QB comparative data for Tyrod from Cian Fahey to discuss

[transplantbillsfan]

So first of all, I'd recommend forking out the less than $20 to get this PDF QB catalogue emailed to you. It's obvious he put tons of work and time into this. Last year when someone first mentioned him to me on reference to this catalogue, my reaction was: "who the hell is Cian Fahey?!"

 

Well, in short, he's good at what he does... having worked at Footballoutsiders for a while before going out on his own. But no matter what you think of his knowledge, what the catalogue primarily accomplishes (at least for me) is a good deal of comparative data that goes beyond the typical charted data the league tracks.

 

The focus is on the actual level of play of a QB on the field by attributing credit and/or blame for individual things the QB almost always gets credit (i.e.:completion %) or blame (i.e.:interceptions, sacks) for.

 

Fahey acknowledges the inevitable subjectivity involved, but uses the same subjective criteria to chart 33 NFL QBs and every single one of their snaps. So it's pretty evenly subjective, at least.

 

There are chapters that discuss in detail all 33 QBs more anecdotally, but I don't want to post too much simply because of the amount of work he put into it. If you're a football fan and specifically a fan of QBs, it's easily worth $20.

 

But here are a few pieces of comparative data some that seem to counter some preconceived notions.

 

I think people can figure out what these terms mean themselves, but again, Fahey explains in detail what each category means and what he includes.

 

All I'm doing is including the rankings among his 32 peers for each category:

 

INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - 3rd

 

CAUGHT (by the defense) INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - Tied for 6th highest

 

ACCURACY % - 9th

 

ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th

 

ACCURACY % passes 11-15 yards - 8th

 

ACCURACY % passes 11-20 yards - 10th

 

ACCURACY % passes 5 or more yards - 7th

 

% of total attempts up to 10 yards beyond LOS - 24th

 

% of total attempts beyond 10 yards beyond LOS - 10th

 

FAILED RECEPTION (by the WR) %.- 4th highest

 

CREATED RECEPTION (by the WR) % - 20th highest

 

CREATED YARDS (by the WR) % - 26th

 

ADJUSTED COMPLETION % - 5th

 

 

ADJUSTED YPA - 3rd

 

SCREENS, SCREEN TDs, & SCREEN % - 33rd

 

AVOIDABLE SACK % - 18th

 

 

 

Anyway... there's a LOT more in the catalogue but I don't know if everyone remembers McDermott's PC about why the Bills decided to keep Taylor and one of the things he mentioned was that in watching Taylor on film last year he was really good (the actual word might have been fantastic, but now I'm too lazy to look it up) and all everyone could call it was "coachspeak?" Maybe that's true, to some degree... but maybe he was also being truthful...

[Domdab99]

Taylor is an above average QB...and I cannot wait to see what does in this offense.

 

But what exactly is:

 

ACCURACY % - 9th

ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th

 

How can he be accurate past the LOS? He can't throw then! So how does the first stat differ from the 2nd?

[Estro]

Cian Fahey makes for a good follow on twitter

 

I don't agree with many of his QB assessments, though.

 

I will take note that he liked Mitch Tribusky quite a bit this year, and really didn't Mahomes. Time will tell.

 

The fact that he seems to genuinely think Tyrod Taylor is a pretty good QB gives me reason enough to not trust his QB analysis, quite honestly.

[transplantbillsfan]

Taylor is an above average QB...and I cannot wait to see what does in this offense.

 

But what exactly is:

 

ACCURACY % - 9th

 

ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th

 

How can he be accurate past the LOS? He can't throw then! So how does the first stat differ from the 2nd?

The first is how accurate he is overall on ALL of his passes compared to his peers.

 

The 2nd is how accurate he is to passes solely behind the LOS compared to his peers.

 

He breaks down accuracy % to different levels of the field.

Edited May 1, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[Domdab99]

ohhhhhhh

 

The PASSES are behind the LOS...that makes more sense lol.

[transplantbillsfan]

Cian Fahey makes for a good follow on twitter

 

I don't agree with many of his QB assessments, though.

 

I will take note that he liked Mitch Tribusky quite a bit this year, and really didn't Mahomes. Time will tell.

 

The fact that he seems to genuinely think Tyrod Taylor is a pretty good QB gives me reason enough to not trust his QB analysis, quite honestly.

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

Besides, did I post an actual assessment by him of Taylor? Do you believe he skews his data because he's enamored with Taylor?

[mead107]

In god we trust

[GoBills808]

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

Besides, did I post an actual assessment by him of Taylor? Do you believe he skews his data because he's enamored with Taylor?

I have no idea how he makes his assessments, but he's definitely enamored of Taylor.

 

Fahey said Taylor was better than Cousins which is reason enough to question the legitimacy of his QB analysis, never mind asking people to pay for it. Cousins is a borderline franchise guy, while Taylor is a borderline starter.

 

Stat guys like Taylor because he ranks on the QBR and DYAR charts, but in the real NFL he's taking a $10M paycut to hand the ball off to McCoy.

[BigBuff423]

Thank you for putting this out there OP, and I appreciate another person / professional is does their best to comb through stats and digest them to some degree for us casual readers or observers. However, while the stats are basic math regarding percentages - and I trust the man to have a calculator to do the percentage for him and that he's not "lying" - I disagree with the other statement or conclusion of this information that leads to believing Tyrod is a "good" QB.

 

To me, finding a good QB is much like what the Supreme Court referred to pornography, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it"....a really good to great QB is similar. I don't necessarily that works counter toward a poor QB, for that I think only time and experience truly show, unless they were really bad in college, which makes me think they didn't even get a look to come to the NFL. Bottom line for me: Tyrod doesn't pass the eye test. I don't watch the All-22 and from what people say, Tyrod does a fine job, but I watch the games and I watch many, many other NFL and college games, and Tyrod routinely throws the ball high, low, wide or behind a receiver. He misses open receivers in the middle of the field and he gets antsy feet in the pocket. To me, he is not Russ Wilson 2.0, he is just an incredible athlete with a penchant for the deep ball.

 

IMHO, a true NFL QB stands in the pocket, takes the hits and delivers, commands the Offense with precision and accuracy, and has the ability to take what the Defense gives him bit by bit and chew up the yardage as well as making good audible calls at the line, not just making plays after the snap with his running or elusive ability, which to Tyrod's credit he does as well as anyone in the league. Tyrod was probably the best option for this year, but he is NOT a good NFL QB, he's just better than what we've had for so very long. Sometimes, desperation makes it hard to tell the difference.

[Big Gun]

So first of all, I'd recommend forking out the less than $20 to get this PDF QB catalogue emailed to you. It's obvious he put tons of work and time into this. Last year when someone first mentioned him to me on reference to this catalogue, my reaction was: "who the hell is Cian Fahey?!"

 

Well, in short, he's good at what he does... having worked at Footballoutsiders for a while before going out on his own. But no matter what you think of his knowledge, what the catalogue primarily accomplishes (at least for me) is a good deal of comparative data that goes beyond the typical charted data the league tracks.

 

The focus is on the actual level of play of a QB on the field by attributing credit and/or blame for individual things the QB almost always gets credit (i.e.:completion %) or blame (i.e.:interceptions, sacks) for.

 

Fahey acknowledges the inevitable subjectivity involved, but uses the same subjective criteria to chart 33 NFL QBs and every single one of their snaps. So it's pretty evenly subjective, at least.

 

There are chapters that discuss in detail all 33 QBs more anecdotally, but I don't want to post too much simply because of the amount of work he put into it. If you're a football fan and specifically a fan of QBs, it's easily worth $20.

 

But here are a few pieces of comparative data some that seem to counter some preconceived notions.

 

I think people can figure out what these terms mean themselves, but again, Fahey explains in detail what each category means and what he includes.

 

All I'm doing is including the rankings among his 32 peers for each category:

 

INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - 3rd

 

CAUGHT (by the defense) INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - Tied for 6th highest

 

ACCURACY % - 9th

 

ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th

 

ACCURACY % passes 11-15 yards - 8th

 

ACCURACY % passes 11-20 yards - 10th

 

ACCURACY % passes 5 or more yards - 7th

 

% of total attempts up to 10 yards beyond LOS - 24th

 

% of total attempts beyond 10 yards beyond LOS - 10th

 

FAILED RECEPTION (by the WR) %.- 4th highest

 

CREATED RECEPTION (by the WR) % - 20th highest

 

CREATED YARDS (by the WR) % - 26th

 

ADJUSTED COMPLETION % - 5th

 

 

ADJUSTED YPA - 3rd

 

SCREENS, SCREEN TDs, & SCREEN % - 33rd

 

AVOIDABLE SACK % - 18th

 

 

 

Anyway... there's a LOT more in the catalogue but I don't know if everyone remembers McDermott's PC about why the Bills decided to keep Taylor and one of the things he mentioned was that in watching Taylor on film last year he was really good (the actual word might have been fantastic, but now I'm too lazy to look it up) and all everyone could call it was "coachspeak?" Maybe that's true, to some degree... but maybe he was also being truthful...

Hahahaha, damage control because they drafted a very accurate passer in Peterman. Nervous I see!

[17 Josh Allen]

I'm not buying it. until Taylor can throw the ball to his receiver who's not open and then throw it before his reciever makes his cut, I will then get on the Taylor train. I'm tired of watching all these other QB's do that in the NFL. Also this whole problem could have been solved by Drafting Mahomes or Watson with our 10th pick. So now we wait yet another year to get to drafting a franchise QB and getting him reps and learning the offense. Taylor is a bridge QB. I like him he's pretty good. But he won't win you any playoff games or Super Bowls with him. You can't play QB like he does and win tuff games against good opponents. Give me a QB that can throw the ball with anticipation and before the receiver makes his cut and then you will see some great wins. Taylor holds the ball the longest. He will only throw it unless he see's his guy is wide open, he does not throw over the middle very much. No anticipation at all, except throwing it out there on deep ball shots. Peterman might be that guy. I don't know enough about him. But what I seen on film is really good. Let's see how he looks in the preseason games.

Edited May 1, 2017 by billsareback

[4merper4mer]

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

 

 

 

I believe the technical term is douche baggery.

[KellyToughII]

Nothing to discuss, he isn't the QB to get us where we want to go. Our long term solution is either Petterman or a 1st round pick next year.

[SDS]

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

Besides, did I post an actual assessment by him of Taylor? Do you believe he skews his data because he's enamored with Taylor?

Confirmation bias. Seeking evidence that supports your current belief.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Some questions I have below in bold

INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - 3rd [is this 3rd best or 3rd worst?]

CAUGHT (by the defense) INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - Tied for 6th highest [similar to above - is 6th highest mean he has 6 most, or 6th least?]

ACCURACY % - 9th [how is this assessed, since he can't know the route the receiver was supposed to run?]

ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th [don't all passes have to be thrown from behind LOS unless lateral?]

% of total attempts up to 10 yards beyond LOS - 24th [i think this is significant because it matches what I saw - that Taylor struggles to see his designed outlet, especially short/intermediate throws over the middle of the field]

% of total attempts beyond 10 yards beyond LOS - 10th

FAILED RECEPTION (by the WR) %.- 4th highest [again does this mean we have a lot of failed receptions, or very few?]

CREATED RECEPTION (by the WR) % - 20th highest

CREATED YARDS (by the WR) % - 26th

SCREENS, SCREEN TDs, & SCREEN % - 33rd

AVOIDABLE SACK % - 18th

 

So what this seems to be saying is that our WR were not very good about catching? And Taylor could be taking far fewer sacks?

I think it's pretty clear to say we had no screen plays (really strange) in our game, and that perhaps our WR were not very good at making catches happen or making YAC happen. Which matches my eyeballs. I would watch other teams and go "why can't we have WR who make plays like that?"

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

I can't think of the name right now, though.

Anyone...?

 

I believe it's called "confirmation bias". The person accepts data that confirms their belief and rejects data or sources that might cause them to reassess or question their belief.

[BillsFan17]

You can have a thousand and one people show me how they calculate their metrics and blah blah blah.

 

I don't need a pencil pusher to tell me Tyrod is not a good QB.

 

Tyrod wasn't a good QB in college, wasn't a good QB in Baltimore and hasn't been a good QB here.

 

A heck of an athlete, sure, I'll never deny that, but the guy is not an NFL level QB.

[mannc]

Thanks. Excellent post, OP. The reaction to this information (I don't care what the numbers say, Tyrod doesn't pass the eye test, he sucks.) is exactly why advanced statistical analysis is so important and why, for example, it has come to dominate baseball and is ascendant in football: your "eye test" is very often wrong, for a whole bunch of different reasons, including unconscious biases and the general unreliability of visual observation, of which Tyrod not meeting the eye test might be a good example.

Edited May 1, 2017 by mannc

[BillsFan17]

I believe it's called "confirmation bias". The person accepts data that confirms their belief and rejects data or sources that might cause them to reassess or question their belief.

Basically cherry picking

[Bangarang]

Another transplant about Tyrod. This should be an exciting rollercoaster.

 

I still say he's nothing more than a decent stop gap.

[BigBuff423]

Thanks. Excellent post, OP. The reaction to this information (I don't care what the numbers say, Tyrod doesn't pass the eye test, he sucks.) is exactly why advanced statistical analysis is so important and why, for example, it has come to dominate baseball and is ascendant in football: your "eye test" is very often wrong, for a whole bunch of different reasons, including unconscious biases and the general unreliability of visual observation, of which Tyrod not meeting the eye test might be a good example.

 

I'm sorry, but I disagree whole-heartedly. Baseball and football are extremely different sports and while it quite obviously works in baseball across the board, I think in football you have to use the metrics and analytics carefully and sparingly. With lineman and linebackers based on their assignments and how they execute the plays, the analytics seem to me to have more value. But with a QB, there are just so many variables including how a game "feels" or "flows", also known as momentum that cannot be easily quantified in metrics that impact how a QB performs that it is a position that is much more about evaluating the QB by sight and what he accomplishes in the MANNER in which he accomplishes it or fails to do so, than any amount of metrics or analytics can provide. JMO, but it's not about dismissing the analytics as it is being quite cautious in their use.

[mannc]

 

I'm sorry, but I disagree whole-heartedly. Baseball and football are extremely different sports and while it quite obviously works in baseball across the board, I think in football you have to use the metrics and analytics carefully and sparingly. With lineman and linebackers based on their assignments and how they execute the plays, the analytics seem to me to have more value. But with a QB, there are just so many variables including how a game "feels" or "flows", also known as momentum that cannot be easily quantified in metrics that impact how a QB performs that it is a position that is much more about evaluating the QB by sight and what he accomplishes in the MANNER in which he accomplishes it or fails to do so, than any amount of metrics or analytics can provide. JMO, but it's not about dismissing the analytics as it is being quite cautious in their use.

Football analytics are certainly more complicated than they are in baseball, where the numbers are much less subjective and require less context. But that doesn't mean football analytics aren't meaningful, especially when it comes to quarterbacking, and many teams are buying in (including the Bills, apparently). And by the way, the idea that "momentum" is an important factor in football has been thoroughly de-bunked by statistical analysis and is a good example of the type of superstitious nonsense that should play no part in a coach's or an organization's decision making.

[transplantbillsfan]

Thank you for putting this out there OP, and I appreciate another person / professional is does their best to comb through stats and digest them to some degree for us casual readers or observers. However, while the stats are basic math regarding percentages - and I trust the man to have a calculator to do the percentage for him and that he's not "lying" - I disagree with the other statement or conclusion of this information that leads to believing Tyrod is a "good" QB.

 

To me, finding a good QB is much like what the Supreme Court referred to pornography, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it"....a really good to great QB is similar. I don't necessarily that works counter toward a poor QB, for that I think only time and experience truly show, unless they were really bad in college, which makes me think they didn't even get a look to come to the NFL. Bottom line for me: Tyrod doesn't pass the eye test. I don't watch the All-22 and from what people say, Tyrod does a fine job, but I watch the games and I watch many, many other NFL and college games, and Tyrod routinely throws the ball high, low, wide or behind a receiver. He misses open receivers in the middle of the field and he gets antsy feet in the pocket. To me, he is not Russ Wilson 2.0, he is just an incredible athlete with a penchant for the deep ball.

 

IMHO, a true NFL QB stands in the pocket, takes the hits and delivers, commands the Offense with precision and accuracy, and has the ability to take what the Defense gives him bit by bit and chew up the yardage as well as making good audible calls at the line, not just making plays after the snap with his running or elusive ability, which to Tyrod's credit he does as well as anyone in the league. Tyrod was probably the best option for this year, but he is NOT a good NFL QB, he's just better than what we've had for so very long. Sometimes, desperation makes it hard to tell the difference.

Completely fair opinion and well stated, even if I disagree, though not strongly

[BringBackOrton]

Some questions I have below in bold

 

So what this seems to be saying is that our WR were not very good about catching? And Taylor could be taking far fewer sacks?

 

I think it's pretty clear to say we had no screen plays (really strange) in our game, and that perhaps our WR were not very good at making catches happen or making YAC happen. Which matches my eyeballs. I would watch other teams and go "why can't we have WR who make plays like that?"

 

I believe it's called "confirmation bias". The person accepts data that confirms their belief and rejects data or sources that might cause them to reassess or question their belief.

TT's accuracy gives them no chance at YAC, on the whole.

[KellyToughII]

You can have a thousand and one people show me how they calculate their metrics and blah blah blah.

 

I don't need a pencil pusher to tell me Tyrod is not a good QB.

 

Tyrod wasn't a good QB in college, wasn't a good QB in Baltimore and hasn't been a good QB here.

 

A heck of an athlete, sure, I'll never deny that, but the guy is not an NFL level QB.

Exactly

[transplantbillsfan]

Hahahaha, damage control because they drafted a very accurate passer in Peterman. Nervous I see!

Are you joking?

 

Yes, I'm sure Taylor's shaking in his boots because McDermott clearly plans to replace him with a guy he drafted with a 2nd 5th round pick...

[mannc]

TT's accuracy gives them no chance at YAC, on the whole.

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters. Edited May 1, 2017 by mannc

[transplantbillsfan]

Nothing to discuss, he isn't the QB to get us where we want to go. Our long term solution is either Petterman or a 1st round pick next year.

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

[dulles]

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

Besides, did I post an actual assessment by him of Taylor? Do you believe he skews his data because he's enamored with Taylor?

It's circular reasoning or begging the question.

 

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/begging-the-question

[BringBackOrton]

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters.

The numbers? How does Fahey get his "numbers?"

 

What was our team YAC in 2015? With a Sammy who played almost the entire season?

 

The evidence is in the game. Not only does TT throw balls that are usually inaccurate enough that WR/TE's can't turn up field, his deficits on using the middle of the field and relying too much on comebacks and outs (sideline throws) virtually ensure poor YAC numbers.

Edited May 1, 2017 by jmc12290

[Big Gun]

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

this is funny

[NewEra]

Tyrod a a decent QB. He doesn't suck. He's great at running the ball and buying time in the pocket. At times, he's really exciting to watch. He's a good guy. With an all-time type defense, he might be able to win a super bowl.

 

That's the most positive post I could put together about TT. Hopefully he can be more than that in a new system and with healthy weapons at his disposal.

[dulles]

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters.

Another forgotten influence was Roman's route tree which was often impugned as archaic. Modern route​ trees are designed to get guys open and to keep them running after the catch.

Evidently Roman never studied the pass game from the 1980s on. Even Lynn admitted that there were pass concepts he'd like to add, but couldn't due to limited practice time midseason.

[mannc]

The numbers? How does Fahey get his "numbers?"

 

What was our team YAC in 2015? With a Sammy who played almost the entire season?

 

The evidence is in the game. Not only does TT throw balls that are usually inaccurate enough that WR/TE's can't turn up field, his deficits on using the middle of the field and relying too much on comebacks and outs (sideline throws) virtually ensure poor YAC numbers.

The OP explained how Fahey gets his numbers. Do you have any reason to dispute them (other than your "eye test")? I don't know what the YAC was in 2015, nor do I know the reason it was low in 2016. As I suggested, there could be many reasons, but TT's supposed inaccuracy is probably not a significant factor.

[GoBills808]

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

Do you agree with Fahey's assessment that Taylor is better than Cousins?

[mannc]

Another forgotten influence was Roman's route tree which was often impugned as archaic. Modern route​ trees are designed to get guys open and to keep them running after the catch.

Evidently Roman never studied the pass game from the 1980s on. Even Lynn admitted that there were pass concepts he'd like to add, but couldn't due to limited practice time midseason.

Yes, that seems likely, but we would need to know whether the Bills' route tree favored certain types of passes over other types, and which types of passes tend to generate more or less YAC.

[Alphadawg7]

You can have a thousand and one people show me how they calculate their metrics and blah blah blah.

 

I don't need a pencil pusher to tell me Tyrod is not a good QB.

 

Tyrod wasn't a good QB in college, wasn't a good QB in Baltimore and hasn't been a good QB here.

 

A heck of an athlete, sure, I'll never deny that, but the guy is not an NFL level QB.

 

Except for those pesky facts and stats where it shows he is an NFL level QB.

 

I don't care if you don't think Taylor is good enough, but the fact that you said he is not an NFL level QB might be one of the absolute dumbest things I have read on this board since the Mario for Skelton straight up trade thread. People can disagree on how good he is or can be, I am fine with that...but to say he can't play in the NFL when he has represented the AFC 2 years in a row and was chosen by his peers (people who know football about a million times better than you) says you probably should just stop commenting on him as you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Alphadawg7

[BringBackOrton]

The OP explained how Fahey gets his numbers. Do you have any reason to dispute them (other than your "eye test")? I don't know what the YAC was in 2015, nor do I know the reason it was low in 2016. As I suggested, there could be many reasons, but TT's supposed inaccuracy is probably not a significant factor.

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

[mannc]

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

Here's what the OP said about how Fahey goes about his work:

 

"The focus is on the actual level of play of a QB on the field by attributing credit and/or blame for individual things the QB almost always gets credit (i.e.:completion %) or blame (i.e.:interceptions, sacks) for. Fahey acknowledges the inevitable subjectivity involved, but uses the same subjective criteria to chart 33 NFL QBs and every single one of their snaps. So it's pretty evenly subjective, at least."

 

That sounds a lot different than, "I know an NFL QB when I see one."

 

As to your comment about WRs and low YAC, I acknowledged that it is probably attributable to multiple factors, but the one thing that is UNLIKELY to be causing it is Tyrod's inaccuracy, since he ranks fairly high in most measures of accuracy.

 

[Alphadawg7]

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

 

I agree YAC does need to improve...however thats also a result of the plays being called, the WR's, etc, not just all on TT. It will help TT when our WR's don't fall all the time (Woods - worst feet on a WR I have ever seen), are out hurt (Sammy, Harvin, Goodwin, Woods are perennially hurt or dinged up), guys don't dog out routes (Clay, Goodwin, etc) or when they aren't just a bunch of scrubs on the field due to injuries.

 

And more importantly, the new coaching staff and Dennison hopefully puts him in a better system too. While there were times I liked what our OC was doing, there were others where I wanted to break my TV on the dumb calls and stupid play designs.

[BigBuff423]

Football analytics are certainly more complicated than they are in baseball, where the numbers are much less subjective and require less context. But that doesn't mean football analytics aren't meaningful, especially when it comes to quarterbacking, and many teams are buying in (including the Bills, apparently). And by the way, the idea that "momentum" is an important factor in football has been thoroughly de-bunked by statistical analysis and is a good example of the type of superstitious nonsense that should play no part in a coach's or an organization's decision making.

 

And I'm not asking this to be condescending, I'm legitimately asking: did you watch the 1992 comeback win?? If you did, fair enough once again we disagree - if you did not, then you should watch it from start to finish. Because I can tell you, the momentum swing in that game was entirely real and relevant. Now, could it simply be the psychological manner in which momentum manifests itself into confidence - of course - but it doesn't change the significant at all. You'll tell me it's one game, but seeing the Bills all these years on the reverse side of that pendulum, doesn't negate it's truth either - just the taste is a bit saltier.