luck throwing the ball more for his team to be successful. Luck has not been as efficient as Wilson but it is quite clear to most that it is a much different circumstance and situation.
Bree's is averaing 25 completions a game for comparitive sake.
Wilson is averaging 15.7 compeltions a game. That really is not very good at all. I mean Gabbert is avearging 17.7 completions a game. Alex Smith this is completing 18.4 passes per game. I know it is just one stat but it does tell a story. There is nothing about 15.7 completions a game that screams great. It is clearly game manager territory. Last game for example Wilson had 12 completions (Sanchez was awful and he completed 9 passes). Wilson was efficient in the game as he threw for 2 td's but he was only asked to attempt 19 passes.
Whether the Seahawk fans want to admit it or not, Wilson is not yet asked to do as much as the other rookie QB's or the average NFL qb. It is not a hit on Wilson it is more a factor of what Seattle feels gives them the best chance to win. At this stage it is run Lynch a lot, allow Wilson to not turn the ball over and be efficient, and let our defense do their work.
The other rookie QB's are being asked to attempt more passes and are completing more passes than Wilson at this stage. Many teams would love consistent defense and running game that Seattle has had this year. Once again this formula does not work if Wilson is not efficient so he definitely needs the credit there.
Luck for example has had one game where he completed 16 passes as his low. Luck is averaging 23 completions a game. Obvioulsy Luck is being asked to do a lot more than Wilson at this stage. The offense clearly revolves around Luck throwing the ball more for his team to be successful. Luck has not been as efficient as Wilson but it is quite clear to most that it is a much different circumstance and situation.
Bree's is averaing 25 completions a game for comparitive sake.
fridayfrenzy
Footballguy
You can easily use the counter argument that Luck is only accumulating stats because he is chucking the ball a ton. Luck is actually not efficient at all. He is at the bottom of the NFL in QB completion % and QB rating. To give you an idea of how bad Luck's QB rating has been...he is only better than the following starting QBs; Newton, Gabbert, Tannehill, Sanchez, Weeden, Cassel and Skelton. Is that really good company?Howabout percentage %, he is only better than the following; Newton, Freeman, Skelton and Sanchez. That is terrible.My opinion is that, while Luck is certainly good and may be great later on, he is getting the benefit of a lot of hype from the media as a result of being the No 1 pick darling boy. It'll be interesting to see if voters go for efficiency vs stat accumulating. They certainly voted that way in the Rodgers vs Brees MVP race.
biju
Footballguy
There is a lot of focus in this about the number of completions which I think it off. Maybe I'm the only one, but I'd rather have a QB that is completing 16 of 25 (64%) than a QB that is averaging 23 completions on 40 throws (57%).Yes, those other QBs are being asked to throw more. But your assertion that because they have more completions and therefore are doing a better job is faulty and cherry picking the data. If I changed it to TDs per attempt then all of the others you just stated are doing worse.And by the way, Alex Smith in 9 games in 2005 had 1 TD and 11 INTs with a 55% completion rate. The league might want to pray Wilson continues to get the "Alex Smith treatment" because who knows what kind of yardage and TDs he might rack up with the "Andrew Luck treatment".
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
I agree with you numbers don't tell the whole story. It is easier to be an efficient game managing QB in the NFL then being totally relied on to make everything happen. I did not say just because you have more completions means you are automatically doing a better job. I said it means your team relies on throwing more and in turn more passing yardage than someone with less completions and less attempts.The Colts at this stage are totally reliant on Luck chucking the ball a lot to be successful. Luck obviously needs to work on being more efficient and increasing his compeltion percentage to be truly elite.'biju said:
Most teams in the NFL don't have the luxury of winning by attempting only 25 pass attempts a game. They don't have the running game or defense to support a system like that. Once again you need to be efficient in that type of offense like Wilson and Alex Smith have proven to do and they both have proven that it can be successful.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
He is leading the rookie class in TD passes. Are completions more important than TD passes? More important that QB rating? Your completions argument is possibly the lamest argument I have heard on this forum.
fridayfrenzy
Footballguy
Luck is 3rd in the NFL in interceptions and has more interceptions than TDs.
Bottom 5 in QB rating amongst starting QBs in the NFL.
Bottom 5 in completion % as well.
At least he has more completions.
Bottom 5 in QB rating amongst starting QBs in the NFL.
Bottom 5 in completion % as well.
At least he has more completions.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Neofight
Footballguy
That run EPA has nowhere to go but down, and in a massive way. And as a Matt Ryan owner in fantasy I gotta say... meh.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Did you even take the time to read what all this statistical analysis is from and how they formulate total QBR?
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating
This is what that link says and how they come to their conclusion...
Early in a scoreless game, a quarterback throws a 20-yard pass just by the reaching arms of a defender and into the hands of his intended receiver, who holds on despite the distraction, then scampers the remaining 15 yards for a touchdown.
Another quarterback, down 30-10 with five minutes left in the fourth quarter, throws a 3-yard screen pass to a running back, who maneuvers another 32 yards through prevent defense to pick up a first down deep in opponent territory. Both are called good plays, but labeling them as "good" isn't enough. Each play has a different level of contribution to winning, and each play illustrates a different level of quarterback contribution. What is the quarterback's contribution to winning in each situation? Coaches want to know this; players want to know this; and fans want to know this.
The Total Quarterback Rating is a statistical measure that incorporates the contexts and details of those throws and what they mean for wins. It's built from the team level down to the quarterback, where we understand first what each play means to the team, then give credit to the quarterback for what happened on that play based on what he contributed.
At the team level, identifying what wins games is not revolutionary: scoring points and not allowing points. Back in the 1980s, "The Hidden Game of Football" did some pioneering work on that topic and on how yardage relates to points. We went back and updated what that book did … then we went further. At the individual level, more detailed information about what quarterbacks do is really necessary. Brian Burke at AdvancedNFLStats.com has done very good work in advancing that effort, and FootballOutsiders.com has done some of this by charting data, but, for the past three years, ESPN has charted football games in immense detail. By putting all these ideas together and incorporating division of credit, we have built a metric of quarterback value, the Total Quarterback Rating, Total QBR or QBR for short.
What follows is a summary of what goes into QBR. It took several thousand lines of code to implement, but we'll keep this shorter.
Win Probability and Expected Points
The goal behind any player rating should be determining how much a player contributes to a win. We went back through 10 years of NFL play-by-play data to look at game situation (down, distance, yard line, clock time, timeouts, home field, field surface and score), along with the ultimate outcome of the game, to develop a win probability function.
Total QBR Basics
A quick primer on the fundamentals of Total Quarterback Rating:
Scoring: 0-100, from low to high. An average QB would be at 50.
Win Probability: All QB plays are scored based on how much they contribute to a win. By determining expected point totals for almost any situation, Total QBR is able to apply points to a quarterback based on every type of play he would be involved in.
Dividing Credit: Total QBR factors in such things as overthrows, underthrows, yards after the catch and more to accurately determine how much a QB contributes to each play.
Clutch Index: How critical a certain play is based on when it happens in a game is factored into the score.
This function treats every win the same, regardless of whether it was 45-3 or 24-23, though there is clearly a difference between such games. The first game represents total domination, whereas the other represents two fairly evenly matched teams. Because win probability treats every win the same, it misses some of what goes into the win, specifically many of the points that represent domination or the points that lead up to a last-second victory. So, although QBR uses win probability to assess how "clutch" a situation is, it uses expected points as the basis of evaluating quarterbacks. It has more of the details, and understands the difference between wins, but still strongly relates to wins in general.
The concept of expected points was discussed as early as the mid-1980s with Pete Palmer & Co. and "The Hidden Game of Football," in which they talk about "point potential." Their idea was that, as you move closer to the opponents' end zone, you are actually gaining points. Brian Burke took it further to note that third-and-10 from midfield, for instance, has fewer expected points than first-and-10 from midfield. In other words, down and distance also matter in terms of points. We took this even further to look at clock time, home field, timeouts and field surface to generate the expected points for any team given its situation in a drive. One particular situation to note is that, at the end of the half, a team is less likely to score any points than at most other times of the game, just because the half is going to expire.
It's useful to mention here that expected points are expected net points. It's possible that a team has expected points less than 0. This simply implies that the other team is generally more likely to score. This usually happens when a team is backed up deep in its own side of the field, especially if it is third or fourth down.
What then happens is an evaluation of expected points added. How does a team go from 1.1 expected points to 2.1? However it does it, that is 1.0 expected points to be distributed to the offensive players on the field. But how the team does it is what determines how credit is given to a quarterback.
Dividing Credit
Division of credit is the next step. Dividing credit among teammates is one of the most difficult but important aspects of sports. Teammates rely upon each other and, as the cliché goes, a team might not be the sum of its parts. By dividing credit, we are forcing the parts to sum up to the team, understanding the limitations but knowing that it is the best way statistically for the rating.
On a pass play, for instance, there are a few basic components:
• The pass protection
• The throw
• The catch
• The run after the catch
In the first segment, the blockers and the quarterback have responsibility for keeping the play alive, and the receivers have to get open for a QB to avoid a sack or having to throw the ball away. On the throw itself, a quarterback has to throw an accurate ball to the intended receiver. Certain receivers might run better or worse routes, so the ability of a QB to be on target also relates somewhat to the receivers. For the catch, it might be a very easy one where the QB laid it in right in stride and no defenders were there to distract the receiver. Or it could be that the QB threaded a needle and defenders absolutely hammered the receiver as he caught the ball, making it difficult to hold on. So even the catch is about both the receiver and the QB. Finally, the run after the catch depends on whether a QB hit the receiver in stride beyond the defense and on the ability of a receiver to be elusive. Whatever credit we give to the blockers, receivers and quarterback in these situations is designed to sum to the team expected points added.
The ESPN video tracking has been useful in helping to separate credit in plays like these. We track overthrows, underthrows, dropped passes, defended passes and yards after the catch. The big part was taking this information and analyzing how much of it was related to the QB, the receivers and the blockers. Not surprisingly, pass protection is related mostly to the QB and the offensive line, but yards after the catch is more about what the receiver does. Statistical analysis was able to show this, and we divided credit based on those things.
As a relevant side note, statistical analysis showed that what we call a dropped pass was not all a receiver's fault, either. A receiver might drop a ball because he wanted to run before catching it, because the defense distracted him, because it was a little bit behind him or because he was about to get hit by a defender. If the defender was there a half second before, the defender would have knocked the ball free and it would have been called a "defended pass," not a "dropped pass." There are shades of gray even on a dropped pass, and analysis showed that. Drops are less a QB's fault than defended passes or underthrows, but the QB does share some blame.
On most other plays, quarterbacks receive some portion of credit for the result of the play, including defensive pass interference, intentional grounding, scrambles, sacks, fumbles, fumble recoveries (Carson Palmer once recovered a teammate's fumble that saved the game for the Bengals) and throwaways.
On plays when the QB just hands off to a running back, we didn't assign any credit to the QB. Our NFL experts did suggest that some QBs are very good at interpreting defenses pre-snap and identifying better holes for their backs. However, they also told us it would be nearly impossible to incorporate. Because they suggested this, we built in the ability to give credit for QBs when they just handed off, but we couldn't find the right analysis to do it in 2011.
Clutch Index
The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.
These clutch index values came from an analysis of how different situations affect a game's win probability on average. One way to think of it is in terms of pressure. A clutch play is defined before the play by how close the game appears to be. Down four points with three seconds to go and facing third-and-goal from the 3-yard line -- that is a high-pressure and high-clutch index situation because the play can realistically raise the odds of winning to almost 100 percent or bring them down from about 40 percent to almost zero percent. The same situation from midfield isn't as high pressure because it's very unlikely that the team will pull out the victory. Sure, a Hail Mary can pull the game out, but if it doesn't work, the team didn't fail on that play so much as it failed before then. On third-and-goal from the 3-yard line, failure means people will be talking about that final play and what went wrong.
The clutch indices are multiplied by the quarterback's expected points on plays when the QB had a significant contribution, then divided by the sum of the clutch indices and multiplied by 100 to get a clutch-valued expected points added per 100 plays.
A Rating from 0 to 100
The final step is transforming the clutch-valued expected points rate to a number from 0 to 100. This is just a mathematical formula with no significance other than to make it easier to communicate. A value of 90 and above sounds good whether you're talking about a season, a game or just third-and-long situations; a value of four or 14 doesn't sound very good; a value of 50 is average, and that is what QBR generates for an average performance.
That being said, the top values in a season tend to be about 75 and above, whereas the top values in a game are in the upper 90s. Aaron Rodgers might have gone 31-of-36 for 366 yards, with three passing TDs, another TD running, 19 first-down conversions, and eight conversions on third or fourth down in one game -- for a single-game Total QBR of 97.2 -- but he can't keep that up all year long. Pro Bowl-level performance for a season usually means a QBR of at least 65 or 70. We don't expect to see a season with a QBR in the 90s.
Defensive Adjustment
With this rating, we have intentionally not adjusted for opponents. This doesn't mean that we won't adjust for opponents as we use it but that we want QBR to be flexible for many purposes, and keeping opponents' strength out gives us that flexibility. As it stands, QBR can be broken down for all sorts of situations -- red zone, third-and-long, throwing to a certain receiver, in bad weather, against different defensive formations. We didn't want to muddy it up with opponent adjustments that aren't as useful for those situations. How to implement a defensive adjustment for third-and-long also might be different from one for the whole season. Beyond this, a defensive adjustment is often not a constant factor. A defense that looks good in Week 4 might not be as good after a few more weeks. Because it isn't a constant thing, it makes sense to leave that for analysis rather than constant incorporation into QBR.
There will be analyses that we do on ESPN that will suggest the use of an opponent adjustment, but we will do that when needed, not up front.
Concluding Thoughts
What underlies QBR is an understanding of how football works and a lot of detailed situational data. What it yields are results that should reflect that. It illustrates that converting on third-and-long is important to a quarterback. It shows that a pass that is in the air for 40 yards is more reflective of a quarterback than a pass that is in the air for 5 yards and the receiver has 35 yards of run after the catch. These premises should sound reasonable to football fans. They come out of a lot of statistical analysis, but they are also consistent with what coaches and players understand.
As we neared the end of the development of QBR, we talked to Ron Jaworski and Greg Cosell at NFL Films about its evolution. Cosell said at one point, "Football is not complex, but it is very detailed." I realized then that QBR is like that. It is very detailed, accounting for a lot of different situations, but it is not particularly complex. It really does try to see the game the way we have gotten used to seeing it in its elegant simplicity. We hope you, the fan, appreciate it, as well.
Dean Oliver is one of the pioneers in sports analytics. Author of "Basketball on Paper," the standard for doing analytics in basketball, Oliver applied his work to personnel and coaching matters for five successful years in the front office of the Denver Nuggets. Oliver is the director of analytics for ESPN. He joined the company in 2011 to build the analytics group, which works across a number of sports.
This is what that link says and how they come to their conclusion...
Early in a scoreless game, a quarterback throws a 20-yard pass just by the reaching arms of a defender and into the hands of his intended receiver, who holds on despite the distraction, then scampers the remaining 15 yards for a touchdown.
Another quarterback, down 30-10 with five minutes left in the fourth quarter, throws a 3-yard screen pass to a running back, who maneuvers another 32 yards through prevent defense to pick up a first down deep in opponent territory. Both are called good plays, but labeling them as "good" isn't enough. Each play has a different level of contribution to winning, and each play illustrates a different level of quarterback contribution. What is the quarterback's contribution to winning in each situation? Coaches want to know this; players want to know this; and fans want to know this.
The Total Quarterback Rating is a statistical measure that incorporates the contexts and details of those throws and what they mean for wins. It's built from the team level down to the quarterback, where we understand first what each play means to the team, then give credit to the quarterback for what happened on that play based on what he contributed.
At the team level, identifying what wins games is not revolutionary: scoring points and not allowing points. Back in the 1980s, "The Hidden Game of Football" did some pioneering work on that topic and on how yardage relates to points. We went back and updated what that book did … then we went further. At the individual level, more detailed information about what quarterbacks do is really necessary. Brian Burke at AdvancedNFLStats.com has done very good work in advancing that effort, and FootballOutsiders.com has done some of this by charting data, but, for the past three years, ESPN has charted football games in immense detail. By putting all these ideas together and incorporating division of credit, we have built a metric of quarterback value, the Total Quarterback Rating, Total QBR or QBR for short.
What follows is a summary of what goes into QBR. It took several thousand lines of code to implement, but we'll keep this shorter.
Win Probability and Expected Points
The goal behind any player rating should be determining how much a player contributes to a win. We went back through 10 years of NFL play-by-play data to look at game situation (down, distance, yard line, clock time, timeouts, home field, field surface and score), along with the ultimate outcome of the game, to develop a win probability function.
Total QBR Basics
A quick primer on the fundamentals of Total Quarterback Rating:
Scoring: 0-100, from low to high. An average QB would be at 50.
Win Probability: All QB plays are scored based on how much they contribute to a win. By determining expected point totals for almost any situation, Total QBR is able to apply points to a quarterback based on every type of play he would be involved in.
Dividing Credit: Total QBR factors in such things as overthrows, underthrows, yards after the catch and more to accurately determine how much a QB contributes to each play.
Clutch Index: How critical a certain play is based on when it happens in a game is factored into the score.
This function treats every win the same, regardless of whether it was 45-3 or 24-23, though there is clearly a difference between such games. The first game represents total domination, whereas the other represents two fairly evenly matched teams. Because win probability treats every win the same, it misses some of what goes into the win, specifically many of the points that represent domination or the points that lead up to a last-second victory. So, although QBR uses win probability to assess how "clutch" a situation is, it uses expected points as the basis of evaluating quarterbacks. It has more of the details, and understands the difference between wins, but still strongly relates to wins in general.
The concept of expected points was discussed as early as the mid-1980s with Pete Palmer & Co. and "The Hidden Game of Football," in which they talk about "point potential." Their idea was that, as you move closer to the opponents' end zone, you are actually gaining points. Brian Burke took it further to note that third-and-10 from midfield, for instance, has fewer expected points than first-and-10 from midfield. In other words, down and distance also matter in terms of points. We took this even further to look at clock time, home field, timeouts and field surface to generate the expected points for any team given its situation in a drive. One particular situation to note is that, at the end of the half, a team is less likely to score any points than at most other times of the game, just because the half is going to expire.
It's useful to mention here that expected points are expected net points. It's possible that a team has expected points less than 0. This simply implies that the other team is generally more likely to score. This usually happens when a team is backed up deep in its own side of the field, especially if it is third or fourth down.
What then happens is an evaluation of expected points added. How does a team go from 1.1 expected points to 2.1? However it does it, that is 1.0 expected points to be distributed to the offensive players on the field. But how the team does it is what determines how credit is given to a quarterback.
Dividing Credit
Division of credit is the next step. Dividing credit among teammates is one of the most difficult but important aspects of sports. Teammates rely upon each other and, as the cliché goes, a team might not be the sum of its parts. By dividing credit, we are forcing the parts to sum up to the team, understanding the limitations but knowing that it is the best way statistically for the rating.
On a pass play, for instance, there are a few basic components:
• The pass protection
• The throw
• The catch
• The run after the catch
In the first segment, the blockers and the quarterback have responsibility for keeping the play alive, and the receivers have to get open for a QB to avoid a sack or having to throw the ball away. On the throw itself, a quarterback has to throw an accurate ball to the intended receiver. Certain receivers might run better or worse routes, so the ability of a QB to be on target also relates somewhat to the receivers. For the catch, it might be a very easy one where the QB laid it in right in stride and no defenders were there to distract the receiver. Or it could be that the QB threaded a needle and defenders absolutely hammered the receiver as he caught the ball, making it difficult to hold on. So even the catch is about both the receiver and the QB. Finally, the run after the catch depends on whether a QB hit the receiver in stride beyond the defense and on the ability of a receiver to be elusive. Whatever credit we give to the blockers, receivers and quarterback in these situations is designed to sum to the team expected points added.
The ESPN video tracking has been useful in helping to separate credit in plays like these. We track overthrows, underthrows, dropped passes, defended passes and yards after the catch. The big part was taking this information and analyzing how much of it was related to the QB, the receivers and the blockers. Not surprisingly, pass protection is related mostly to the QB and the offensive line, but yards after the catch is more about what the receiver does. Statistical analysis was able to show this, and we divided credit based on those things.
As a relevant side note, statistical analysis showed that what we call a dropped pass was not all a receiver's fault, either. A receiver might drop a ball because he wanted to run before catching it, because the defense distracted him, because it was a little bit behind him or because he was about to get hit by a defender. If the defender was there a half second before, the defender would have knocked the ball free and it would have been called a "defended pass," not a "dropped pass." There are shades of gray even on a dropped pass, and analysis showed that. Drops are less a QB's fault than defended passes or underthrows, but the QB does share some blame.
On most other plays, quarterbacks receive some portion of credit for the result of the play, including defensive pass interference, intentional grounding, scrambles, sacks, fumbles, fumble recoveries (Carson Palmer once recovered a teammate's fumble that saved the game for the Bengals) and throwaways.
On plays when the QB just hands off to a running back, we didn't assign any credit to the QB. Our NFL experts did suggest that some QBs are very good at interpreting defenses pre-snap and identifying better holes for their backs. However, they also told us it would be nearly impossible to incorporate. Because they suggested this, we built in the ability to give credit for QBs when they just handed off, but we couldn't find the right analysis to do it in 2011.
Clutch Index
The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.
These clutch index values came from an analysis of how different situations affect a game's win probability on average. One way to think of it is in terms of pressure. A clutch play is defined before the play by how close the game appears to be. Down four points with three seconds to go and facing third-and-goal from the 3-yard line -- that is a high-pressure and high-clutch index situation because the play can realistically raise the odds of winning to almost 100 percent or bring them down from about 40 percent to almost zero percent. The same situation from midfield isn't as high pressure because it's very unlikely that the team will pull out the victory. Sure, a Hail Mary can pull the game out, but if it doesn't work, the team didn't fail on that play so much as it failed before then. On third-and-goal from the 3-yard line, failure means people will be talking about that final play and what went wrong.
The clutch indices are multiplied by the quarterback's expected points on plays when the QB had a significant contribution, then divided by the sum of the clutch indices and multiplied by 100 to get a clutch-valued expected points added per 100 plays.
A Rating from 0 to 100
The final step is transforming the clutch-valued expected points rate to a number from 0 to 100. This is just a mathematical formula with no significance other than to make it easier to communicate. A value of 90 and above sounds good whether you're talking about a season, a game or just third-and-long situations; a value of four or 14 doesn't sound very good; a value of 50 is average, and that is what QBR generates for an average performance.
That being said, the top values in a season tend to be about 75 and above, whereas the top values in a game are in the upper 90s. Aaron Rodgers might have gone 31-of-36 for 366 yards, with three passing TDs, another TD running, 19 first-down conversions, and eight conversions on third or fourth down in one game -- for a single-game Total QBR of 97.2 -- but he can't keep that up all year long. Pro Bowl-level performance for a season usually means a QBR of at least 65 or 70. We don't expect to see a season with a QBR in the 90s.
Defensive Adjustment
With this rating, we have intentionally not adjusted for opponents. This doesn't mean that we won't adjust for opponents as we use it but that we want QBR to be flexible for many purposes, and keeping opponents' strength out gives us that flexibility. As it stands, QBR can be broken down for all sorts of situations -- red zone, third-and-long, throwing to a certain receiver, in bad weather, against different defensive formations. We didn't want to muddy it up with opponent adjustments that aren't as useful for those situations. How to implement a defensive adjustment for third-and-long also might be different from one for the whole season. Beyond this, a defensive adjustment is often not a constant factor. A defense that looks good in Week 4 might not be as good after a few more weeks. Because it isn't a constant thing, it makes sense to leave that for analysis rather than constant incorporation into QBR.
There will be analyses that we do on ESPN that will suggest the use of an opponent adjustment, but we will do that when needed, not up front.
Concluding Thoughts
What underlies QBR is an understanding of how football works and a lot of detailed situational data. What it yields are results that should reflect that. It illustrates that converting on third-and-long is important to a quarterback. It shows that a pass that is in the air for 40 yards is more reflective of a quarterback than a pass that is in the air for 5 yards and the receiver has 35 yards of run after the catch. These premises should sound reasonable to football fans. They come out of a lot of statistical analysis, but they are also consistent with what coaches and players understand.
As we neared the end of the development of QBR, we talked to Ron Jaworski and Greg Cosell at NFL Films about its evolution. Cosell said at one point, "Football is not complex, but it is very detailed." I realized then that QBR is like that. It is very detailed, accounting for a lot of different situations, but it is not particularly complex. It really does try to see the game the way we have gotten used to seeing it in its elegant simplicity. We hope you, the fan, appreciate it, as well.
Dean Oliver is one of the pioneers in sports analytics. Author of "Basketball on Paper," the standard for doing analytics in basketball, Oliver applied his work to personnel and coaching matters for five successful years in the front office of the Denver Nuggets. Oliver is the director of analytics for ESPN. He joined the company in 2011 to build the analytics group, which works across a number of sports.
Last edited by a moderator:
Neofight
Footballguy
Yes, when QBR came out I read up on it. More ESPN over-hyped nonsense.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Well that is simple to say but why?
Neofight
Footballguy
For a lot of reasons, but if you care to look there was a discussion of it in this very forum somewhere from over a year ago. There was also some pretty damning stuff written about QBR over at Cold Hard Football Facts and/or Football Outsiders. I recall Farrar (whom I generally find to be spot on) from Shutdown Corner pointing out that QBR does not adjust for opponent. Which is kinda stupid.ETA: his DVOA and DYAR over at FO are both lower than Luck's, but they are much more comparable and better (IMO) measures.ETAII: I just noticed that Jake Locker (Jake freakin' Locker) is number 7 in total QBR. That right there should tell you a lot about this formula. Jake is mid 20's in DYAR (and the last starter with a positive DYAR #).
Last edited by a moderator:
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
You actually belivin in ESPN's trash? LOL.....they are the worst. Much better is Qb Rating....ya know...its been around awhile.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
I posted both.Some people are unable to click on links at work or other places.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Are they the worst because it does not support your argument?Also it is just another statistical analysis to add to the discussion. I did not say it is bullet proof. You are right though. Using just passer rating and seeing that right now Alex Smith is sitting higher than Brady and Brees and Big Ben and Matt Ryan and company is completely flawless.
biju
Footballguy
I'm not totally sold on QBR but I don't think it's the trash that others are calling it. I just don't think it is definitively the best option, just the most advertised (by ESPN) because it's proprietary. I like all of the advanced stats in some form or another and Football Outsiders does a pretty damn good job IMO.
I think the hardest part about defending QBR is the subjective nature of it on its own. If you're telling me that a pass for 20 yards is more important than a 30 yard pass because of the context in which the 20 yards is gained, great. But what led up to it? Was this a number of plays in the setup? Was this called by the OC or did the QB see something particular and audible to it?
In the end all advanced stats fail because it would be impossible to know how much of it is the QB using their football knowledge versus (or perhaps in combination with) their execution. For example, Peyton Manning is 2nd on the list but does anyone doubt that he runs that offense entirely?
Carter, I'm not knocking QBR but I would simply state that this is going to be a futile attempt because of the nature of all advanced stats.
I think the hardest part about defending QBR is the subjective nature of it on its own. If you're telling me that a pass for 20 yards is more important than a 30 yard pass because of the context in which the 20 yards is gained, great. But what led up to it? Was this a number of plays in the setup? Was this called by the OC or did the QB see something particular and audible to it?
In the end all advanced stats fail because it would be impossible to know how much of it is the QB using their football knowledge versus (or perhaps in combination with) their execution. For example, Peyton Manning is 2nd on the list but does anyone doubt that he runs that offense entirely?
Carter, I'm not knocking QBR but I would simply state that this is going to be a futile attempt because of the nature of all advanced stats.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Just another reference as pointed out by Biju but Football outsiders does some good work as well.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
Didn't even check to see what they support. Now that I look at it Luck and Locker in the top of the rankings kind of show you what they are.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
NFL.COM.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
Im not a QBR guy at all...but I found this interesting...."Smith ranks fourth in Total QBR since Week 8 among players with enough plays to qualify for season-to-date rankings. Seattle's Russell Wilson ranks second. Tom Brady is first. St. Louis' Sam Bradford is 15th. Again, that's all since Week 8."'Carter_Can_Fly said:
To me its a worthless statistic made up by ESPN to spew.
DoubleG
Footballguy
I hate driving behind people like you...PICK A ####### LANE!!!
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Agreed to an extent. Unfortunately in sports people always compare athletes to each other. There are awards like All pro, pro bowls, rookie of the year, MVP, etc and as meaningless as they might be they will always be there.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
Quarterbacks with a lower rating than Wilson's 90.5: Philip Rivers, Eli Manning, Jay Cutler, Matthew Stafford, Tony Romo, Cam Newton, Joe Flacco, Sam Bradford. 
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
21 for 27, 228 yards w/ 2 more TDs.
17TDs passing on the year....
He now has a 63.6% completion percentage and a 93.9QB Ratting.
17TDs passing on the year....
He now has a 63.6% completion percentage and a 93.9QB Ratting.
Last edited by a moderator:
DoubleG
Footballguy
I'm glad you are here to bump this thread every Monday. Don't know what we'd do without you. Keep up the fine work. Just curious - if he has a #### game in Week 13 are you still going to post his stats ?? And how will the whole "pat yourself shamelessly on the back" thing work in that post? TIA.21 for 27, 228 yards w/ 2 more TDs.17TDs passing on the year....
packersfan
Footballguy
Damn tempted to drop Locker and pick up Wilson in my Start-2 QB league but as much as I love Russ I'm worried about Week 13 vs. the Bears.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
With the two boneheads cornerbacks facing suspensions, he may have to start airing it out more. Plus the Bears are a limping hospital ward right now.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
When they allow him to throw he is great. I would drop Locker for him in a second, Locker just isn't that good.
packersfan
Footballguy
Wilson is far more talented. No doubt about that. However, I like Locker's schedule and weapons a lot more. That's what has me leaning toward keeping him as of right now.
scrumptrulescent
Footballguy
This kid needs an Adderall. Think anyone on his team could hook him up? 
Hooper31
Footballguy
From Scientist? Fully expect he will keep posting no matter what happens. He's a blind homer and will defend Wilson 100% of the time.However, I see few of Wilson's critics posting in the thread bringing attention to their incorrect predictions. Do you?
