Re: Handicapping - Factors to evaluate Quarterbacks

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, bryan K wrote:

>
> "Philip S. O'Donnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I'd be interested to see if anyone has some ideas about some
> > lesser-known statistics to use to evaluate quarterbacks. Everyone has
> > passing yards and completion rates and the "passer rating", but what
> > about some lesser known/more difficult to obtain stats? (Assume that
> > you can find out anything...)
> >
> > Like:
> > Passes resulting in First Downs (passing efficiency)
> > Passes over 40/30/20 yards (to evaluate big play potential)

   I've never been a fan of getting as deeply into it as specific
situations. For example, people often say 3rd down passes should count for
more, but why is it 3rd down? Maybe because the QB failed to do his job on
1st and 2nd down, in which case he doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a
bonus for making it on 3rd. If the team ran on 1st and 2nd, thus needing
the QB to do it on 3rd, then that would merit something, but you'd really
need to get into evaluating every single play of every game - very tedious
(and still subjective).
   I think there's merit to not counting spikes (since the Passer wasn't
really attempting to actually pass it to someone), but then on the other
hand I'm philosophically opposed to any form of legal intentional
grounding, so they can live with having an incompletion charged against
them. :-)

   I think there's merit to counting what percentage of passes picked up a
first down (being the secondary goal of the offence).


> > Rushing First Downs (scramble ability/decision making)

   Even just rushing, full-stop. As far as decision-making, some kind of
bonus for audibles or similar would be good (e.g. Flutie is making some of
his own calls - I'm not sure who else is. Is anyone able to list the
players who at some time or another are currently making their own calls?
Not counting pre-defined audibles of course).


> > Rushing Touchdowns (same)
> > Fumbles (ball control/protection)

   I definitely think fumbles should be taken into account. Even if a
fumble is recovered, there was still that window of opportunity there for
the defence, which you certainly don't want to give them.


> The problem with quantifying quarterbacks, or any football player, is that
> their play is so reliant on teammates.  You can give me any quarterback stat
> in the book, and I can shoot it down.

   For example, incompletions can be the QB's fault (over-thrown), the
receiver's fault (dropped), but unless you want to spend hours in front of
film, you need to assume it all comes out in the wash (which is why you
use stats instead of sitting down in front of endless hours of film).


> Take completion percentage, for instance.  I think it is a very good stat,
> but there are so many no yard passes thrown in the NFL that the number tends
> to be thrown off a bit by short yardage passers such as Jeff Garcia who
> throw a lot of dump offs to the check-down receiver.  However, I think it is
> important to count those no yard passes in some sort of fashion simply
> because it is a created opportunity by the quarterback.

   I agree completely. Once the pass is completed, it's up to the receiver
to try and do something with it. If it's not completed, then the QB failed
to do his end of the job (unless it was a drop).


> Another great statistic is yards per pass attempt.  This is also important
> becasue it gives a good measure on just how productive a quarterback is.
> However, using Garcia again as an example, he got the benefit of throwing to
> a guy named Owens for his entire 49er career who is arguably the best RAC
> guy in the league.  However, again, the stat cannot be completely forgotten
> because a quarterback can do a lot to help his receivers RAC numbers by
> throwing it to him so he can catch it in stride.

   Agreed again. Again, unless you want to break down every single play...

   My take is that if you made 40 yards on the play, then you made 40
yards on the play. It doesn't matter if it was in the air for 40 yards, or
if it was a 5 yard pass that preceded another 35 by the receiver - in
either case the QB and receiver both did their job, and they both deserve
credit.


> Interceptions thrown are a decent measure of a negative statistic,but they
> are, again, oftentimes caused by a receiver not making a play or a defender
> making an outstanding play.

   Interceptions are vastly under-valued by the NFL's formula (a linear
model is used instead of a hyberbolic). Check out
http://jedi.apana.org.au/~jims_son/PPR/alltime.html to see how good Kurt
Warner REALLY is (hint: not #1, not with all those intercepts). :-)


> Fumbles by the quarterback are oftentimes caused by poor play by the
> offensive line.

   Which gets back to breaking down every single play. I think you'd have
to make the same assumption as with incompletions - sometimes it's the
QB's fault, sometimes it isn't - let's just see what the raw numbers tell
us about the difference between QB's (the OL has 5-7 players - depending
on how many tight ends there are - so there'd arguably be less difference
between them. "law of averages" and all).


> Then, throw in rushing yards and touchdowns.  The problem is that many good
> rushing quarterbacks (Garcia again) are not very good throwers, and I'll
> take a pocket passer like Peyton Manning or Drew Bledsoe who can throw the
> ball on a dime any day over someone who might get one or two first
> downs/touchdowns a game with his feet.

   I agree that passing is the single most important thing that a QB does,
but scrambling ability certainly gives the defence a lot more to worry
about.


> That being said, the quarterback I want on my team is a guy who throws an
> accurate longball, hits receivers in stride, doens't miss opportunities with
> passes behind the line of scrimmage, gets better in clutch situations, and
> can scramble well enough to get tough first downs when necessary.

   I'd modify the latter to "can scramble at least well enough to avoid
the sack" (sacks should be counted against), add doesn't lose the handle,
and can make a good play on a bad snap (if the holder on a FG attempt. I
wonder how well Darren Bennett can throw? :-) ).
   I'd also add - philosophically - can call plays well (harking back to
the days before "coaches" did it).


regards,
   DONALD.

BIG DON's Home-page  - http://jedi.apana.org.au/~jims_son
Pedder Passer Rating - http://jedi.apana.org.au/~jims_son/PPR
AusNFL mailing-list  - http://jedi.apana.org.au/mailman/listinfo/ausnfl

"What I always wanted is to be accepted, not understood" - MAN RAY