Threads from the Enemy-Tennessee

[CJD]

(11-22-2022, 08:06 PM)Sevenfeet Wrote: QBR (invented by ESPN in 2011) is a harder metric to grasp, especially since there are 6 major metrics that it is following and the first one has a number of moving parts. Contrast that to passer rating (which is a real NFL stat) which is only about passing yards/completion percentage/TDs/sacks and nothing more.  Some of the metrics are subjective at best.  For example, there is a "discount" for garbage time stats, that is a QB that gets a whole bunch of yards when the game is out of reach. I'd love to see how that's calculated and if someone has to manually determine that.

As for the names on this list, I think Lamar Jackson would like to have a word with you on whether Joe Burrow is a better QB. But let's discuss Marcus Mariota since we Titans fans are very familiar with him and his game play since he started for us for years. No one is saying that Mariota is better than Burrow...heck, he'd probably agree. (And Mariota was loved in Nashville as a great human being, but he was a middling, inconsistent QB). But QBR helps Mariota in that running the football is considered to be something that gooses the metric. And Mariota has always done well there (as has Lamar Jackson).

And then there's the "degree of difficulty" metric for a play. So I expect that a QB isn't rewarded much if he checks down a lot, but gets points for harder, down the field passes. Then you get freaks like Mahomes who can pocket pass in tight windows down the field, run the ball AND do freaky off-schedule stuff that kills defenses (like what happened to us twice now).

So a passer rating is certainly easier to wrap your brain around. But QBR was supposed to rate the entire package of the athlete, so to speak.

Right. I think QBR is an incredibly subjective statistic, which makes it very difficult to rely on for much, especially since it will only ever really matter on ESPN's website, since other websites will not be interested in broadcasting a competitor's confidential statistic. It seems even ESPN's own employees don't regard it as worthy of consideration, since their QB rankings never match the QBR stat.

It seems to me based on your response and some other responses that running the ball is too heavily accounted for in QBR, but even that isn't something Tannehill holds over Burrow. I imagine if the general fanbase of the NFL were to rank each attribute of a QB (accuracy, arm strength, touch, athleticism, pocket awareness, ability to read a defense etc), Burrow would come away ranked higher in almost every category compared to Tannehill, arm strength being the only one I'd call a toss up between the two.

I didn't mean to start a debate about whether QBR is or is not a legitimate statistic as much as I was just pointing out that using it to claim that Tannehill is playing as well as Burrow right now is bad and will cause you to lose credibility in non-echo chamber discussions.

Regarding Lamar Jackson, he does one thing better than Burrow and that's run the ball. I understand that running is part of the arsenal that a QB has, as you alluded to with Mariota, but it's clear as day that Burrow is the far superior passer of the football. Funnily enough, I recall a recent Burrow interview where he said that, in some ways, he is kind of glad he isn't the same athlete that Jackson is because, if he were, he probably wouldn't have fine tuned his passing accuracy and ability to read the defense, the two things that have made him a millionaire.