Bills' Fitzpatrick Ranks Poorly Under Pressure

[GaryPinC]

I see where among the 34 quarterbacks, that Fitz was sacked the 6th least when pressured (14.02%). That is a significant stat in his favor.

 

It doesn't appear to me however that Pro Football Focus incorporates this fairly significant stat into their ratings of how QBs perform under pressure.

 

In spite of the fact that they have a chart showing sack percentage when pressured, they barely mention it and don't state whether this stat is incorporated into their overall formula (I just skimmed through the article). It appears that sacks are not factored in.

 

If I'm correct in this, I would say that the study is somewhat flawed.

 

When a quarterback ends up getting sacked, the offense loses that down AND an average of about 7 yards. In that sense a sack is a much worse outcome than an offensive holding penalty which is 10 yards but a replay of the down. This is also not to even factor in that sacks are often big momentum-swinging plays.

 

Football is still a game of field position and if PFF wants to rate performance under pressure, they have to factor in the ability to avoid negative plays.

 

 

Somewhat flawed? At least. WGR claims Fitzy sucks with a guy in his face, but while the original article alludes to this situation I don't see anywhere they clearly define "pressure". How do you correct for the fact that the Bills offense was pretty much a complete clusterf* the entire first half of the season, young, inexperienced, new head coaches, new offensive system with everyone struggling to get on the same page? Can anyone watching the Bills offense last year honestly claim it was all Fitzpatrick's fault and therefore he sucks? From the games I watched, he was the guy most responsible for improving the offense in the second half of the year.

 

Fitzpatricks TD to int #'s under pressure(back calculating from the %) was 2:5. Colt McCoy's was 3:3. I think it is irresponsible to take such small #s, convert to ratio and rank. Especially if some quarterbacks were playing from behind and forced to take more risks than others. Even if it "seems" to make sense.

 

In a previous report PFF has Fitzy down for 227 blitzes last year. For this report they only gave him 164 "pressures" which I assume includes non-blitzing pressure. Just recognizing the blitz and making a play should count for something even if the pressure isn't "in your face" at the time.

 

So sad when an author claims to account for many factors in their analysis then don't have the guts to present their accounting formulas.

 

For the record, I think Fitzy deserves another chance this year. I am completely in line with Buddy and Chan's plan and not reaching to draft a QB. Fitzy may suck, he may be a good quarterback, or he may be a great quarterback. I don't know what type of QB Fitzy will be, I only know he made a noticeable positive difference to the offense last year. His team and coaches seem to have a large amount of confidence in him, their priorities this past draft seem to back up what they've been saying.

[Webster Guy]

There are simply too many intangibles at the QB position for that article to have any merit. QB stats are as close to meaningless as you can get.

 

Here's a stat for you: Tom Brady sucked in the superbowl against the Giants defensive pressure and they only scored 14 points and lost. Since then he hasn't won a single playoff game, and that was four years ago. He is a HOF QB with above average protection and receiving corps.

 

Can I then conclude that he plays poorly under pressure and is a sub-standard QB?

 

That's the logic some of you are using.

 

Judge Fitz on his performance as a three year starter under Chan and Nix. I think he makes us look better than we are on offense considering the weak tackle play on both sides of the OL. Same goes for Spiller.

[John from Riverside]

I will tell you another completely unscientific meter I used this last season....

 

My son would come home from college (he plays linebacker at a local college and is transferring to San Diego State this next year)

 

So anyways my knucklehead kid comes home to toss his laundry at us and spend a little bit of time with dad watching football...and of course either the raiders or the bill games are always on (mom is raidas fan)

 

So were talking about the players and he is always saying how impressed he is with Fitzpatrick....along with being totally cool with the beard he is just impressed with the way he handles himself on the field....has control of the huddle and a calming affect on the OL before the snap.....and the way he plays with guts and how he will take off for a first down and not slide 2 yards away from getting it...he stands in the pocket on a lot of plays and takes the hit to deliver the ball......he thinks "Fitz is a stud" and he isn't even a fan of my team. He is a raiders fan and would take Fitz over anyone they have.

 

Thats how I see it to....what makes Fitz fun to watch is he has a bit of swag to him....and its not fake swag either its the type of "Im gonna lead the question is can you follow" type thing he has with these bills players. One of the reasons why I really liked Andy Dalton was he has that same "swag" to him.....would have loved to get him but I understand drafting Williams.

[JPS]

Great example of why it's hard to come on this board in the offseason. Some wahoo makes up a stat and we're supposed to pick a side on our obviously decent, but not great QB. Why don't you just morph it into a "Lee Evans is not a true #1" discussion and complete this topic for me. The Bills played about 7 different players and LT and RT and you're going to analyze the QB? Fix the wheels before you worry about the driver.

[Bangarang]

I just get so tired of seeing posts that people look up like it is the be all end all of their arguement. Do the stats take into consideration that Fitz would toss a ball to a wide reciever only to have them drop it?

 

I go with what my eyes see in the games.....and to be quite honest? I thought Fitz was fine except for the times when he made me want to pull my hair out when he dropped a ball out of his hand when he went back to pass or when he threw a bad ball or when he through an interception......but after the games I would remind myself just how little opportunities Fitz would get to redeem himself for a mistake......WE HAD TO SCORE ON NEARLY EVERY POSSESSION TO WIN A GAME........our defense was that bad. Then there was the issue of guys just falling out left and right to IR......how do you biuld any kind of continuity when you have the largest group of IR guys (or at least seemed like it) in the league

 

Then I reminded myself that the team is being biult through the draft......and we needed premium draft picks......its interesting how fate would have it that we played just well enough to stay away from Cam Newton and just well enough to be in line for Marcel....who I think is going to be a GREAT player

 

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

[RealityCheck]

The Buffalo Bills are all in on Ryan Fitzpatrick as their quarterback for the 2011 NFL season. But the writers at ProFootballFocus.com put together an interesting study in their review of the 2010 season, revealing that Ryan Fitzpatrick is among one of the worst starting quarterbacks in the league with pressure in his face.

 

http://wgr550.com/Bills--Fitzpatrick-Ranks-Poorly-Under-Pressure/9846589

 

heres the complete article:

 

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/05/16/pressure-reveals/

The entire team performed poorly under pressure all year, and I would love to see an equivalent analysis of the teams blitz pickup success rate superimposed over Fitz's relative performance. I suppose a running game is too much to ask for too.

[Doc]

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

Why just remove the Cincy game? Why not also remove his worst game, which was the 2nd Pats game? If you do, he completed 58.3% of his passes, threw for 221 yards/game and had a 19:10 TD:INT ratio, not to mention 2 fewer fumbles.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?

As Doc suggests, if you remove a game, you remove two games…the best and the worst…statistical outliers at any rate.

 

And once again (and we've gone in circles on this subject many times without resolution) this needs to be said:

 

Fitz was in the first year in the system.

 

He got fewer reps coming into the season as a result of the anointing of Trent Edwards as the starter.

 

He had a poor offensive line in front of him with a veritable revolving door at right tackle.

 

He had no tight end option to throw to.

 

His wide receiving corps consisted of one proven vet seemingly on the downside of his career (Evans), one other vet who had never had a significant season as a wide receiver (Parrish), an unproven 7th rounder (Johnson), and three undrafted rookies (Nelson, Jones, Roosevelt).

 

It's amazing to me that some posters believe that we've seen the ceiling of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I personally can't see how he won't improve in 2011.

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

Why just remove the Cincy game? Why not also remove his worst game, which was the 2nd Pats game? If you do, he completed 58.3% of his passes, threw for 221 yards/game and had a 19:10 TD:INT ratio, not to mention 2 fewer fumbles.

 

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The poster was illustrating that the Cincy game was an abnormal game, and it was greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious.

 

The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

Edited May 17, 2011 by Alphadawg7

[billsfan89]

Its not surprising. BUT most QB's aren't good with pressure. Any QB needs time to be effective put Brady or Manning on his ass a lot of the time and see how effective he will be. If the cast around Fitz was better I think his numbers under pressure would be better BUT they still would be below average.

 

Still think Fitz can take this team to success. Watch him run the offense and watch him elevate the teams play. No one is saying Fitz can be a franchise guy BUT that doesn't mean he isn't a starting caliber QB either.

[Wiz]

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The Cincy game was an abnormal game greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious. The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

Like I said before, in the 9 games following the Balt game which caused everyone to get on his band wagon, he completed just 56% of his passes, 12 TD's, with 16 turnovers, and a QB rating of 70...and that is including the Cincy game.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

You're right, Fitzpatrick sucks. We should have taken one of the five future pro bowl qb's that we could have had in the draft.

[Doc]

Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The Cincy game was an abnormal game greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious. The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.

 

Like I said before, in the 9 games following the Balt game which caused everyone to get on his band wagon, he completed just 56% of his passes, 12 TD's, with 16 turnovers, and a QB rating of 70...and that is including the Cincy game.

 

I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?

They lost Joseph, which hurt, but Cris Crocker is a journeyman talent at best and was replaced by an equal, and arguably better, FS in Ndukwe. And it's not like the Bills didn't have injury issues of their own. So again, if you want to take out the best game, you had better take out the worst.

[Orton's Arm]

The grade is poor, but some of the percentages show exactly what Fitz is/does.

 

He has a low completion percentage when facing pressure, but also has one of the lowest sack percentages on the table. Also, his interception % when facing pressure is middle of the pack compared with other QBs.

 

This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB with great intelligence.

I agree with most of this, but my conclusion about Fitz may be less optimistic than yours.

 

First, there's the question of Fitz's grade under pressure. On a scale that apparently ranged from 19 all the way down to -10, Fitz scored a -4.5 under pressure. That made him the 30th-best pressure QB of those evaluated (out of 34). His grade under pressure was 3.5 points worse than Jimmy Clausen's. Considering that Pro Football Focus graded each play individually, that grade is the single most important part of the article.

 

Fitz's INT percentage under pressure was 3.05%. Of the 33 non-Fitz QBs evaluated, only 12 had a worse interception percentage under pressure. Fitz's performance in that category is noticeably worse than a typical NFL QB.

 

However, he was the eighth-best QB in the league at avoiding a sack when under pressure; so that's clearly a point in his favor. It is also the case that he's good at getting rid of the ball quickly, making the percentage of dropbacks under pressure lower than it otherwise would have been.

 

Also of significance was Fitz's completion percentage under pressure, of 39.2%. Fitz is the third-worst QB in the league (out of the 34 examined) in that category. The second-worst QB at completing passes under pressure was Jimmy Clausen, whose completion percentage under pressure was just 0.18% lower than Fitz's. Amusingly, the worst QB in the league under pressure was Mark Sanchez. Unfortunately, Bills' fans making fun of Sanchez on that basis is like a homeless man with a shiny new shopping cart giving some other homeless man a hard time about his old and squeaky shopping cart!

 

While it is clear Fitz does some things well (such as getting rid of the ball in a hurry), the overall picture which emerged from this article was of a quarterback who's very mediocre under pressure. This confirms my opinion that Fitz is not, and never will be, a franchise QB, or anything reasonably close.

[Wayne Cubed]

I get a little confused with some arguments posters make on this board.

 

The author of this article presents an argument, then through statistical data makes a conclusion about 34 different quarterbacks. That in the world, is known as a logical argument. There is no biases there. He isn't out to just get Ryan Fitzpatrick. This is the conclusion he game up with after looking at STATISTICAL FACTS. He even goes so far as to show all of his data, rather then just make this blanket statement without providing the evidence.

 

Therefore, in a logical argument, the burden of proof now falls to the people who dismiss his claims. And proof is not "I feel" or "I see" statements. 500 years ago people "saw" a flat Earth, that didn't make it true. Again, the argument is how Ryan Fitzpatrick preforms under pressure and if you believe he preforms well under pressure(that would be the counter argument) then by all means present your case and support it.

 

All these blanket statements about stats not meaning anything is hog wash. Statistically the majority of Trent Edwards passes were under 15 yards. Do you not think that helps the opposing DC to game plan against him? Maybe just a little?

[LGB]

As Doc suggests, if you remove a game, you remove two games…the best and the worst…statistical outliers at any rate.

 

And once again (and we've gone in circles on this subject many times without resolution) this needs to be said:

 

Fitz was in the first year in the system.

 

He got fewer reps coming into the season as a result of the anointing of Trent Edwards as the starter.

 

He had a poor offensive line in front of him with a veritable revolving door at right tackle.

 

He had no tight end option to throw to.

 

His wide receiving corps consisted of one proven vet seemingly on the downside of his career (Evans), one other vet who had never had a significant season as a wide receiver (Parrish), an unproven 7th rounder (Johnson), and three undrafted rookies (Nelson, Jones, Roosevelt).

 

It's amazing to me that some posters believe that we've seen the ceiling of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I personally can't see how he won't improve in 2011.

 

I would just add that besides the questions with RT, does anyone think that the OL that was on the field most of the time (i.e. injury replacements) had any sort of continuity as an offensive unit?

 

edit: many fans wanted help on the OL. Well, it turned out there must have been more needs for the Bills on D than even Nix would admit to.

Edited May 17, 2011 by LGB

[Thoner7]

Fitz is probably the 15th - 25th best QB in the league, but I would still call him the "leagues best backup" If that makes any sense.

[Doc]

I would just add that besides the questions with RT, does anyone think that the OL that was on the field most of the time (i.e. injury replacements) had any sort of continuity as an offensive unit?

 

edit: many fans wanted help on the OL. Well, it turned out there must have been more needs for the Bills on D than even Nix would admit to.

The O-line had little continuity last year. Woods and Bell barely practiced during the off-season and training camp, and needed rest during games and during the week. RT was a revolving door almost all season long. RG became a revolving door from game 11 on. The only constant was Levitre at LG.

 

This time around, Bell and Wood are healthy going into the off-season, the RG situation will be fleshed-out before the season starts from a promising group of candidates, and ideally the same goes for RT, where the Bills added a draft pick to the mix. Of course, there's nothing you can do about injuries.

[Ghost of Rob Johnson]

I get a little confused with some arguments posters make on this board.

 

The author of this article presents an argument, then through statistical data makes a conclusion about 34 different quarterbacks. That in the world, is known as a logical argument. There is no biases there. He isn't out to just get Ryan Fitzpatrick. This is the conclusion he game up with after looking at STATISTICAL FACTS. He even goes so far as to show all of his data, rather then just make this blanket statement without providing the evidence.

 

Therefore, in a logical argument, the burden of proof now falls to the people who dismiss his claims. And proof is not "I feel" or "I see" statements. 500 years ago people "saw" a flat Earth, that didn't make it true. Again, the argument is how Ryan Fitzpatrick preforms under pressure and if you believe he preforms well under pressure(that would be the counter argument) then by all means present your case and support it.

 

All these blanket statements about stats not meaning anything is hog wash. Statistically the majority of Trent Edwards passes were under 15 yards. Do you not think that helps the opposing DC to game plan against him? Maybe just a little?

I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.

 

Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.

 

As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.

 

Fitz is probably the 15th - 25th best QB in the league

 

I think that range seems about right.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Ghost of Rob Johnson

[Doc]

I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.

 

Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.

 

As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.

 

I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.

That Fitz has a low completion percentage, sack rate, and fairly low INT percentage under pressure tells me he's throwing the ball away rather than risk a sack (+/- fumble) or INT. The question that needs to be answered is "did he miss open/obvious receivers when throwing under pressure?" It's hard to complete a pass when no one is open/quick enough.

[Lurker]

My take: he's willing to throw an incompletion instead of take a drive killing sack when the pressure is bearing down. What's wrong with this again?

Agreed.

 

Can anyone tell me the data source this guy is using? I read the article quickly, but didn't see any documentation to go with the stats.