oldmanfan

Good article. I would agree with the author that Allen’s improvement needs to be on the mental and not physical side. Reading defenses is the key for him as far as continued development. As for his rookie season, I believe Beane has publicly stated they made a mistake not bringing in a vet like Anderson after they traded McCarron. Peterman beat out McCarron; one of the great mysteries of the Beane/ McD regime is how Peterman could look so good in preseason and then so terrible in real games and why they kept faith in him for so long..

First drop the apologies horsecrap. Second, I think the above description fit his first year better but he improved in all these areas his second year.

We’ll see

He makes more money doing what he’s doing vs. being on a staff.

I really don’t care what a Chiefs fan has to say, but my comment was directed towards those who obsess over the 60% completion number. It is statistically meaningless vs. 58.8%. And the entire offense needs to continue improving. Everyone gets that.

What terrible news. Prayers for Mr. White; must be unbearable at this point.

Who is saying it's a sure thing? What people are saying is the kid is improving and we'll see how he continues to develop. It is not the folks who are more on the pro side that are having any trouble with that, it is those like you that think you know exactly what he is and what he'll become that have the problem. Of course by your standard we can only hope he'll be Jameis Winston.

I think Gore is borderline. I would have to see who else he was up against in a given year before I'd put him in. You have to give him credit for longevity an the total production he's had. I suspect I would not vote him in on say first or second ballet. I fully get where you're coming from on coaches. I just think sustained excellence in the form of championships should be used as the measure of a great coach. You mention Billick, and that would be laughable of course. One SB doesn't make a great coach. Too bad we're not electors; it would liven up the debate in the voting room.

We agree to disagree then. Reid has not won a championship. A very good offensive mind, but if he doesn't ever win one then he is on a long list of very good coordinators that didn't really make it as a HC. Same with Marv; he didn't win a championship and I would argue that for the first and last of the 4 we lost because we got completely outcoached in each game. Great guy, love what Marv did, but not HOF caliber. I readily admit my standards for the Hall are high. For coaches you have to be a winner. Neither of these guys have been. If Reid wins one or two my opinion would likely change. Same thing with players. To me they have to be truly great at their position.. I think the guys from the Bills that are in belong there. And I would put Tasker in; he redefined how special teams are played and that deserves credit. But he won't as we all know.

A work in progress. Has a long way to go. To put it in perspective, as much as we all love Marv I don't think he should be in the Hall. Not even close in my opinion.

I don't get why people have to use childish terms like homers. I'm sorry I'm a fan of the Buffalo Bills and root for their QB. Which team are you a fan of?

An OK coach. Good offensive mind but tends to outguess himself in playoff situations, make mistakes with clock management, and such. In the Hall of Good to Very Good.

Good

Again I am not the one obsessing over a 60% completion rate. That’s you and others. I know exactly what you and others would say if he hit those 4 passes and had a 60% rate. You'd say it needs to be at least 62%. In fact someone did just that a few weeks ago. If he threw for 65% you’d say it has to be 70%. If he threw for 100% you’d pivot to some other stat to whine about. Or say he needs to be 110%; given the math and stats skills I’ve see in some that would not surprise me in the least. Same with the 300 yard stuff that gets brought up time and time again. We all know what will happen when he hits that mark. The whiners will either say it didn’t matter because they lost (even though it had been mentioned time and again that 300 yards doesn’t match wins), or that one game is a fluke or that the D they played was poor and so on. We all saw Allen improve this past season over his rookie year. Denying that would be ridiculous. We all know he still has a lot of improvement to make. Denying that would be ridiculous. And we all know there are some here that either believe a QB should be a completely finished product day 1, or that make judgments on players predraft and then desperately try to run a player down to justify their opinion. Denying that would also be ridiculous.

I agree he had a problem with the deep ball this year. Something he definitely needs to work on. And one play can in fact make a difference in a game. But not in statistical analysis, especially when trying to parse a 1.2% difference. A single play is a single play and you can’t prove anything statistically with an N=1 sample size. Tell the people that obsess over a 60% completion rate.

To quote a famous poster around here, you’re an idiot. Again for I think the fifth time now, Allen had a 58.8% completion rate. The difference between that and 60% given the number of passes he threw? Four. Four out over over 400. I showed you the power analysis; you’d have to have over 35000 throws to make that meaningful. Those four throws could have been 4 bad throws, 4 dropped balls, 4 throwaways, 4 gusts of wind. Whatever. It is time to drop this obsession over a 60% completion rate when it is no different than 58.8%. But you either aren’t smart enough to understand that or simply refuse to recognize simple math because it violates your bias against the kid.

I'm not rejecting it, I'm saying without my knowing what the variables are and how they are weighted it's difficult for me to determine the validity of this particular measure. And it would appear I'm not alone from the article you posted. I review a lot of medical and scientific manuscripts submitted for publication and the primary reason they get rejected is because of improper study design and statistics. This thread is about completion percentage, and just in that alone there are a number of variables to consider. Is QB one of them? Absolutely. I have said more times than I can count since the end of the season that Allen needs to continue improving. I think there are two primary things that affect his completion rate. One is that he does not read defenses all that well yet, and as a result sometimes he throws too quickly off a bad platform or sometimes he doesn't make the correct read and take an easier throw over a harder one. That's on him. The second is on his WRs/TEs making catches and on the OC setting up plays where he has receivers open. Those can each be improved on as well. What I do know is that the continual moaning about a 60% pass completion rate being all on Allen, or in some way a testimony to inaccuracy is wrong. Accuracy does not equal completion percentage. I showed the math above where the difference between 58.8% and 60% completion rate is 4 passes over his past season. I just did a quick power analysis to see what the sample size would be to say that 58.8% is truly different than 60%, and you'd need over 35,000 passes to make that meaningful. Again Allen needs to continue improvement. But there's a lot of different things that go into that, some under his control and some not. I just think people need to quit attaching themselves to one number like a 60% completion rate or a 300 yard passing game (when it has been show repeatedly here that 300 yard passers have an equal chance of winning or losing games) as if it definitively means anything. it doesn't. it's a lot more complex.

A quick read of the link you sent indicates there are flaws in the proprietary QBR rating ESPN uses, including the fact that no one really know what they put into their formula. So you're proving my point. Moreover, the thread is discussing completion percentage, not QBR, and as I have pointed out several times now the criticism of Allen that he doesn't have a 60% completion rate comes down to 4 passes over the past season. Statistically invalid and could have been caused by bad throws, drops, whatever. Allen needs to continue to improve. I have said that repeatedly. But this obsession over completion percentage, especially as some sign of accuracy as so many want to do despite it having been debunked repeatedly, is to the point of absurdity.

Really? Which ones, how are they weighted, and so on?

Good points. Statisticians use a term called multivariate analysis, in which multiple variables have to be accounted for in order to arrive at a statistically valid conclusion. Football is inherently multi variant. The ability of the QB, pass protection, quality of receivers, quality of opposing defense, availability of a running game to complement the offense, weather. All are examples of independent variables that can alter the value of a single parameter. Such as completion percentage.

I see your point. He needs to get rid of clunkers like most young QBs do. I just think it comes down to him getting more experience. The game slowed down more for him this past season, it should slow down more next season. He should make quicker decisions with the ball, check down more when needed, etc.

And?? Yes, 0.25 throws a game mean nothing. And has been shown repeatedly 300 yard passing games don’t predict wins. Allen just finished his second year. He did appreciably better year 2 than year1. He needs to continue improving. I and most others say that repeatedly. So stop with the contrarian nonsense . He needs to continue improving on presnap reads, processing things quicker, etc. More experience should help.

All this angst over 0.25 throws a game. But we know what will happen here. As soon as he has a 60% completion rate the nay sayers will say that’s not good enough and the real landmark is 62%.

That’s different than using the mythical 60% to define accuracy.

But you have no idea what he’ll become after only two years in the league. Look at Brees as a classic example of a guy who improved. Or many others.