ESPN QB rankings

[TheFan]

(08-23-2022, 03:47 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Brady's career completion percentage is 64.2%
Rodgers' career completion percentage is 65.3%

Burrow has only played two seasons, but he's already at 68.2%

I guess I shouldn't get too worked up. Brady and maybe Rodgers probably won't be playing in a couple years.

The early part of their Era was also a lot different that today's game too. I can see the argument for Burrow being ahead of Brady currently but Rodgers just threw for 70.7% in 2020 and his int% is significantly lower. Burrow has already thrown more INT in a season that Rodgers has in any season of his career. 

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2022, 03:56 PM)TheFan Wrote: The early part of their Era was also a lot different that today's game too. I can see the argument for Burrow being ahead of Brady currently but Rodgers just threw for 70.7% in 2020 and his int% is significantly lower. Burrow has already thrown more INT in a season that Rodgers has in any season of his career. 

INT percentage doesn't (or shouldn't) be factored into accuracy, IMO.

[KillerGoose]

(08-23-2022, 04:18 PM)ochocincos Wrote: INT percentage doesn't (or shouldn't) be factored into accuracy, IMO.

This is an interesting take, especially since you seem to be in favor of completion percentage factoring into accuracy. Why are you against INT percentage? 

[AlphaBengal]

Toughness is the only one I disagree on. Joe was battered last year like no other and performed at an all-pro level. Sprained his MCL in the Super Bowl and kept playing.

When Brady and Rodgers retire(Brady next year, Rodgers 2-3 more) we should see Joe at the top of virtually every single passing category save for arm strength.

[*Synric*]

Burrow played with a broken finger on his throwing hand...

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

Should be #1 in accuracy and toughness. I am sure many already called this out. I know it was only his 2nd season
but he led the league in completion percentage last season at 70+ percent. He also got his ACL blown out as a rookie
and had to come back and do what he did all the while getting sacked more than any other QB in the league and getting
hit maybe more than any as well. Plus he got his finger broken late last year and played the entire postseason like that.

Dude is crazy tough.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2022, 04:20 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: This is an interesting take, especially since you seem to be in favor of completion percentage factoring into accuracy. Why are you against INT percentage? 

Because INTs are already factored into the completion percentage.
Does someone throwing an INT vs an incomplete pass make them LESS accurate?
Or is it the same accuracy whether there's an INT or not?

[KillerGoose]

(08-23-2022, 05:57 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Because INTs are already factored into the completion percentage.
Does someone throwing an INT vs an incomplete pass make them LESS accurate?
Or is it the same accuracy whether there's an INT or not?

To the bolded, it depends. Context is king in football. Why was the pass incomplete? Was it a bad route, or a timing play where the receiver didn't get to his spot? That isn't really the QBs fault. Did the receiver run the right route, but the QB just missed him? Okay, that's an inaccurate pass. Did the receiver run the right route but the QB threw a dangerous ball? Maybe he threw it behind him, or under/overthrew him and allowed the DB to easily make a play.

In my opinion, accuracy, or in this case, inaccuracy, is a spectrum. Throwing an interception is part of that spectrum, even within the interception grouping. There is a difference between throwing a ball high, which gets tipped and ultimately picked vs. completely missing your man and throwing it straight to a defender. You can even throw an accurate, incomplete pass. QB's have the ability to put a ball only where their guy can get it, so even if the pass is incomplete it can still be an accurate pass. 

 I interpret your final question as insinuating that the outcome doesn't matter; a miss is a miss. What happens with that miss is irrelevant, but I would argue that these misses are, again, on a spectrum and the outcome is valuable in determining where on that spectrum the individual pass lies. 

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2022, 06:13 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: To the bolded, it depends. Context is king in football. Why was the pass incomplete? Was it a bad route, or a timing play where the receiver didn't get to his spot? That isn't really the QBs fault. Did the receiver run the right route, but the QB just missed him? Okay, that's an inaccurate pass. Did the receiver run the right route but the QB threw a dangerous ball? Maybe he threw it behind him, or under/overthrew him and allowed the DB to easily make a play.

In my opinion, accuracy, or in this case, inaccuracy, is a spectrum. Throwing an interception is part of that spectrum, even within the interception grouping. There is a difference between throwing a ball high, which gets tipped and ultimately picked vs. completely missing your man and throwing it straight to a defender. You can even throw an accurate, incomplete pass. QB's have the ability to put a ball only where their guy can get it, so even if the pass is incomplete it can still be an accurate pass. 

 I interpret your final question as insinuating that the outcome doesn't matter; a miss is a miss. What happens with that miss is irrelevant, but I would argue that these misses are, again, on a spectrum and the outcome is valuable in determining where on that spectrum the individual pass lies. 

I would also say not every INT is the same either.
If you're going to be nitpick why a pass was incomplete, you also need to nitpick why an interception happened.
An INT gets dinged on the QB even if the wrong route was ran or the ball was deflected and luckily grabbed by a defender hitting the ground.

Going off metrics is never going to tell the whole story, but you should be able to at least gather some information in much less time spent compared to watching hours upon hours of film.
Is my opinion always right when I toss a number out vs going in super deep to analyze a bunch of film? Usually not.
But if it takes me 5 minutes to pull up a metric and get close, I'm going to go that route since I don't have the time nor interest to go watch a ton of film just for the sake of maybe being slightly more informed.

If a metric/dashboard gives me 90% of the way there, that's "good enough" for me usually.

[KillerGoose]

(08-23-2022, 06:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I would also say not every INT is the same either.
If you're going to be nitpick why a pass was incomplete, you also need to nitpick why an interception happened.
An INT gets dinged on the QB even if the wrong route was ran or the ball was deflected and luckily grabbed by a defender hitting the ground.

I already am nitpicking interceptions. That was in the second paragraph of my post. "...Throwing an interception is part of that spectrum, even within the interception grouping. There is a difference between throwing a ball high, which gets tipped and ultimately picked vs. completely missing your man and throwing it straight to a defender."

Quote:Going off metrics is never going to tell the whole story...

Correct, but the more data you gather, the better the orator. You can look at completion percentage and interception percentage and have a better idea of who is accurate vs. who is not rather than simply looking at completion percentage. 

Quote:If a metric/dashboard gives me 90% of the way there, that's "good enough" for me usually.

I agree. I am an analyst by trade. This is my approach as well. 

[TheFan]

(08-23-2022, 06:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I would also say not every INT is the same either.
If you're going to be nitpick why a pass was incomplete, you also need to nitpick why an interception happened.
An INT gets dinged on the QB even if the wrong route was ran or the ball was deflected and luckily grabbed by a defender hitting the ground.

Going off metrics is never going to tell the whole story, but you should be able to at least gather some information in much less time spent compared to watching hours upon hours of film.
Is my opinion always right when I toss a number out vs going in super deep to analyze a bunch of film? Usually not.
But if it takes me 5 minutes to pull up a metric and get close, I'm going to go that route since I don't have the time nor interest to go watch a ton of film just for the sake of maybe being slightly more informed.

If a metric/dashboard gives me 90% of the way there, that's "good enough" for me usually.

Not every incompletion is the same either. Think if instead of eating some of the sacks Burrow did he threw it away a bit more, even just 15 times so he's down to 36 sacks (not inconceivable) he's down to 68%. 

In the last 2 years Burrow was 65.3% and 70.4%. In the last 2 years Rodgers was 70.7% and 68.8%.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2022, 06:40 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I already am nitpicking interceptions. That was in the second paragraph of my post. "...Throwing an interception is part of that spectrum, even within the interception grouping. There is a difference between throwing a ball high, which gets tipped and ultimately picked vs. completely missing your man and throwing it straight to a defender."


Correct, but the more data you gather, the better the orator. You can look at completion percentage and interception percentage and have a better idea of who is accurate vs. who is not rather than simply looking at completion percentage. 


I agree. I am an analyst by trade. This is my approach as well. 

I mean I guess, but I don't personally look at it when I consider who's more accurate in the league.
Might be my fault.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2022, 06:51 PM)TheFan Wrote: Not every incompletion is the same either. Think if instead of eating some of the sacks Burrow did he threw it away a bit more, even just 15 times so he's down to 36 sacks (not inconceivable) he's down to 68%. 

In the last 2 years Burrow was 65.3% and 70.4%. In the last 2 years Rodgers was 70.7% and 68.8%.

I know not every incompletion is the same...that was already mentioned to the post I replied to, which is why I only mentioned not every INT is the same...

[BengalSteve13]

They gotta say what they gotta say, for a lot of reasons.

Only one full season and Burrow is already a top 5 QB MINIMUM.

And who is Patrick Mahomes again...?

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-23-2022, 03:36 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Yeah, the only quarterback I can think of tougher than Burrow is Aaron Rodgers. MAYBE Tom Brady, but Rodgers has had many a season with an offensive line nearly as bad as ours last year. 

On average Aaron Rodgers has been sacked 29.3 times a season over the course of his career. Tom Brady even less at 24.7

Burrow dreams about numbers like that.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-23-2022, 03:42 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Russell Wilson would be up there for me. 

Now he has truly been running for his life most of his career.

42.7 per season average.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-23-2022, 03:42 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Russell Wilson would be up there for me. 

(08-23-2022, 03:47 PM)TheFan Wrote: I can get the Allen argument because of the hits he takes/gives while running but Jackson makes no sense. Don't really get Mahomes either. 

Stafford, like Rodgers, had not the best Oline and got hit a lot for years so I kind of get that to. He's had a lot of gritty plays and fighting through injuries. 

I could see Stafford or Wilson up there on the toughness list. Ahead of Burrow? Debatable, but I'm not going to argue it.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-23-2022, 08:43 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Now he has truly been running for his life most of his career.

42.7 per season average.

Yes, Russell is one tough sumbitch.