eball Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I don't remember how folks do or don't like this rating system developed by ESPN a few years ago, but if anyone's interested, here are the rankings after two weeks. (spoiler: EJ is 13th, Geno is 29th) Just for kicks I looked at the "all time best games" listing, and four of the top ten were against Buffalo defenses -- with two of those coming last season against our Wanny-led unit. Eff that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I don't remember how folks do or don't like this rating system developed by ESPN a few years ago, but if anyone's interested, hereare the rankings after two weeks. (spoiler: EJ is 13th, Geno is 29th) Just for kicks I looked at the "all time best games" listing, and four of the top ten were against Buffalo defenses -- with two of those coming last season against our Wanny-led unit. Eff that guy. Never give up on your crusade against Wannshaft. Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 Regardless how we all think about the system. Being rated higher than the majority of the league = better performance in the long run. 16 teams make the playoffs. We just need to be in that group. Right now were borderline. Lets hope things keep going here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatloaf Sandwich Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I love it if it work out good for the Bills players. Hate it if we are near last on the list. Pretty much how 99% of TBD and all other sports fans mentality is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 Guide to the Total Quarterback Rating Explaining the methodology and statistics behind ESPN's new QB metric Win Probability: All QB plays are scored based on how much they contribute to a win. By determining expected point totals for almost any situation, Total QBR is able to apply points to a quarterback based on every type of play he would be involved in. Dividing Credit: Total QBR factors in such things as overthrows, underthrows, yards after the catch and more to accurately determine how much a QB contributes to each play. Clutch Index: How critical a certain play is based on when it happens in a game is factored into the score. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I don't remember how folks do or don't like this rating system developed by ESPN a few years ago, but if anyone's interested, hereare the rankings after two weeks. (spoiler: EJ is 13th, Geno is 29th) The base QBR and this rating both have EJ at about the same ranking which is good. He is in elite company on that list and ahead of several recent 1 rounders. Encouraging signs for sure. Is there room to improve for EJ ? Absolutely. But I would like to think it is due to a by-design conservative game plan to limit mistakes and allow him to get his feet wet. So far so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 17, 2013 Author Share Posted September 17, 2013 Never give up on your crusade against Wannshaft. Never. It's nothing he didn't fully and completely earn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offside Number 76 Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 It is no better and no worse than the official QB rating. The only reason it exists is so ESPN can talk about itself some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 It's nothing he didn't fully and completely earn. Correct. He's a: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 Never give up on your crusade against Wannshaft. Never. Just like the Jimmy V commercial on ESPN where he says "don't ever give up" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 17, 2013 Author Share Posted September 17, 2013 It is no better and no worse than the official QB rating. The only reason it exists is so ESPN can talk about itself some more. I'm no ESPN shill -- can't stand the network most of the time except for live games (and College Gameday). But I do respect incorporating more "realistic" data into evaluating a QB. Should TDs and yards accumulated in garbage time when your team is down by 30 count the same as plays made when the result is hanging in the balance? Sacks are not only the fault of the QB, obviously, but clearly some QBs are better at avoiding them than others. It's an interesting new take on a very dated system (QB rating). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 Regardless how we all think about the system. Being rated higher than the majority of the league = better performance in the long run. 16 teams make the playoffs. We just need to be in that group. Right now were borderline. Lets hope things keep going here. 12 teams make the playoffs...If the playoffs started today, Denver, New England, Houston and Baltimore would be the division winners with Miami and one of the 1-1 teams making the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I'm no ESPN shill -- can't stand the network most of the time except for live games (and College Gameday). But I do respect incorporating more "realistic" data into evaluating a QB. Should TDs and yards accumulated in garbage time when your team is down by 30 count the same as plays made when the result is hanging in the balance? Sacks are not only the fault of the QB, obviously, but clearly some QBs are better at avoiding them than others. It's an interesting new take on a very dated system (QB rating). i think its better, but obviously not perfect or without flaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 Like most ratings and ranking systems, I don't take them in a vacuum. I compare them with other systems and take the overall for a better feel. ESPN's QBR, standard QB Rating, stuff from PFF, stuff from Pro Football Reference, etc. Usually if a player is good, they'll look good in most/all of the above. If there's questions, they'll show as negative in one or two things, and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 No system is perfect, but the best gauge on the value of the rating to me is how the rating is viewed at the professional levels of player evaluations. Coaches, scouts, GM's etc have not cared nor used the old QB Rating at all as it had literally no value and was a worthless stat that told you very little about a QB. The new TQBR developed by ESPN is actually quite the opposite and coaches, scouts, etc do consider it a significantly more effective stat at measuring the effectiveness of a QB. Again, there is no perfect way to evaluate anyone, but the ESPN TQBR is a substantially better gauge on how a QB is performing week to week on the field. It factors in so many more things that are relevant to how a QB actually positively or negatively impacted a game. I for one find it to be a very reliable score each week as if you look at the TQBR and then actually look at how good or bad the QB was in the game, its pretty accurate. The old system a QB could have a pretty bad game, but if he had a high comp % because of dinking and dunking but still going 3 and out, his rating could still be solid, sometimes even good, even though he didn't really do anything positive. With TQBR, a game like that would refelect a low rating for the game, more accurately refelecting the ineffectiveness of the QB. So, IMO, TQBR is substantially better than the old system and one that has a lot of merit and proven to be pretty accurate refelction of the true performance of the QB overall in a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 In years past, ESPN's AFC East blog goes on and on about how Tom Brady leads the QBR standings in the division, and how all the other QBs suck compared to him, generally starting with week 1. (In fact, the article is usually "who's second best??? lulz") EJ Manuel tops the division in QBR this year, so far, and we have heard exactly nothing on the topic from them. Fun times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 "blaine gabbert couldn't throw a beach ball to a six-armed man." deadspin was correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 17, 2013 Author Share Posted September 17, 2013 A good example of this stat in action can be seen with RGIII. His traditional QB rating is 16th in the league at 89.6 -- pretty good, right? His TQBR, however, is 31st in the league -- arguably more accurate considering his team has been blown out in the first halves of both games and he compiled gaudy statistics when those games were essentially over. He has not been a difference maker for his team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 In years past, ESPN's AFC East blog goes on and on about how Tom Brady leads the QBR standings in the division, and how all the other QBs suck compared to him, generally starting with week 1. (In fact, the article is usually "who's second best??? lulz") EJ Manuel tops the division in QBR this year, so far, and we have heard exactly nothing on the topic from them. Fun times. Its a different writer this year but your point is still valid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 I'm no ESPN shill -- can't stand the network most of the time except for live games (and College Gameday). But I do respect incorporating more "realistic" data into evaluating a QB. Should TDs and yards accumulated in garbage time when your team is down by 30 count the same as plays made when the result is hanging in the balance? Sacks are not only the fault of the QB, obviously, but clearly some QBs are better at avoiding them than others. It's an interesting new take on a very dated system (QB rating). Passer rating certainly has its problems, but it's at least based on objective data and it's easy to account for its biases. ESPN's metric is based on subjective judgments of biased people who have preconceived notions about the players they're judging. And since we don't know who those people are, what biases they have, or what sort of methodology they use, it's hard to know exactly what the problems are. As an example, ESPN's description talks about accounting for overthrows & underthrows. But how can they determine which throws are bad throws by the QB and which are bad routes run by the WR? Or, worse yet, just an example of the QB & WR reading the D differently. Without knowing the play call or the reads that each player is supposed to make, it's hard to make those subjective judgments. Of course, some stuff is obvious. If a pass hits the WR perfectly in stride, bounces off his hands, then intercepted, that shouldn't count against the QB the way most INTs do. But just because ESPN's metric is better than passer rating some of the time doesn't tell me that it's consistently better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts