VW82

This is further proof that Josh hasn’t been as accurate as some of you think he’s been. We can all agree the number seems low right? That’s because there have been way more than 13 times this year where the ball touched a receivers hands but still fell incomplete. An objective party looked at all the passes and deemed a huge chunk we’re at least partly on the QB, which is what many of us have been saying. Yes our receivers should have come up with more catches. No these catchable imcompletes are not all their fault. That doesn’t mean Allen sucks or he can’t improve or we’re all biased against. It’s just further evidence that he hasn’t been as consistently accurate as some of you are saying.

Nice to get confirmation from the All 22. He played much better than his numbers suggested. It was really just the two dropped INTs (end of 1st q along sideline and mid 4th on the scramble right) and the overthrow deep to Zay when he was doubled covered in the 3rd. Outside of that he was really excellent. Sure felt like we couldn't get open for him.

Nice bump.

I feel like we have a better idea of the type of receivers we need to pair with Allen. More speed and ability to separate, the better. Also, they need to have decent hands given the velocity on some of these balls though perhaps that goes without saying. I don't think it's as important that we find a long, big bodied receiver to fight for balls. We need guys who get open. Foster and Mckenzie are the C+ versions of that. It's going to take time to put the WR corp together. Draft and FA don't look that promising this year, and I'd be hesitant to reach on a guy.

Based on the way you've interpreted my posts, and the frequent and blatant misrepresentations of not only the work accumulated but also the general conclusions in them, I'd be terrified to have you review my paper. Hopefully your reading comprehension is better IRL. I was completely up front with you about limitations to doing what I was doing, going through the throws individually and without proper comparison. The picture I posted illustrating accuracy and precision, which you claim you also posted, is something that I think a child could comprehend, and so even if there might have been confusion before (on your part) there shouldn't be any now. For you to continually go back there honestly makes me think you're actually just trolling to be a jerk, and so at this point, and with all due respect. I'm going to ask you to stop. I'm sorry I referenced you in the other post. I won't do that again.

My apologies. You alluded to poor word choice which is what so many inaccuracy deniers (hah) seem to be doing, with many going so far as to outright say the rest of us don't know what the word means (see multiple examples in the this thread and others). By itself, raw completion percentage is a shaky argument. Looking at it and adjcomp%, and listening to experts talk about his accuracy, and watching the games...that's an educated opinion. I respect your opinion to disagree based on your own evidence. I would tend to think you're probably in the minority though obv that doesn't mean you're incorrect...but I think you are

Wrong. I said he had much better accuracy against the Lions both in that thread (only 3 bad throws out of 26) and in this thread. You've gone from claiming that I just don't understand the definition to literally putting words in my mouth. If you're going to comment, at least read the post. Don't make sh!t up! Allen had some accuracy problems in the Jets game, and in several others this year. When you add it all up, I think he's been inaccurate compared to his peers. I'm fine with you disagreeing with that - I don't get what you're watching, but who cares. We're all Bills fans, right? Everyone's entitled to their opinion. This weird and ineffective attacking of other posters, telling them they're not seeing what they claim to see because they're too dumb to understand, and then completely misrepresenting their posts nonsense is getting tiresome.

Having watched that throw 20+ times now, I disagree. Perhaps he did expect Zay to sit on the route but Josh still threw behind him even accounting for that. But even if you give him the benefit of the doubt on that one, there are so many to choose from on the year. I think any time the crux of your argument is you're smart and everyone else is stupid you're on shaky ground. For the record, I know what accuracy means, and I have a feeling Trent Dilfer knows better than most what accuracy means, and so when he says Josh has some issues to work out with his accuracy and his mechanics (on Russillo's podcast), I believe him, especially because it matches what I'm seeing as well (and again, what the adjcomp% numbers at least hint at). Oldmanfan is also making this claim (essentially that the rest of us are dumb and don't understand accuracy vs. precision), and so because a picture is worth a 1000 words here it is. Can we all agree that maybe the rest of us aren't saying he's inaccurate because we just don't understand the definition? I would categorize Allen on the year as low accuracy, low precision, but trending in the right direction on both.

All good points. Here's my counter: Allen was probably an above average passer in terms of accuracy in the Lions game, despite his poor completion percentage. He was below average in the Jets game. If you go back to the start of the season and add up all the throws where he made the right decision and just missed the mark, it's going to be a high number compared to the rest of the NFL. So it is partly about decision making, but it's also about sometimes he just isn't accurate. Like the Ivory throw or the Thompson short crossing route against the Jets. Sometimes he just misses. Do I have the one perfect piece of evidence to prove my point and end this debate? No. But when you consider where Allen ranks as a passer in completion percentage (or adjcomp%) and by the eye test he has a bad habit of missing easy throws (though he seems to be trending the right way), and you have numerous scouts, former QBs like Dilfer, etc., that have worked out with him or studied him and have no reason to be biased other than in his favour tht have gone on record saying accuracy is sometimes a bugaboo...at some point the preponderance of evidence is overwhelming, and you conclude it's probably more likely than not that he struggles with accuracy in addition to whatever other problems (Oline, bad wr group, play calling, decision making, etc.) are contributing factors.

If Foster is basically a number one and Zay and Mckenzie are developing nicely and have roster spots all locked up next year, then why is Allen taking so long back there to find guys, complete so few passes, and only score 14 points? We can't have it both ways so which is it?

No one's saying it's a perfect measure of accuracy. It's still valuable along with Yards, YPA, QB rating, and a bunch of other statistical measurements so we can get a more complete statistical profile of the player for the purposes of comparison. By adjusting for things like drops and throwaways we get even better representations. Either way, he's grading out poorly against his peers. You can question the rubric all you want, but it's the best one we've got. I'm not even saying he's bad. He was bad. These last four weeks he's been everything from amazing to underwhelming to exciting and everything in between, and the stats back that up.

It would really help if all that happened. Again, he's super talented and he needs help. But to this point of the season, and even if we just isolate these last four games, Allen is still near the bottom of the NFL in whatever version of adjusted completion percentage you want to use. Even accounting for the drops, and the throwaways, and the fact he throws downfield more often. He's still much less accurate than most everyone else, at least statistically. It's a fact.

Interesting observation. I would counter that most former QBs tend to treat up and coming QBs with kid gloves the same way former coaches tend to do with current coaches. Instead of Allen critics and Allen supporters, why can't it just be about discussing his play? If you're not able or willing to entertain passing stats as a way to understand and compare QB play that probably says more about you and your ignorance to numbers than it does anything else. There's a reason we've evolved beyond using only the eye test as a form of measurement and analysis. As far as I've heard/read, everyone and every measurement we have all say the same thing: talented but inaccurate.

Think we need to get some real talent in the building before we claim any of these guys to be mainstays. It might take time, and I'm fine with any of these three as long as they perform. We need guys who will get open and make tough catches. Josh doesn't always put it on target. I hope we bring in a bunch of guys in the off season and let them battle it out. The ones with the best chemistry with Josh get to stay. 2020 is when we'll make a big time wr acquisition. Keep in mind we also need to spend resources on the lines, particularly the Oline. TE could use an upgrade as well.

If this thread is correct, then Allen looks like he's going to be better than Rosen. So far the draft order has played out exactly as predicted in terms of performance, though Allen could catch Darnold and Baker if he continues to keep his accuracy under control and he keeps making plays with his legs. He's the most dynamic player. I think the better question is should we have kept all of our draft picks and just taken Lamar Jackson with either ours or the Chiefs FRP? Now that's a fascinating what if.

I think in any kind of analysis you need quantitative and qualitative measurement, and that doesn't mean just one stat plus one non-numerical observation. I think the statistical measurement is worth more than 1/3. Statistical case: Total QBR of 19.6 (27th), Traditional QB rating of 89.3 (16th), Observations: 1. Despite having lots of time it sure looked like guys were struggling to get open. 2. Allen had a number of throwaways and a couple drops that killed drives. 3. Lions did a good job taking away his runs. 4. we had a lot of injuries to key personnel on offense throughout the game. 5. we only scored 14 points at home. Conclusion: Allen was maybe a little better than his stats suggest, and good enough to win, but when you look at all the available evidence he wasn't incredible or anything. We only scored 14 points!

That he's anywhere near as good as Mahomes right now like alphadawg was suggesting. I just meant he forgot to include those (legit) excuses in his assessment.

Things you learn at TBD: Allen is basically just as good as Mahomes. Oh and you forgot Mahomes has a great Oline and one of the best offensive football coaches of the last 20 years. Respectfully, I'm going to disagree.

Fair write up though I'm hesitant to give Whaley credit for anything without mentioning that he wasted 5+ years of all of our collective time with bad football decisions. Good riddance! If you look at the four game sample size since Allen has returned, he's 57/114 for 801 yards, 4 TDs, 4 INTs, 7.02 YPA. It's not great but when you consider all the big plays, the scrambles, the fact he has little help at receiver...it's enough to think he might be a player we can build around. For me this is the first time he's hit that check point - I get a lot of people here hit that check point the moment we drafted him - and it's because of his development on the field. That said, he still needs to figure out how to score points. We've only averaged 19.5 points since Josh has returned and that isn't nearly enough. He's left some points out there.

The one thing we haven't seen yet from Allen is a kick ass passing performance where he racks up 350+ yards and 3+ passing TDs. He needs some cooperation from the receivers but I feel like we're not that far off.

I think that's probably true of every QB. What I liked is he seemed to make better decisions yesterday. There was a pass attempt (incomplete) in the middle of the 3rd when he scanned the field for like five seconds and was eventually chased out of the pocket to the right. He keeps his head up the whole time trying to find someone and eventually throws it away. The replay showed the coverage at each step, and legitimately there was no one open the entire time. That's progress.

I think he threw downfield a lot yesterday because a) guys weren't getting open initially, and b) he just waited too long to make a decision a few times. I'll be interested to see where Josh ranks this week in ave time in the pocket. For all the heat our oline takes, Allen had lots time on a bunch of throws yesterday. It was nice to see. Mckenzie going down hurt.

Here's every one of the throws detailed. I got to 61.9% (13/21). How can anyone possibly get to 13/18 without being a complete homer??

So in other words, if we don't count his first six weeks when he was really bad, and adjust his completion percentage for all these drops and throwaways, he's still only 23rd in accuracy. If you include all his games I bet he's still last in adjusted completion %. Also , in order to get to 72% they would have to discount eight incompletions. I went through every one of those throws and got to five. You could get to six if you count the Thompson bomb (where he laid out but couldn't come up with it) as a drop. Are they grading every QB like this? Seems fishy.

Great question. I'm attempting to go deeper than just "inaccurate", and actually determine fault. I think three of his 26 throws this week were some version of badly inaccurate / bad throw. He missed the target a number of other times, but you have to take circumstance into account. For example, that 3rd quarter throw to Thomspon. Josh missed him but he was also running to the left sideline and having to throw back across his body. Hard throw to hold against him. Same with the 4th quarter bomb to Thompson. It wasn't either of their fault. A better receiver would have come up with that catch; a better QB wouldn't have required his receiver to lay out for it in the first place. 3 bad throws in 26 attempts this week. We can live with that. 7 bad throws in 36 attempts last week was too high. It sounds overly simplistic but more bad throws = more turnovers, and so I think it's important we look at this stuff.