Peterman Arm Strength

[Shaw66]

6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

No, adjusting the timing means you have to adjust the timing, early or late.

 

My understanding of how it goes for a WCO based on timing routes is, you work out your timing for a guy running an unimpeded route on a good field.  Normally you have to slow the timing a bit to account for physical contact with the WR slowing him down, sub-optimal field conditions, WR fatigue or injury etc.  I'm happy to be corrected, but this is what logically makes sense.

Where I can see velocity mattering is in a broken play where WR and QB are improvising, and the QB sees something and has a tight window to get it in there.

 

I'm not quite sure that's true.  One extreme example would be Fitzpatrick, to make a long throw, he had to involve his whole body (possibly due to improper lower body mechanics).

 

I was talking about things like the bolded language, not how the WCO works in the ideal.  And it isn't only when you're improvising.   There are plenty of plays designed for the 

qb to throw when he recognizes something.   Like an out pattern.  Two qbs, different arm strength, the guy with the weaker arm has to release the ball earlier than the other in order to get the ball there on time.  That means he has to recognize his key earlier than the other guy, which means he has less time to look at what's happening before deciding.  That's a disadvantage, because the longer you have to look at the play develop, the better your decision making will be.  

[BadLandsMeanie]

Short and sweet. 

 

Peterman is going to pick them to pieces tomorrow.

 

First game rookie, 5th round pick, Peterman is going to pick them to pieces tomorrow.

[Tcali]

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 8:39 AM, Shaw66 said:

I agree.   Some of that is athleticism, but as you say, he has practiced.   He's learned to throw the ball from all kinds of positions.   

 

Watch the replays when he makes those throws.  He always finds a way to get his body, particularly his upper body, into the throw.  It's often just a quick twitch, but it gives him to deliver the ball on a line instead of throwing a wounded duck. 

Everybody says this, but I don't think there are plenty.  Or even a few. 

 

If I have a strong arm and I think quickly, I'm better than your guy who thinks quickly with a weak arm.  Can you say FItzpatrick?

I agree with you that the strong arm /think quickly combo is the best of course. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.Johnny U comes to mind. His arm strength was a joke.

RE: Fitzpatrick...His arm was a joke of course. But I also think he is not a very intelligent football player despite his high IQ. So I don't think he was a quick thinker out there.

[Theshallowcross]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/edit?usp=drivesdk

 

The biggest thing to take from this (which has now been tracked since 2008) is that QBs with velocity of 55 or less, just simply haven't been successful in the long-term. Here is a good article. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dawgsbynature.com/platform/amp/2017/3/10/14890754/cleveland-browns-2017-nfl-scouting-combine-qb-velocity

 

Hoping for the best for Peterman but I don't think it matter who the QB is because the OLine and Dennison are absolutely horrendous. 

[Thurman#1]

Agreed, Shaw, this is the question with Peterman. Or anyway, the most obvious question that we yet have any information about beyond the obvious ... a lack of experience at NFL level.

 

I think he needs to go to a QB coach during the offseason. Increasing your arm strength is possible. It doesn't seem to be common, but it's been done, generally through coaching on the fundamentals of the throwing motion. Both Aaron Rodgers and Brady have improved their arm strength. But not everybody does. I'm hoping he can and does. 

 

But my guess is that we're going to be drafting a QB early next year if we can possibly get early enough to get a guy we like.

[McNubbins]

I'm not concerned about arm strength at all.  Fitz used to air it out on occasion. 

 

 

I just want to see him getting the ball out quick, and on target.  Not waiting and waiting in the pocket for someone to get open.

[Thurman#1]

11 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I was talking about things like the bolded language, not how the WCO works in the ideal.  And it isn't only when you're improvising.   There are plenty of plays designed for the 

qb to throw when he recognizes something.   Like an out pattern.  Two qbs, different arm strength, the guy with the weaker arm has to release the ball earlier than the other in order to get the ball there on time.  That means he has to recognize his key earlier than the other guy, which means he has less time to look at what's happening before deciding.  That's a disadvantage, because the longer you have to look at the play develop, the better your decision making will be.  

 

 

Speed matters, but worth remembering that other factors affect how little/much time you have to throw. For example, speed of decision-making and speed of release. I'd argue that decision-making speed is the most important of the three. Peterman appears to be very good at that, though it's very early days.

[Doc]

8 hours ago, Theshallowcross said:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_-SienfT3umX0HKxRyQqyXM9BqHrotdcQA6W-V_pDiY/edit?usp=drivesdk

 

The biggest thing to take from this (which has now been tracked since 2008) is that QBs with velocity of 55 or less, just simply haven't been successful in the long-term. Here is a good article. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dawgsbynature.com/platform/amp/2017/3/10/14890754/cleveland-browns-2017-nfl-scouting-combine-qb-velocity

 

Hoping for the best for Peterman but I don't think it matter who the QB is because the OLine and Dennison are absolutely horrendous. 

 

Funny that the only rookie QB who has looked like he'll be worth anything was Watson with a 49 MPH BV.  Oh and BTW, Peterman is 6' 2-5/8", not 6' 2-1/8", so he's actually closer to 6' 3".

 

I have to admit that after seeing Watson's BV, along with being just 6' 2" and having been surrounded with talent at Clemson, I thought he'd be a bust.  Goes to show you that it's not that easy to predict a QB's success in the NFL.  

 

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

Speed matters, but worth remembering that other factors affect how little/much time you have to throw. For example, speed of decision-making and speed of release. I'd argue that decision-making speed is the most important of the three. Peterman appears to be very good at that, though it's very early days.

 

Yup.

[Theshallowcross]

17 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Funny that the only rookie QB who has looked like he'll be worth anything was Watson with a 49 MPH BV.  Oh and BTW, Peterman is 6' 2-5/8", not 6' 2-1/8", so he's actually closer to 6' 3".

 

I have to admit that after seeing Watson's BV, along with being just 6' 2" and having been surrounded with talent at Clemson, I thought he'd be a bust.  Goes to show you that it's not that easy to predict a QB's success in the NFL.  

 

Watson has started 6 games. That's it. Small sample size cherry picks like that prove nothing. Even if somehow Watson becomes great, he is nothing more than an outlier. If you look at that list and glean anything, it should be obvious that quarterbacks who are sub 55 velocity don't ever work out. That's exactly what the data says and there is a lot more of that data then there is of Watson and his 6 games. 

 

Everyone is hoping that Peterman is an outlier but statistically speaking, it doesn't look promising. 

[Doc]

14 minutes ago, Theshallowcross said:

 

Watson has started 6 games. That's it. Small sample size cherry picks like that prove nothing. Even if somehow Watson becomes great, he is nothing more than an outlier. If you look at that list and glean anything, it should be obvious that quarterbacks who are sub 55 velocity don't ever work out. That's exactly what the data says and there is a lot more of that data then there is of Watson and his 6 games. 

 

Everyone is hoping that Peterman is an outlier but statistically speaking, it doesn't look promising. 

 

We shall find out soon.

[Foxx]

34 minutes ago, Theshallowcross said:

 

Watson has started 6 games. That's it. Small sample size cherry picks like that prove nothing. Even if somehow Watson becomes great, he is nothing more than an outlier. If you look at that list and glean anything, it should be obvious that quarterbacks who are sub 55 velocity don't ever work out. That's exactly what the data says and there is a lot more of that data then there is of Watson and his 6 games. 

 

Everyone is hoping that Peterman is an outlier but statistically speaking, it doesn't look promising. 

i don't buy your entire argument here. Peterman was clocked at what, 53mph? that is 2 mph slower then the bottom rung of your supposed metric. do you honestly think that he can't improve the velocity of his throw by 2 mph, minimum?

[Theshallowcross]

7 minutes ago, Foxx said:

i don't buy your entire argument here. Peterman was clocked at what, 53mph? that is 2 mph slower then the bottom rung of your supposed metric. do you honestly think that he can't improve the velocity of his throw by 2 mph, minimum?

 

It's not my metric but I definitely believe in the data. That 2 MPH slower velocity equates to 3 feet traveled on a 20 yard throw. Which is a huge passing window in the NFL. It's the difference between a completion and a turnover from an NFL level corner. 

 

The data shows very clearly that sub 55 velocity is a deathknell for quarterback prospects. 

[Foxx]

Just now, Theshallowcross said:

 

It's not my metric but I definitely believe in the data. That 2 MPH slower velocity equates to 3 feet traveled on a 20 yard throw. Which is a huge passing window in the NFL. It's the difference between a completion and a turnover from an NFL level corner. 

 

The data shows very clearly that sub 55 velocity is a deathknell for quarterback prospects. 

just guessing here but there should be ways to compensate for this. what your example refers to essentially boils down to timing. Nate knows how he is going to deliver the ball and he makes the required dynamic adjustment to do what needs to be done to get his throw there. if that means he throws the out 21 yards to make up for that 1 yard lost in velosity, he does it.

 

there is much more to the equation than simple velocity.

[Luka]

The only thing that matters is your ability to read defenses and anticipate throws. How many "physically gifted" QBs have we seen come and go in the league and never amount to anything? People always think they are going to create some metric or find some statistic that's going to prove this or that about a guy. It's NEVER going to happen. Football has been around for more than 100 years and no one has come up with it yet.

[Theshallowcross]

8 minutes ago, Foxx said:

just guessing here but there should be ways to compensate for this. what your example refers to essentially boils down to timing. Nate knows how he is going to deliver the ball and he makes the required dynamic adjustment to do what needs to be done to get his throw there. if that means he throws the out 21 yards to make up for that 1 yard lost in velosity, he does it.

 

there is much more to the equation than simple velocity.

 

What it boils down to is velocity. Nothing more nothing less. I understand that we all want to try and explain away the data but sometimes it just is what it is and what it is, is that no sub 55 passer has ever broken the trend. 

 

Expecting a 5th round rookie who never carried an offense even in college to do so probably won't end well. Taylors velocity was sub 55 and he is now on the bench. That sub 55 velocity will become even more of a big deal when you're throwing in the elements in Western New York where its cold and windy. 

 

Again, I hope I'm wrong and I hope that Peterman is the exception to the rule, the outlier, but I wouldn't bet against the data. 

[Foxx]

9 minutes ago, Theshallowcross said:

 

What it boils down to is velocity. Nothing more nothing less. I understand that we all want to try and explain away the data but sometimes it just is what it is and what it is, is that no sub 55 passer has ever broken the trend. 

 

Expecting a 5th round rookie who never carried an offense even in college to do so probably won't end well. Taylors velocity was sub 55 and he is now on the bench. That sub 55 velocity will become even more of a big deal when you're throwing in the elements in Western New York where its cold and windy. 

 

Again, I hope I'm wrong and I hope that Peterman is the exception to the rule, the outlier, but I wouldn't bet against the data. 

i don't agree but you are as entitled to your opinion as i am mine.

 

cheers

 

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, Theshallowcross said:

 

Watson has started 6 games. That's it. Small sample size cherry picks like that prove nothing. Even if somehow Watson becomes great, he is nothing more than an outlier. If you look at that list and glean anything, it should be obvious that quarterbacks who are sub 55 velocity don't ever work out. That's exactly what the data says and there is a lot more of that data then there is of Watson and his 6 games. 

 

Everyone is hoping that Peterman is an outlier but statistically speaking, it doesn't look promising. 

 

Dak Prescott was a 54. Is he another outlier too? 2 outliers in 2 years. I’ll take my chances.

[John from Riverside]

On 11/16/2017 at 12:30 PM, BadLandsMeanie said:

Yes and no. What you say is true but guys don't want to catch a ball that is going 60 miles an hour. So this really only applies on the long ball as in your example, when it has had time to slow down some.

 

And to be a pain  there is also the arc of the ball to be considered and the calculations of wind resistance and deceleration on a 60 mph versus a 50 mph one. I have no idea if it is different, but it could require adjustments to your calculations there!

I really want to see Peterman play because I want to see if the whole arm strength thing is overblown.....

 

If your accurate....IT DONT MATTER the only concern is not being able to make certain throws where the ball hangs.....and you simply dont make those throws

[dave mcbride]

On November 17, 2017 at 9:42 AM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Fitz would just make inaccurate throws even if the decision was right.   He could be pinpoint at times......like the Baltimore game in 2010........ and then inexplicably wild high AND low in others and you don't see that from the Rodgers/Brady/Brees types that so many Bills fans here can only see thru their very FAR-SIGHTED lens.

 

Peterman has shown he can and will make bad throws......if you don't want to look at it much check out that Senior Bowl highlight video posted where he totally skies a ball 10 feet off the mark from short range to Zay Jones in the end zone........that's what he's shown.......... and when you are needing 7 passes to get down the field all the time that increases your chances of a big mistake.

 

Bills offense under Roman/Lynn was about big plays.........which they LEAD THE NFL in two years in a row with Tyrod at QB.   When the personnel was injured at WR he threw more short passes but his impact on the running game mean't they didn't have to throw a lot of passes EVEN THEN.

 

But Tyrod's main value wasn't his legs he brings a number of things to the table of equal importance including the ability to make spectacular big/deep throws and protecting the football.......they worked in unison.  But he needs to be surrounded with complementary talent to give you a top offense like the team had last year.   

 

One thing Peterman isn't likely to bring to the table is a running game.   That's scheme related and the short-to-intermediate passing game clogs the front 7 so you really need to be surgical or you can complete 25-30 passes in a game and still not be scoring points. 

 

And please don't be the person who tries to claim they didn't have an excellent offense last year............it was their best since 1991.

 

I am excited to see Peterman play because he's new and I know that for better or worse McD is going down with his guys regardless.

 

It's like Rex with his scheme.........it was going to work or fail in spectacular fashion there was certainly no in between and McD is going to live and die with his bold personnel decisions.   Won't take 3 years to see if he is capable of executing his vision, we will know by the end of next season so I like that he's started his own clock ticking at least.    

 

Inaccuracy issues plus a weak arm are why he was there in round 5.   

 

Not saying either can't be fixed but that's why he was there.

Good post. Sums it up.

On November 17, 2017 at 9:42 AM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2017 by dave mcbride

[Theshallowcross]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Dak Prescott was a 54. Is he another outlier too? 2 outliers in 2 years. I’ll take my chances.

 

Do you not understand what the word outlier means? It's also entirely too early to say that Watson or Prescott are outliers. Watson especially. Prescott has a pretty great situation he is in. A top offensive line (the Bills still have a crap OL) and a top running game. Without his LT and his star RB last week, he looked horrendous. 

 

The data is there for everyone to see. Take what you want from it. Peterman being successful would be an absolute long shot. But that's ok because we have the ammunition to move up and draft Josh Rosen.