Bills' Fitzpatrick Ranks Poorly Under Pressure

[GaryPinC]

I see where among the 34 quarterbacks, that Fitz was sacked the 6th least when pressured (14.02%). That is a significant stat in his favor.

 

It doesn't appear to me however that Pro Football Focus incorporates this fairly significant stat into their ratings of how QBs perform under pressure.

 

In spite of the fact that they have a chart showing sack percentage when pressured, they barely mention it and don't state whether this stat is incorporated into their overall formula (I just skimmed through the article). It appears that sacks are not factored in.

 

If I'm correct in this, I would say that the study is somewhat flawed.

 

When a quarterback ends up getting sacked, the offense loses that down AND an average of about 7 yards. In that sense a sack is a much worse outcome than an offensive holding penalty which is 10 yards but a replay of the down. This is also not to even factor in that sacks are often big momentum-swinging plays.

 

Football is still a game of field position and if PFF wants to rate performance under pressure, they have to factor in the ability to avoid negative plays.

 

 

Somewhat flawed? At least. WGR claims Fitzy sucks with a guy in his face, but while the original article alludes to this situation I don't see anywhere they clearly define "pressure". How do you correct for the fact that the Bills offense was pretty much a complete clusterf* the entire first half of the season, young, inexperienced, new head coaches, new offensive system with everyone struggling to get on the same page? Can anyone watching the Bills offense last year honestly claim it was all Fitzpatrick's fault and therefore he sucks? From the games I watched, he was the guy most responsible for improving the offense in the second half of the year.

 

Fitzpatricks TD to int #'s under pressure(back calculating from the %) was 2:5. Colt McCoy's was 3:3. I think it is irresponsible to take such small #s, convert to ratio and rank. Especially if some quarterbacks were playing from behind and forced to take more risks than others. Even if it "seems" to make sense.

 

In a previous report PFF has Fitzy down for 227 blitzes last year. For this report they only gave him 164 "pressures" which I assume includes non-blitzing pressure. Just recognizing the blitz and making a play should count for something even if the pressure isn't "in your face" at the time.

 

So sad when an author claims to account for many factors in their analysis then don't have the guts to present their accounting formulas.

 

For the record, I think Fitzy deserves another chance this year. I am completely in line with Buddy and Chan's plan and not reaching to draft a QB. Fitzy may suck, he may be a good quarterback, or he may be a great quarterback. I don't know what type of QB Fitzy will be, I only know he made a noticeable positive difference to the offense last year. His team and coaches seem to have a large amount of confidence in him, their priorities this past draft seem to back up what they've been saying.

[Webster Guy]

There are simply too many intangibles at the QB position for that article to have any merit. QB stats are as close to meaningless as you can get.

 

Here's a stat for you: Tom Brady sucked in the superbowl against the Giants defensive pressure and they only scored 14 points and lost. Since then he hasn't won a single playoff game, and that was four years ago. He is a HOF QB with above average protection and receiving corps.

 

Can I then conclude that he plays poorly under pressure and is a sub-standard QB?

 

That's the logic some of you are using.

 

Judge Fitz on his performance as a three year starter under Chan and Nix. I think he makes us look better than we are on offense considering the weak tackle play on both sides of the OL. Same goes for Spiller.

[John from Riverside]

I will tell you another completely unscientific meter I used this last season....

 

My son would come home from college (he plays linebacker at a local college and is transferring to San Diego State this next year)

 

So anyways my knucklehead kid comes home to toss his laundry at us and spend a little bit of time with dad watching football...and of course either the raiders or the bill games are always on (mom is raidas fan)

 

So were talking about the players and he is always saying how impressed he is with Fitzpatrick....along with being totally cool with the beard he is just impressed with the way he handles himself on the field....has control of the huddle and a calming affect on the OL before the snap.....and the way he plays with guts and how he will take off for a first down and not slide 2 yards away from getting it...he stands in the pocket on a lot of plays and takes the hit to deliver the ball......he thinks "Fitz is a stud" and he isn't even a fan of my team. He is a raiders fan and would take Fitz over anyone they have.

 

Thats how I see it to....what makes Fitz fun to watch is he has a bit of swag to him....and its not fake swag either its the type of "Im gonna lead the question is can you follow" type thing he has with these bills players. One of the reasons why I really liked Andy Dalton was he has that same "swag" to him.....would have loved to get him but I understand drafting Williams.

[JPS]

Great example of why it's hard to come on this board in the offseason. Some wahoo makes up a stat and we're supposed to pick a side on our obviously decent, but not great QB. Why don't you just morph it into a "Lee Evans is not a true #1" discussion and complete this topic for me. The Bills played about 7 different players and LT and RT and you're going to analyze the QB? Fix the wheels before you worry about the driver.

[Bangarang]

I just get so tired of seeing posts that people look up like it is the be all end all of their arguement. Do the stats take into consideration that Fitz would toss a ball to a wide reciever only to have them drop it?

 

I go with what my eyes see in the games.....and to be quite honest? I thought Fitz was fine except for the times when he made me want to pull my hair out when he dropped a ball out of his hand when he went back to pass or when he threw a bad ball or when he through an interception......but after the games I would remind myself just how little opportunities Fitz would get to redeem himself for a mistake......WE HAD TO SCORE ON NEARLY EVERY POSSESSION TO WIN A GAME........our defense was that bad. Then there was the issue of guys just falling out left and right to IR......how do you biuld any kind of continuity when you have the largest group of IR guys (or at least seemed like it) in the league

 

Then I reminded myself that the team is being biult through the draft......and we needed premium draft picks......its interesting how fate would have it that we played just well enough to stay away from Cam Newton and just well enough to be in line for Marcel....who I think is going to be a GREAT player

 

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

[RealityCheck]

The Buffalo Bills are all in on Ryan Fitzpatrick as their quarterback for the 2011 NFL season. But the writers at ProFootballFocus.com put together an interesting study in their review of the 2010 season, revealing that Ryan Fitzpatrick is among one of the worst starting quarterbacks in the league with pressure in his face.

 

http://wgr550.com/Bills--Fitzpatrick-Ranks-Poorly-Under-Pressure/9846589

 

heres the complete article:

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/05/16/pressure-reveals/

The entire team performed poorly under pressure all year, and I would love to see an equivalent analysis of the teams blitz pickup success rate superimposed over Fitz's relative performance. I suppose a running game is too much to ask for too.

[Doc]

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

Why just remove the Cincy game? Why not also remove his worst game, which was the 2nd Pats game? If you do, he completed 58.3% of his passes, threw for 221 yards/game and had a 19:10 TD:INT ratio, not to mention 2 fewer fumbles.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

As Doc suggests, if you remove a game, you remove two games…the best and the worst…statistical outliers at any rate.

 

And once again (and we've gone in circles on this subject many times without resolution) this needs to be said:

 

Fitz was in the first year in the system.

 

He got fewer reps coming into the season as a result of the anointing of Trent Edwards as the starter.

 

He had a poor offensive line in front of him with a veritable revolving door at right tackle.

 

He had no tight end option to throw to.

 

His wide receiving corps consisted of one proven vet seemingly on the downside of his career (Evans), one other vet who had never had a significant season as a wide receiver (Parrish), an unproven 7th rounder (Johnson), and three undrafted rookies (Nelson, Jones, Roosevelt).

 

It's amazing to me that some posters believe that we've seen the ceiling of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I personally can't see how he won't improve in 2011.

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

Why just remove the Cincy game? Why not also remove his worst game, which was the 2nd Pats game? If you do, he completed 58.3% of his passes, threw for 221 yards/game and had a 19:10 TD:INT ratio, not to mention 2 fewer fumbles.

 

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The poster was illustrating that the Cincy game was an abnormal game, and it was greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious.

 

The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

Edited May 17, 2011 by Alphadawg7

[billsfan89]

Its not surprising. BUT most QB's aren't good with pressure. Any QB needs time to be effective put Brady or Manning on his ass a lot of the time and see how effective he will be. If the cast around Fitz was better I think his numbers under pressure would be better BUT they still would be below average.

 

Still think Fitz can take this team to success. Watch him run the offense and watch him elevate the teams play. No one is saying Fitz can be a franchise guy BUT that doesn't mean he isn't a starting caliber QB either.

[Wiz]

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The Cincy game was an abnormal game greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious. The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

Like I said before, in the 9 games following the Balt game which caused everyone to get on his band wagon, he completed just 56% of his passes, 12 TD's, with 16 turnovers, and a QB rating of 70...and that is including the Cincy game.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

You're right, Fitzpatrick sucks. We should have taken one of the five future pro bowl qb's that we could have had in the draft.

[Doc]

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The Cincy game was an abnormal game greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious. The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

Like I said before, in the 9 games following the Balt game which caused everyone to get on his band wagon, he completed just 56% of his passes, 12 TD's, with 16 turnovers, and a QB rating of 70...and that is including the Cincy game.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

They lost Joseph, which hurt, but Cris Crocker is a journeyman talent at best and was replaced by an equal, and arguably better, FS in Ndukwe. And it's not like the Bills didn't have injury issues of their own. So again, if you want to take out the best game, you had better take out the worst.

[Orton's Arm]

The grade is poor, but some of the percentages show exactly what Fitz is/does.

 

He has a low completion percentage when facing pressure, but also has one of the lowest sack percentages on the table. Also, his interception % when facing pressure is middle of the pack compared with other QBs.

 

This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB with great intelligence.

I agree with most of this, but my conclusion about Fitz may be less optimistic than yours.

 

First, there's the question of Fitz's grade under pressure. On a scale that apparently ranged from 19 all the way down to -10, Fitz scored a -4.5 under pressure. That made him the 30th-best pressure QB of those evaluated (out of 34). His grade under pressure was 3.5 points worse than Jimmy Clausen's. Considering that Pro Football Focus graded each play individually, that grade is the single most important part of the article.

 

Fitz's INT percentage under pressure was 3.05%. Of the 33 non-Fitz QBs evaluated, only 12 had a worse interception percentage under pressure. Fitz's performance in that category is noticeably worse than a typical NFL QB.

 

However, he was the eighth-best QB in the league at avoiding a sack when under pressure; so that's clearly a point in his favor. It is also the case that he's good at getting rid of the ball quickly, making the percentage of dropbacks under pressure lower than it otherwise would have been.

 

Also of significance was Fitz's completion percentage under pressure, of 39.2%. Fitz is the third-worst QB in the league (out of the 34 examined) in that category. The second-worst QB at completing passes under pressure was Jimmy Clausen, whose completion percentage under pressure was just 0.18% lower than Fitz's. Amusingly, the worst QB in the league under pressure was Mark Sanchez. Unfortunately, Bills' fans making fun of Sanchez on that basis is like a homeless man with a shiny new shopping cart giving some other homeless man a hard time about his old and squeaky shopping cart!

 

While it is clear Fitz does some things well (such as getting rid of the ball in a hurry), the overall picture which emerged from this article was of a quarterback who's very mediocre under pressure. This confirms my opinion that Fitz is not, and never will be, a franchise QB, or anything reasonably close.

[Wayne Cubed]

I get a little confused with some arguments posters make on this board.

 

The author of this article presents an argument, then through statistical data makes a conclusion about 34 different quarterbacks. That in the world, is known as a logical argument. There is no biases there. He isn't out to just get Ryan Fitzpatrick. This is the conclusion he game up with after looking at STATISTICAL FACTS. He even goes so far as to show all of his data, rather then just make this blanket statement without providing the evidence.

 

Therefore, in a logical argument, the burden of proof now falls to the people who dismiss his claims. And proof is not "I feel" or "I see" statements. 500 years ago people "saw" a flat Earth, that didn't make it true. Again, the argument is how Ryan Fitzpatrick preforms under pressure and if you believe he preforms well under pressure(that would be the counter argument) then by all means present your case and support it.

 

All these blanket statements about stats not meaning anything is hog wash. Statistically the majority of Trent Edwards passes were under 15 yards. Do you not think that helps the opposing DC to game plan against him? Maybe just a little?

[LGB]

As Doc suggests, if you remove a game, you remove two games…the best and the worst…statistical outliers at any rate.

 

And once again (and we've gone in circles on this subject many times without resolution) this needs to be said:

 

Fitz was in the first year in the system.

 

He got fewer reps coming into the season as a result of the anointing of Trent Edwards as the starter.

 

He had a poor offensive line in front of him with a veritable revolving door at right tackle.

 

He had no tight end option to throw to.

 

His wide receiving corps consisted of one proven vet seemingly on the downside of his career (Evans), one other vet who had never had a significant season as a wide receiver (Parrish), an unproven 7th rounder (Johnson), and three undrafted rookies (Nelson, Jones, Roosevelt).

 

It's amazing to me that some posters believe that we've seen the ceiling of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I personally can't see how he won't improve in 2011.

 

I would just add that besides the questions with RT, does anyone think that the OL that was on the field most of the time (i.e. injury replacements) had any sort of continuity as an offensive unit?

 

edit: many fans wanted help on the OL. Well, it turned out there must have been more needs for the Bills on D than even Nix would admit to.

Edited May 17, 2011 by LGB

[Thoner7]

Fitz is probably the 15th - 25th best QB in the league, but I would still call him the "leagues best backup" If that makes any sense.

[Doc]

I would just add that besides the questions with RT, does anyone think that the OL that was on the field most of the time (i.e. injury replacements) had any sort of continuity as an offensive unit?

 

edit: many fans wanted help on the OL. Well, it turned out there must have been more needs for the Bills on D than even Nix would admit to.

The O-line had little continuity last year. Woods and Bell barely practiced during the off-season and training camp, and needed rest during games and during the week. RT was a revolving door almost all season long. RG became a revolving door from game 11 on. The only constant was Levitre at LG.

 

This time around, Bell and Wood are healthy going into the off-season, the RG situation will be fleshed-out before the season starts from a promising group of candidates, and ideally the same goes for RT, where the Bills added a draft pick to the mix. Of course, there's nothing you can do about injuries.

[Ghost of Rob Johnson]

I get a little confused with some arguments posters make on this board.

 

The author of this article presents an argument, then through statistical data makes a conclusion about 34 different quarterbacks. That in the world, is known as a logical argument. There is no biases there. He isn't out to just get Ryan Fitzpatrick. This is the conclusion he game up with after looking at STATISTICAL FACTS. He even goes so far as to show all of his data, rather then just make this blanket statement without providing the evidence.

 

Therefore, in a logical argument, the burden of proof now falls to the people who dismiss his claims. And proof is not "I feel" or "I see" statements. 500 years ago people "saw" a flat Earth, that didn't make it true. Again, the argument is how Ryan Fitzpatrick preforms under pressure and if you believe he preforms well under pressure(that would be the counter argument) then by all means present your case and support it.

 

All these blanket statements about stats not meaning anything is hog wash. Statistically the majority of Trent Edwards passes were under 15 yards. Do you not think that helps the opposing DC to game plan against him? Maybe just a little?

I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.

 

Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.

 

As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.

 

Fitz is probably the 15th - 25th best QB in the league

 

I think that range seems about right.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Ghost of Rob Johnson

[Doc]

I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.

 

Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.

 

As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.

That Fitz has a low completion percentage, sack rate, and fairly low INT percentage under pressure tells me he's throwing the ball away rather than risk a sack (+/- fumble) or INT. The question that needs to be answered is "did he miss open/obvious receivers when throwing under pressure?" It's hard to complete a pass when no one is open/quick enough.

[Lurker]

My take: he's willing to throw an incompletion instead of take a drive killing sack when the pressure is bearing down. What's wrong with this again?

Agreed.

 

Can anyone tell me the data source this guy is using? I read the article quickly, but didn't see any documentation to go with the stats.

[K-9]

Agreed.

 

Can anyone tell me the data source this guy is using? I read the article quickly, but didn't see any documentation to go with the stats.

 

Good luck. I asked earlier how the author defines pressure. Does he define it only in terms of blitzes? Beating a blitz isn't the same as beating pressure.

 

Someone else in the thread suggested he defined it by "defenders in the backfield." If that's the case I don't see how anyone can put any stock into anything this guy comes up with.

 

Anyway if you find that data source please post it.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Green Lightning]

This response is about what I expected...you state the obvious that all QB's stats are worse under the pressure while completely ignoring the actual point of the article to somehow dismiss its value. The article is about comparing all the QB's under the same pressure...and Fitz is among the worst in the league at it. So just stating the obvious that all QB's perform lower under pressure then without pressure does not dismiss Fitzs very poor performance in comparison to all the other QB's in the league under pressure. People like you like to dismiss facts and go with biased opinion, lol.

 

BREAKING NEWS: In the NFL QB's will be facing pressure a lot because thats what defenses do. If your QB can't handle that, then thats a problem.

 

Exactly what I expected from you Alpha. So you trust you little article and precious stats. I'm with you 100%. By your argument and by what the article says....in the AFC East, only Brady is better that Fitz under pressure. So what's your beef with Fitz again?

[Lurker]

Good luck. I asked earlier how the author defines pressure. Does he define it only in terms of blitzes? Beating a blitz isn't the same as beating pressure.

 

Someone else in the thread suggested he defined it by "defenders in the backfield." If that's the case I don't see how anyone can put any stock into anything this guy comes up with.

If that is indeed the case, what did he do...watch video of every single snap for each QB? Highly doubtful.

 

Anbody know if Elias provides this kind of detail?

[Orton's Arm]

I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.

 

Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.

 

As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.

 

 

 

I think that range seems about right.

I'd like to make a comment about the bolded statement. Consider a neighborhood with 100 people. 98 of them earn $50,000 a year, one of them earns $70,000 a year, and one of them is Bill Gates, who earns $1 billion a year. The average income for the neighborhood is slightly over $10 million a year, because of the effect Gate's income has on the average. The guy making $70 K a year could be described as having a below average income for the neighborhood, because that $70K a year is significantly less than the neighborhood average of $10 million a year. But this guy's income is above the median, because he earns more money than anyone else in the neighborhood except for Bill.

 

We face something similar with respect to Fitz's interception percentage when under pressure. There are a few quarterbacks with very high/bad INT under pressure stats. Brett Favre, for example, was intercepted a whopping 7% of the time he was under pressure. A few quarterbacks like that can distort the average, much like Gates' ridiculously high income distorted the average income for the above-described neighborhood. That's why it's better to use the median rather than the average when deciding where any given QB stands. Fitz had the 22nd best ranking (out of 34 QBs total) for the INTs under pressure stat. There is nothing praiseworthy about that! (Unless the discussion is about how Fitz would be a solid backup.)

 

I agree with your assessment that Fitz makes good decisions, and that he's somewhere between the 15th and 25th best QB in the league. Yes, he has limitations. He'd be better off if he had a stronger arm, bigger hands, and so forth. But I don't see his physical limitations as being the primary reason for his mediocre stats. If (for example) he threw the ball with Montana-like touch and accuracy for short and intermediate throws, but was inaccurate on deep throws, then people could legitimately blame his physical limitations. Fitz is a guy who will make the right decision, and will throw it to the guy he's supposed to throw it to. But the throw will often be inaccurate, even if it's a short or intermediate throw. Fitz's good decision-making and awareness is why he did so well at avoiding sacks. His lack of throwing accuracy is why he had mediocre or poor showings in the measurements which involved accuracy; including INT percentage under pressure, completion percentage under pressure, and his overall performance grade when under pressure. That lack of throwing accuracy also shows up in his career yards per attempt stat (which is worse than Trent Edwards'), and his yards per attempt stat for this past season (which was only modestly higher than Edwards' career average). Typically, QBs with major accuracy issues at this stage in their careers don't correct them. That's why I think Fitz has hit his ceiling.

[John from Riverside]

I get a little confused with some arguments posters make on this board.

 

The author of this article presents an argument, then through statistical data makes a conclusion about 34 different quarterbacks. That in the world, is known as a logical argument. There is no biases there. He isn't out to just get Ryan Fitzpatrick. This is the conclusion he game up with after looking at STATISTICAL FACTS. He even goes so far as to show all of his data, rather then just make this blanket statement without providing the evidence.

 

Therefore, in a logical argument, the burden of proof now falls to the people who dismiss his claims. And proof is not "I feel" or "I see" statements. 500 years ago people "saw" a flat Earth, that didn't make it true. Again, the argument is how Ryan Fitzpatrick preforms under pressure and if you believe he preforms well under pressure(that would be the counter argument) then by all means present your case and support it.

 

All these blanket statements about stats not meaning anything is hog wash. Statistically the majority of Trent Edwards passes were under 15 yards. Do you not think that helps the opposing DC to game plan against him? Maybe just a little?

 

Because quite frankly....the OP's post with the "proving data" carrys about as much want as the "I feel" and "I think" crowd. THE DATA IS FLAWED

 

I'd like to make a comment about the bolded statement. Consider a neighborhood with 100 people. 98 of them earn $50,000 a year, one of them earns $70,000 a year, and one of them is Bill Gates, who earns $1 billion a year. The average income for the neighborhood is slightly over $10 million a year, because of the effect Gate's income has on the average. The guy making $70 K a year could be described as having a below average income for the neighborhood, because that $70K a year is significantly less than the neighborhood average of $10 million a year. But this guy's income is above the median, because he earns more money than anyone else in the neighborhood except for Bill.

 

We face something similar with respect to Fitz's interception percentage when under pressure. There are a few quarterbacks with very high/bad INT under pressure stats. Brett Favre, for example, was intercepted a whopping 7% of the time he was under pressure. A few quarterbacks like that can distort the average, much like Gates' ridiculously high income distorted the average income for the above-described neighborhood. That's why it's better to use the median rather than the average when deciding where any given QB stands. Fitz had the 22nd best ranking (out of 34 QBs total) for the INTs under pressure stat. There is nothing praiseworthy about that! (Unless the discussion is about how Fitz would be a solid backup.)

 

I agree with your assessment that Fitz makes good decisions, and that he's somewhere between the 15th and 25th best QB in the league. Yes, he has limitations. He'd be better off if he had a stronger arm, bigger hands, and so forth. But I don't see his physical limitations as being the primary reason for his mediocre stats. If (for example) he threw the ball with Montana-like touch and accuracy for short and intermediate throws, but was inaccurate on deep throws, then people could legitimately blame his physical limitations. Fitz is a guy who will make the right decision, and will throw it to the guy he's supposed to throw it to. But the throw will often be inaccurate, even if it's a short or intermediate throw. Fitz's good decision-making and awareness is why he did so well at avoiding sacks. His lack of throwing accuracy is why he had mediocre or poor showings in the measurements which involved accuracy; including INT percentage under pressure, completion percentage under pressure, and his overall performance grade when under pressure. That lack of throwing accuracy also shows up in his career yards per attempt stat (which is worse than Trent Edwards'), and his yards per attempt stat for this past season (which was only modestly higher than Edwards' career average). Typically, QBs with major accuracy issues at this stage in their careers don't correct them. That's why I think Fitz has hit his ceiling.

 

Finally a post that actually makes some sense.....

 

It could be entirely true that Fitz has hit his ceiling....which makes it all the more important to biuld up the team around him (temporarily till the next guy is found)

 

But you do have someone good enough to step out onto the field on Sunday for now and lead this team.

[K-9]

If that is indeed the case, what did he do...watch video of every single snap for each QB? Highly doubtful.

 

Anbody know if Elias provides this kind of detail?

 

If you visit their site they make it sound like their staff watch all the games. In an AOL article (hyper-linked on their site) they claim that NFL teams have told them how remarkable they are. From my own experience I feel comfortable saying that NFL teams would put absolutely no stock in these stats. But they claim otherwise so who knows? If NFL teams DID put stock in their reports they should be strongly marketing their services to the league.

 

To my knowledge, Elias does not provide this kind of detail.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Lurker]

THE DATA IS FLAWED

I must be getting old. I forgot these bozos are the ones that use network TV video to produce their "analysis":

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/about/faq/

 

"We use TV broadcasts for both the analysis and the player participation data. We’ve been asked a lot how therefore is it possible to determine who was on the field in every position through TV pictures. Surely that just isn’t possible? Well, just because something is not easy doesn’t mean it is impossible. Firstly, the high definition picture from which we work is excellent, and that gives us the best starting point outside of coaches’ film, which isn’t attainable outside of NFL offices."

 

What a crock...

[thewildrabbit]

First of all... take a look at the team around each QB as it is a TEAM sport, and any player is pretty much dependent on others around him to be able to play their best, everything comes into consideration here, coaching, scheme, other players.What makes me think Fitz can get the job done is first looking at the team around him, bad O line, no running game, only one decent receiver all year, new coaches, new scheme. Call it excuses if you like, just look at that really bad 4-12 team around him and compare that cast to other teams.

 

An important way to judge a player is what happened when different QB's took the field, it really showed how bad that O line really is when they needed to pass protect more then 3 seconds for Trent Edwards and Brian Brohm....both those QB's sucked ass so hard they could turn a hippo inside out.

 

If you TiVO'd any of last years games, go back and watch "pants on the ground" Fitz running for his life against the Jets, the guy was the leading rusher for the Bills that game. Fitz played on one of the worst Buffalo Bills teams ever and managed to pull out 4 wins, all I know is that team goes win-less and pulls a Detroit if not for Fitz and his uncanny ability to escape the pass rush. Fitz has about as much es-capability as anyone I've ever seen play QB in the NFL, if I were to compare the guy to anyone it would be Fran Tarkenton

 

 

This article is for people who like stats, but what the stats don't show is that both Brady and Ryan have all pro tight ends, a better running game and O line, better receiving corps, better coaching and play calling. Both can take a 7 step drop if they need to and at any time. aww hell....Ive watched Tom Brady in plays where the guy has 15 seconds get rid of the football, Fitz had a max of 3 seconds most of last season.

 

I don't need to look at some page of stats to know that Brady and Ryan are going to look better under pressure... simply because they have better options to get rid of the ball while under pressure

,

[CardinalScotts]

Cue the excuses...

all quarterbacks don't play well under a pass rush

Mr Hall of famer three super bowl rings Brady, how did he look in the playoffs with a pass rush in his face.

 

not exactly breaking news, bad O-line = bad qb atleast stat wise- the fact you could compete despite no line actually is a plus not a minus

[JESSEFEFFER]

Would any here deny the following?:

 

"All pressure is not created equal. Quick pressure @ 2.5 seconds (a whiffed block) is not the same as pressure that occurs @ 5 seconds. The first is a play killer where an incompletion or a scramble and run would be a good play. The second is an opportunity in that the play has developed, the QB has had time to survey the field, and the coverage has had a chance to breakdown."

 

If you agree with that then would you also conclude that any attempt at assessing pressure that ignores when it occurred is flawed?

 

Fitzpatrick was hit 80+ times. That's among the highest in the league. That's 80 attempts with a defender hitting him as he was throwing or with a defender one step away. That's over six times a game. A guy like Eli Manning was hit a little over 3 times a game. What would this tend to do to a QB's passer rating?

Edited May 17, 2011 by JESSEFEFFER

[thewildrabbit]

Read this....same source

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/04/22/help-wanted-buffalo-bills/

 

""This was originally titled “Right Tackle”, but given Demetrius Bell (-12.9) didn’t play all that impressively for the Bills it was changed to “Offensive Tackle”. In 2010, the Bills simply could not find an answer at right tackle despite giving four guys the opportunity to win the job. Erik Pears (-0.3), Cornell Green (-4.5), Mansfield Wrotto (-10.8), and Cord Howard (-19.5) all played 60+ snaps but their combined play put them third to last of all tackles.""

 

""Given the importance of offensive tackle play in a passing-oriented league, the Bills must address this need.""

 

 

 

One of the best ways to help with QB pressure is to have decent options to get rid of the ball...

 

""The tight end position was a black hole for the Bills. The tight ends as a group only managed 23 receptions, 187 yards, and 1 touchdown – the single worst production from a group of tight ends in the NFL. ""

 

 

[Dorkington]

I'm more than fine with giving him longer than a year with the current system to "figure it out". He played well enough, and the 2011 draft class had enough questions, it just makes sense to me. Does that mean he's a superstar? Does that mean he's our guy of the future? Nah.

[Doc]

I'm more than fine with giving him longer than a year with the current system to "figure it out". He played well enough, and the 2011 draft class had enough questions, it just makes sense to me. Does that mean he's a superstar? Does that mean he's our guy of the future? Nah.

I'll give him at least the better part of this year. He'll have had a full year in the system and the players around him should be better. If he plays better, great. If not, move to option B.

[papazoid]

first, i have been a Fitz supporter....but after reading this article, i am less impressed.

 

this discussion has focused on Fitz "under pressure"....

 

 

THERE IS ADDITIONAL DATA PROVIDED of Fitz NOT under pressure that shows poorly....

 

it is "Completion Percentage on Deep Throws"

 

We broke down every pass from the 2010 season, and dropped them into numerous categories and sub categories. One of these was passes thrown longer than 20 yards. Which brings us to the point of this article. A look at who threw downfield the most and who did it most efficiently. 30 deep attempts was the qualifying mark to be considered.

 

Fitz ranked 25th in Deep Throw Completion Percentage....even tho he had the 8th highest Deep Throw Percentage of Attempts. (this is the part where we blame his receivers....lol)

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/05/16/pressure-reveals/

 

then click "deep ball"

[downunderbill]

fitz is this years starting qb, like it or not.

[papazoid]

additionaly, if you click on "blitzed" you will see that Fitz was the:

 

 

3rd highest @ Percentage of Pass Play Blitzed.

 

19th highest @ Completion Percentage When Blitzed

 

19th highest @ Touchdown to Interception Ratio When Blitzed

 

22nd highest @ Pro Football Focus Grade When Blitzed

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/05/16/pressure-reveals/

[akm0404]

Oh look, a Ryan Fitzpatrick thread.

 

Summary of two sides of the argument:

 

1. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a bottom-third quarterback in the NFL

2. But he's better than Rob Johnson, J.P. Losman, and Trent Edwards!

 

Standards, we let them slip a decade ago.

[BobChalmers]

My take: he's willing to throw an incompletion interception instead of take a drive killing sack when the pressure is bearing down.

 

FIXED.

Edited May 17, 2011 by BobChalmers

[Fan in Chicago]

Can those that are bashing Fitz in this post, point specifically to what the FO could have done over the past 4-5 months regarding the QB position ? Be specific. I will even help by seeding this discussion with some ideas:

- Draft a QB: Which one and why do you think that QB would be a good replacement for Fitz?

- Trade before the end of past season (before labor issues): Again, who would you have traded for and why ?

 

Further, what do you think the FO can do different prior to next offseason ?

 

The original article's source data is shaky and this board has gone all in a tizzy about how the one guy who brought consistency to his position does not deserve to start.

[atlbillsfan1975]

I have heard very few (if any?) people say "he is the solution". I have heard many people say hey played better than expected last year and that they are OK with him being the starter this year or until we find someone better. The QB's in the draft hardly looked better to me.

 

I am not "comfortable" with Fitz as our starter, but the sad thing is he's better than the other QB's we've had recently, and better then any available alternatives at the moment.

 

Those kind of stats, or ANY stats are always overblown and usually taken out of context. Fitz had a mess of a team around him, a defense that gave up loads of points, and a pathetic running attack on offense, which meant opposing D's could T off on him against our awful and oft injured o-line. He had virtually no receiving core (except SJ, who dropped plenty of his own).

 

Maybe you'd like the Bills to pick up Rob Johnson or JP Losman, who had better stats and QB ratings, but looked absolutely lost on the field. Fitz is no probowler, but the offense at least looked watchable for stretch's with him at the helm. Have a better solution than him? I'm all ears.

Then keep reading the board. many people on here feel as if he is the solution for the next few years. And they are right, but not because he is good. He is just the tallest midget at QB for Buffalo.

 

I just feel like Fitz will look really good sometimes and others(in the same game) leave us scratching our head. I cant emphasize how wrong i wish i was.

And no i dont want Rob Johnson or JP Losman. But i hope the Bills can figure out a longterm solution at QB, if not we have another decade of losing to look forward to.