QBR Rating

Quick question: what stat is an infallible stat that can be used as a universal indicator of QB performance? Or does one not exist? That's sort of my point, that there is no one stat that can be used to gauge a QB's performance. The evaluation of a QB is an amalgamation of stats and first-hand accounts. I'm simply adding one more stat that can be a piece of the pie. I'm not arguing that Total QB Rating is the sole criteria for the MVP award.

Then again...it actually does perfectly coincide with the MVP winners of the past few years.

In 2011, Rodgers finished with the best Total QB Rating and won the MVP.

In 2010, Brady finished with the best Total QB Rating and won the MVP.

In 2009, Manning finished with the best and won the MVP

In 2008, Manning finished with the best and won the MVP.

So it must be doing something right? :shrug:


Vick has 3 td's and 6 ints and has a higher QBR than Brady.....do I really need to explain this? By the way in 2008 MatT Ryan was second in QBR.....any formula can get the top guy right...You cannot use a formula that has Trent Dilfer saying what is clutch and what is not clutch and what is a game making difference pass and what is not...who gets to make the decision? They showed a graphic that showed that if the QB is sacked less his QBR goes up big time....Manning was never sacked that much...sometimes being sacked is the Olines fault sometimes its the Qb's fault,,,but in this formula its always the QB's fault...If Brady dives for one yard 2 times for a td, he is rewarded more than if he threw a 10 yard pass for a td....sorry man, its flawed badly...
 
Vick has 3 td's and 6 ints and has a higher QBR than Brady.....do I really need to explain this? By the way in 2008 MatT Ryan was second in QBR.....any formula can get the top guy right...You cannot use a formula that has Trent Dilfer saying what is clutch and what is not clutch and what is a game making difference pass and what is not...who gets to make the decision? They showed a graphic that showed that if the QB is sacked less his QBR goes up big time....Manning was never sacked that much...sometimes being sacked is the Olines fault sometimes its the Qb's fault,,,but in this formula its always the QB's fault...If Brady dives for one yard 2 times for a td, he is rewarded more than if he threw a 10 yard pass for a td....sorry man, its flawed badly...

I've stated repeatedly that the stat is flawed. Like every statistic.

Unless you can point out to me a stat that is infallible. Until then, your objections to this stat work with every stat you could possibly come up with.
 
I've stated repeatedly that the stat is flawed. Like every statistic.

Unless you can point out to me a stat that is infallible. Until then, your objections to this stat work with every stat you could possibly come up with.

i can look at yards, completion pct, td's ints, ypa, and get a pretty good read on how well the QB is playing which is what makes up the Qb rating formula.....but all of those things do not really count with QBR because you can be god awful throw twice as many ints as td's and be better than a guy hitting 67% of his passes with 3 times as many td's as ints....
 
I was looking through some QBR stuff....want to know the QB's who have had the 3 best games in the past 3 years since QBR came out? Ok so these 3 Qb's had better games according to this than any other QB....the 6 td Brady game, the near perfect Rodgers games.....no no no

Charlie Batch
Carson Palmer
Mike Vick

there you go....
 
i can look at yards, completion pct, td's ints, ypa, and get a pretty good read on how well the QB is playing which is what makes up the Qb rating formula.....but all of those things do not really count with QBR because you can be god awful throw twice as many ints as td's and be better than a guy hitting 67% of his passes with 3 times as many td's as ints....

I'll point out the flaws of QB rating again:

The official formula for passer rating is actually less complicated than its reputation. It takes completions, passing yards, touchdown passes and interceptions, all on a per-attempt basis, compares each to a league-average figure, and mashes them into one number. But passer rating doesn't attempt to weight its categories by their importance to winning football games. It just averages them together, which tends to bias scores heavily in favor of QBs who complete a lot of short passes, driving up completion percentage without necessarily generating more yards or points. It's even possible, absurdly enough, to improve your rating by throwing passes for negative yards.

Another issue: the league averages that passer rating uses to grade QBs come from the Paleozoic 1970s, when a special NFL committee put the stat together, and when football's rules and strategies were both far less friendly to passers than today. How much has the game changed since then? Well, in 1973, the year passer rating became an official stat, Roman Gabriel, then with the Eagles, led the league with 3,219 passing yards, a total that would have ranked 18th in the NFL last year. A QB's passer rating is partly, often largely, a product of the time in which he played, rendering era-to-era comparisons nearly useless.

Let's look at what's left out of the official passer rating formula. Michael Vick led the NFL with 6.8 yards per rushing attempt last season, but the system the league uses to rate QBs gives him no credit for the 676 yards or nine TDs his legs generated. Conversely, Jay Cutler lost 352 yards on sacks, but Osi Umenyiora could still be planting Cutler near Jimmy Hoffa and passer rating wouldn't notice. It counts the four categories it cares about, and only those four. Just as important, passer rating doesn't consider how or when a QB racks up passing yards, TDs or INTs. Throw for 300 yards and a couple of scores as you're trying to avoid getting shut out in a hopeless loss, and you'll inflate your rating; heave a Hail Mary jump-ball INT as the clock runs out in the first half, and you'll drag your rating down.

I'd call that a fairly flawed statistic, too. :shrug:
 
I'm going ot be honest here and say I do not understand this QBR thing in the slightest............
 
43-60 71% 508 yards 4 td's 1 int 81.9

51-77 66.2% 552 yards 3 td's 1 int 76.7

43-76 56.6% 533 yards 3 td's 3 ints 48.3

43-63 68% 494 yards 3 td's 3 ints 48.0

52-88 59% 688 yards 3td's 6 ints 58.0

I have them listed in the order I think they should go, but since the two in the 48 range were nearly identical, I assumed that the 6int ranking was higher due to the yardage.
I would think the one with 6 interceptions would be the worst one (although there's not much difference between 48.0 & 48.3).

52-88 59% 688 yards 3tds 6 ints - 48.0


The next two I'd expect to are be the 3 interception ones. I am surprised that there would be so much difference, which would make me think other important stats that factor in, aren't listed here.

43-63 68% 494 yards 3 tds 3 ints - 48.3

43-76 56.6% 533 yards 3 tds 3 ints - 58.0


I'd expect the 1 interception games to be the best ones. To be honest, I'd expect both of these to be a bit higher.

43-60 71% 508 yards 4 tds 1 int - 76.7

51-77 66.2% 552 yards 3 tds 1 int - 81.9
 
I would think the one with 6 interceptions would be the worst one (although there's not much difference between 48.0 & 48.3).

52-88 59% 688 yards 3tds 6 ints - 48.0


The next two I'd expect to are be the 3 interception ones. I am surprised that there would be so much difference, which would make me think other important stats that factor in, aren't listed here.

43-63 68% 494 yards 3 tds 3 ints - 48.3

43-76 56.6% 533 yards 3 tds 3 ints - 58.0


I'd expect the 1 interception games to be the best ones. To be honest, I'd expect both of these to be a bit higher.

43-60 71% 508 yards 4 tds 1 int - 76.7

51-77 66.2% 552 yards 3 tds 1 int - 81.9



Yeah.....yeah you would....If you get a chance go look at the answer that I showed on one of the posts, its kinda shocking.
 
I'll point out the flaws of QB rating again:





I'd call that a fairly flawed statistic, too. :shrug:

As you can see. I offered people to pick where they thought the Qb went, and everyone is wrong when they do it, because it makes zero sense....Unless you are telling me that Charlie Batch has had the single greatest game in the last 3 years. Who's opinion is it that its hopeless loss? Who's opinion is it that one pass rusher is better than another? As I said, you are letting trent dilfer tell you who he likes the best. Sorry, I have eyes. If you can tell me how Peyton can throw 3 ints and basically dump the ball off the rest of the game and have a higher QBR than Aaron Rodgers, then by all means.
 
This ones even better.....Ok in week one, they gave Brady a 90.4 QBR in the second week they gave his game a 30.6 his total for the year? 48!!!

In week one they gave Peyton a 94 QBR, in his second week they gave him a 21.3....total for the year....76????? LMAO...WHAT!!!

So in wek one peyton beat Brady by 4 points, in week two brady beat manning by 9 points, yet in total manning is 30 points higher....WTF?!!?
 
As you can see. I offered people to pick where they thought the Qb went, and everyone is wrong when they do it, because it makes zero sense....Unless you are telling me that Charlie Batch has had the single greatest game in the last 3 years. Who's opinion is it that its hopeless loss? Who's opinion is it that one pass rusher is better than another? As I said, you are letting trent dilfer tell you who he likes the best. Sorry, I have eyes. If you can tell me how Peyton can throw 3 ints and basically dump the ball off the rest of the game and have a higher QBR than Aaron Rodgers, then by all means.

And according to passer rating, here's our top 11:

1. Matt Ryan
2. Alex Smith
3. Sam Bradford
4. Robert Griffin III
5. Philip Rivers
6. Christian Ponder
7. Cam Newton
8. Ben Roethlisberger
9. Tony Romo
10. Kelvin Kolb
11. Mark Sanchez

Is Brady worse than all of them? Including Sanchez and Kolb?

Point is:

Every.
Stat.
Is.
Flawed.

And you can make laughable conclusions about any stat's flaw. Just like I just did with Sanchez/Kolb being better than Brady. That's clearly not the case, and yet that's what the stat you're trumpeting is stating.
 
And according to passer rating, here's our top 11:

1. Matt Ryan
2. Alex Smith
3. Sam Bradford
4. Robert Griffin III
5. Philip Rivers
6. Christian Ponder
7. Cam Newton
8. Ben Roethlisberger
9. Tony Romo
10. Kelvin Kolb
11. Mark Sanchez

Is Brady worse than all of them? Including Sanchez and Kolb?

Point is:

Every.
Stat.
Is.
Flawed.

And you can make laughable conclusions about any stat's flaw. Just like I just did with Sanchez/Kolb being better than Brady. That's clearly not the case, and yet that's what the stat you're trumpeting is stating.




No man, you are not getting it....I dont care where someone is ranked....You have two QB's QB A gets a 90.4 in week one, and a 30.6 in week 2...his total is 48.....QB B gets a 94 in week one and a 21 in week two, his total is 77??? That makes zero sense....none, thats not flawed that is laughable....Qb rating is flawed but at least its based on something real, not made up....QBR is based on something made up....Hell I could design a formula based on things made up too.....well I will just give Brady more points for his int last week because it was tipped and had it not been tipped, I will just say it would have been caught and went for a td....see you can't do that stupid crap and thats what they are doing.
 
Just for you midgar...

Andrew Luck is officially listed as the #4 ranked quarterback in ESPN’s QBR Rankings after five weeks. Alex Smith actually ranks first after his dismantling of the Bills, ahead of Peyton Manning and Matt Ryan. I thought it would be interesting, though, to see what happens when we take the weekly game QBR numbers and adjust them for opponent. After all, lighting up the Bills isn’t exactly note-worthy this year. Mark Sanchez also posted a near perfect rating in the QBR in week one, along with Tom Brady two weeks ago.So, I compared the weekly game scores of each quarterback, to the average of the other quarterbacks who played the same defensive opponent. Obviously, some injuries have changed some defenses from week one to week five, but this is still better than ignoring it altogether.
Quarterbacks are then ranked by how much above or below average they are compared to other quarterbacks with the same schedule. (I’ll note that my “QBR” rankings do not match up with ESPN’s. Mine are just the average of the weekly QBR scores for each player, there may be weighting issues changing the numbers slightly). QBR represents the individual’s average weekly QBR score. “OPP QBR” is the average weekly score of the other QB’s who played the same opponents, and Adjusted QBR is a +/- representing how much above or below average the QB is compared to others playing the same teams.


Screen-Shot-2012-10-11-at-12.24.55-PM.png


There is Andrew Luck sitting at the top, and just below him is Eli Manning, who was down at 8th in the raw rankings. What does this mean? Both have played tougher passing schedules than peers listed ahead of them. Andrew Luck, in fact, has had either the best or second best performance against each defense he has faced this year.
Schedule matters. Aaron Rodgers and Tony Romo are struggling, right? Well, part of that, a big part of it, is who they have played. They check in with the two hardest passing schedules so far, and other quarterbacks have struggled more than them. Rodgers, in fact, jumps up from 17th in the rankings, to 7th on this list, just behind Alex Smith, once we account for opponent strength. That’s not going to get any better this week, as Rodgers goes against Houston. If he can put up, by raw numbers, just a slightly below average game against the Texans, he’ll jump even higher. That’s how dominant Houston has been against everyone not named Peyton Manning.
Romo, meanwhile, moves to a slightly above average quarterback once we account for playing the likes of Seattle and Chicago in half his games.
The flip side is Philip Rivers. He and Rodgers appear next to each other in the unadjusted rankings, but once we account for their schedules, it’s not even close. The Chargers have faced the easiest passing schedule in the league. The San Diego performance on offense doesn’t look nearly as good once you realize that.

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php...-by-espns-qbr-once-you-account-for-opponents/

But hey, Brady is ranked ahead of Manning and that's all that really counts, right? ;)
 
Just for you midgar...



http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php...-by-espns-qbr-once-you-account-for-opponents/

But hey, Brady is ranked ahead of Manning and that's all that really counts, right? ;)

I do not really care what that silly stat says where Dilfer tells us what he thinks is clutch and not clutch and what he thinks is a needed throw and a throw that is not needed. The fact it has Luck who is completing less than 60% of his passes as the best QB in the the league says all I need to know about if that stat is legit or not.
 
I do not really care what that silly stat says where Dilfer tells us what he thinks is clutch and not clutch and what he thinks is a needed throw and a throw that is not needed. The fact it has Luck who is completing less than 60% of his passes as the best QB in the the league says all I need to know about if that stat is legit or not.

Here's your breakdown on his incompletions from somebody that re-watched all of them:

While Andrew Luck has drawn rave reviews for his play early in his rookie year, some key statistical indicators show that he's struggled.
In particular, Luck has a low completion percentage. Among qualified quarterbacks, Luck is 32nd in completion percentage, hitting just 54.2 percent of his passes (96/177).
Given that accuracy has never been listed as a problem area for the rookie, why would Luck excel in so many statistical categories while hitting such a low percentage of his total passes?
Is he inaccurate with his throws or is there something else at work?
A look at the tape should help.
After examining all 81 incomplete passes for Luck on the year, the following conclusions can be drawn.

Indianapolis Receivers Are Failing to Get Open
Luck threw 31 of his 81 incomplete passes to receivers that can only be classified as "covered."
Against the Bears and Vikings, Luck did miss some opportunities to check off to wide open men, but too often, his only option was throwing to a blanketed receiver.
Luck has thrown to Reggie Wayne 60 times, and he could be classified as well-covered on 10 of those passes.


Compare that to Donnie Avery, who has been targeted just 35 times, but was well covered on nine of those routes.
T.Y. Hilton has just 18 targets on the year, but Luck threw to him when covered six times.
Indianapolis needs Hilton and Avery to get open, or the offense will suffer.

Luck's Luck has Been Bad
There are a few throws holding down Luck's completion percentage that are just the breaks of the game.
He's had six passes dropped, two Hail Mary throws, four spikes and one throw to Wayne which can only be classified as a blown pass-interference call (in the end zone against Green Bay).


That's 13 throws that don't tell us much about how Luck has played, but they total seven percent of his total passes. With this small a sample size, a few throws that are functionally insignificant can radically alter perception of a stat line.

Pressure Is a Problem
Luck has thrown the ball away eight times when under a heavy rush and had another three passes batted down.
The Indianapolis line has not protected well this season, and that leads to many of the hurried and off-target throws Luck has made.
The Colts aren't giving Luck many short routes to work with, and he's often under duress as he looks downfield.
Better protection would likely cause Luck's completion percentage to rise five to 10 points.
Coby Fleener has seen his catch rate suffer because of this. He's been the victim of three "pressure throws" and a batted ball. He's had two drops, but also seen Luck target him with bad throws four times.

He's Not Perfect
More than a quarter of Luck's incomplete passes are just inaccurate throws. He's flat missed 22 times. Of those passes, 13 have been off target, while three were underthrows and six were overthrows.


While Luck has hit a few bombs already, his timing with Avery is off. He's overthrown Avery four times and underthrown him three times.
Some of that may be do to the fact that Avery was hurt through much of training camp, and they are still building rapport.
Avery has clearly struggled to get open, but even when he has, Luck hasn't hit him.

Luck has visibly improved from Week 1 to Week 5. He's doing a better job identifying open men and is more confident in his reads.
Given how deep most of the routes are for the Colts and how unstable the offensive line is, Luck's low completion percentage shouldn't be a concern at this stage of his career.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-is-andrew-lucks-completion-percentage-so-low

Completion percentage does not adjust for different factors and regular QB Rating is an antiquated stat.
 
Here's your breakdown on his incompletions from somebody that re-watched all of them:



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-is-andrew-lucks-completion-percentage-so-low

Completion percentage does not adjust for different factors and regular QB Rating is an antiquated stat.

So someone's opinion is that colt receivers are not getting open? Ok thanks. This reminds me of all those years when Brady was beating Peyton is games and people came behind to tell us all of the reasons why Peyton was not winning...his oline, his defense, his receivers, the weather, the stadium was too loud it was too quiet, they were wearing white jerseys, etc etc etc...You win, you dont win, the rest are excuses. You do well, you dont do well, the rest are excuses...how do I know if receivers are getting open in indy? Cause Dilfer said so? I remember the year that Eli had 25 ints, and they did an entire story on ESPN detailing on why none of the ints were his fault....why do I never see this for Brady? I never see a detail of all his ints broken down to see if the receiver ran the wrong route, or the ball was tipped or the wind caught it....nope, its just an int.
 
So someone's opinion is that colt receivers are not getting open? Ok thanks. This reminds me of all those years when Brady was beating Peyton is games and people came behind to tell us all of the reasons why Peyton was not winning...his oline, his defense, his receivers, the weather, the stadium was too loud it was too quiet, they were wearing white jerseys, etc etc etc...You win, you dont win, the rest are excuses. You do well, you dont do well, the rest are excuses...how do I know if receivers are getting open in indy? Cause Dilfer said so?

That's not Dilfer.

And you're trying to tell me you never make excuses for Brady?
 
Back
Top