oldmanfan

It would depend how big the target is. If you're throwing a football say from 20 yards and your target is a foot wide, you hit it every time you are both accurate and precise. If the target is 5 feet wide and you hit it 10 times but all over the target you're accurate (although not as accurate as the first scenario) but you're not precise. Your last statement is dead on. Your miss it ten times and miss in the exact same spot you're precise but you have terrible accuracy.

I would disagree.

The classic way to explain it is the dartboard. Say you're throwing darts and want to hit the bulls eye. If you don't hit the bulls eye with ten throws but they closely surround the bulls eye, you're accurate. But you're not precise because your throws aren't hitting the same spot consistently. Now let's say your ten darts all hit the exact same spot, but that spot is three inches away from the bulls eye. Now you're very precise, but your accuracy is bad. What the OPs data suggests is that Allen is accurate, but that he could stand to be more precise. Really good QBs are both. They put the ball not only in the receiver's catch radius (accurate) but put in on a specific spot within that catch radius where the receiver can make a play (precision). When one talks about fitting a ball into a tight window, that's a throw that is both accurate AND precise. Allen needs to be more precise so his receivers get the ball in stride and make YAC, as an example.

That is the difference between accuracy and precision. If the throw is within the catch radius it is accurate, but may not be precise. Really good throws are both.

Was that the one year with Kelly?

Jumped a kid after school in third grade that was my sworn enemy. When he fell his glasses flew off and broke, and as he fell he knocked over a girl carrying her flute, and her flute broke. My dad got the call from my enemy's dad right in the middle of dinner, demanding payment for the glasses and the flute (because the girl's dad called my enemy's dad demanding payment). I remember my dad staring at me, the top of his head getting redder by the second, knowing I was a dead man as soon as he hung up. We had spaghetti that night; it took me 20 years to be able to eat spaghetti again.

It will be interesting to see if Foles has the same degree of success when not in Peterson's offense.

Accuracy can only be measured by giving a QB a specific target and asking him to hit the target. If he surrounds the target but doesn't hit it right on the nose he's accurate. He's not terribly precise but he's accurate. Completion percentage as you so rightly point out has considerably more variables associated with it. It would be like comparing accuracy of a rifle shooter firing at a stationary target vs. one that is randomly moved.

Good compariosn

You continue to not understand the definition of accuracy, so it is pointless to continue having a discussion. You are mixing up accuracy with precision.

Why did the two other guys have higher percentages, and one for just one game? Because they are veterans and see the field better and get the ball to guys quicker when they're more open, is the likely explanation. Which has nothing to do with accuracy. Nothing. At all. And I did say that Allen certainly needs to improve. Touch is one of those things he can improve upon. You are the typical guy out there that slavishly latches onto one stat with no comprehension of the variables that can affect such a statistic. You also are the typical one who does not understand the difference between being accurate and precise. When people complain about someone not being accurate, what they are really complaining about is that someone is lacking being precise together with being accurate. I have gone over this several times on the board, but folks like you don't want to become educated on it because it would interfere with your predetermined conclusion.

I recall concern that his ankle/foot was not healing quickly.

If he became available, absolutely. The primary reason they traded him was to move up and get Allen. I don't think any bridges were burned at all.

No I'm not. I have explained this concept more times than I can count. And the OP does a good job of explaining it as well, accounting for things like throw aways, etc. You have no concept what the term accuracy means. And saying I'm reaching proves it. I agree Allen has to improve. But drop the banal accuracy stuff based solely on completion percentage.

I don't know, when do you finally realize completion percentage is not the same as accuracy?

Just chronologic age? Maybe not much. But if you look at your list I think Edmunds took on a position that was fairly new for him, MLB in a 4-3. The others were playing positions they were more used to from college.

Interesting analysis. And the appropriate way to analyze. The only way to measure accuracy is to actually look at throws and determine how close they are to a target. And that's exactly what you have done. I have talked about the dart board analogy in terms of what is accuracy vs. precision, and your study is a good determination of accuracy. Too many folks, including columnists and sites that claim to use advanced stats to measure performance, mistake accuracy and precision, and use measures such as completion percentage incorrectly. What I would say is that Allen needs to improve his precision. Let's take a crossing route as an example. You can be accurate based on your analysis, hit the WR where he can make the catch. But if you throw it a bit behind where he slows down to make the catch then you lose YAC. A precise throw, and also accurate, would put the ball just out in front of the WR so he catches in stride and continues running.The best QBs are highly accurate and highly precise. Thanks for doing your study - it casts much needed light on Allen's performance.

Clay needs to go. Not hating on the guy but his injuries have piled up and he's simply not worth a roster spot especially at the $$ they'd have to shell out. McCoy? Assuming they focus on O line still worth another season; at minimum make him into a third down back.

No more or less than any other team in the NFL. There were nine teams ahead of the Bills pick that round that could have taken him, and any other team in the league could have moved up if they thought Mahomes was all that. This kind of hindsight crap is just that - crap.

The most important thing is to get a guy that is in synch with Daboll and can coach proper technique for what he runs. Not how fast we name a guy.

I have to say I have never found these kind of retrospective analyses worth much. Would they have taken Mahomes then knowing how he played this season? Of course. You can play that game with any pick in the draft for any team in the league. At the time concerns were expressed about Mahomes' footwork, and that he was coining from a program from which no QBs had succeeded in the league, given the one read shotgun offense they ran. These articles to me show the problems inherent in our Internet based communications. Guys have to write stories just to fill a blog or a website, and as such one just writes stuff without a lot of real thought.

I thought EJ might be the guy after than Carolina game his rookie year., but he got worse instead of better. Never did I say he was worth an entire draft.

True. Been a while since we've seen threads about how dumb it was to trade Ragland, hasn't it?

a jrober

And one of the folks on here who makes grand proclamations about how smart he is at assessing QB play, constantly criticizes Allen, etc. etc., when that draft was coming up claimed he'd trade an entire draft for Winston.