Buffalo News: PFF Breaks Down Josh Allen's Accuracy "Issue"

[Scott7975]

3 hours ago, Maine-iac said:

I'll preface this by saying I really like Allen but that said this is the same group from last year.  Funny how the song has changed from horrible QB to horrible WR's.  Granted I thought it was horrible WR's the whole time but fans love to play to a narrative.

Me personally, I thought it was a terrible group last year as well.  

[Socal-805]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Such ignorance around here

 

 

Did you actually READ the article?

 

 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Socal-805 said:

 

 

Did you actually READ the article?

 

 

Yes I did and have commented on it extensively herein as to the difficulties in such analyses.  Some of us don't blindly take numbers someone throws out there to support a set conviction as you have done.

[thebandit27]

31 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

You sure about that?  

 

Wanna post the numbers to back it up?  

 

Because I see the difference between this season's team and last season's team as being the difference between last season's 7th-ranked +9 TO ratio and this season's 28th-ranked -8.  

 

Cleveland had the 32nd-ranked -28 last season and are 4th this season at +9.  

 

Of Cleveland's 41 total giveaways last season, Kizer had 28 of them.  22 INTs and 6 lost fumbles of 9 total fumbles.  He started 15 games.  

Of Buffalo's 31 giveaways this season, Allen has 13 of them.  11 INTs and 2 lost fumbles of 8 total fumbles.  He's started 10 games, 2/3 as many.  

 

Kizer's rate of TO was 1.9, Allen's is 1.3, but the big difference there is the recovered fumbles.  Allen's INT rate is worse than Mayfield and far worse than Jackson, his closest QB comp, and almost the same as Darnold and Rosen but both of them have more passing TDs, Darnold by over twice, and it's not because he has better WRs and RBs or even OL.  Allen ranks 29th of 33 in INT%, not good.  

 

Either way, at the same rate of recovered fumbles, which is essentially pure luck, Allen's TO rate moves to 1.5/game.  Allen has the worst TD/INT ratio of any QB in the league that has started more than a couple of games, meaning among starting QBs.  Rosen's close, but after that it's pretty distant to the next one.  

 

Either way, if you think he can continue on that path and become a franchise QB, great.  Not sure what to say, but  that's my primary point, things are going to have to change drastically in that way in order for Allen to become a franchise QB.  I understand that you disagree.  

 

On a side note I will point out that the Bills under McBeane have not been able to win games unless they generate TOs.  Under McBeane they've only won twice when they didn't finish the game with a positive TO margin. 

 

They won with a neutral +/-0 against Detroit and then only at -2 vs. Indy in last year's snow game. 

When they finish at +4 they're 1-0.

When the finish at +3 they're 3-0.

When they finish at +2 they're 5-1. 

When they finish at +1 they're 3-1. 

When they finish at +/-0 they're 1-5. 

When they finish at -1 they're 0-3. 

When they finish at -2 they're 0-5. 

When they finish at -3 or worse they're 0-4.  

 

Last season Taylor had just over half the total TOs that Allen's had over a full season.  The 0-16 Browns actually out-played us on average last seaason, the only significant difference was us having a +9 and them having a -28.  Imagine if last season we had the -8 we have this season.  You still think we've have finished 9-7?  I'm thinking more like 2-14 under those circumstances.  Say what we want about Taylor, but scoring was greater and TOs didn't happen much.  

 

Relying on TOs to win games is hardly a way to build a competitive team.  

 

Happy New Year!  

 

Yes...and I don't need to write a novella to do so  

 

Allen's TD:TO ratio is 13:19 and he's 4-6 as a starter

 

Kizer's TD:TO ratio was 16:31 and he was 0-15 as a starter 

 

Not. Even. Close.

 

Happy New Year to you as well

Edited December 30, 2018 by thebandit27

[Straight Hucklebuck]

1 minute ago, Socal-805 said:

 

 

Did you actually READ the article?

 

 

Statistical numbers are presented. But somehow the spin always has to be positive. 

 

The supporting cast is poor. But we did make the same excuses about Trent Edwards. None of these Drought ex-QBs did anything when they went to other teams outside of Fitzpatrick’s brief flurries. 

 

The more excuses you have to make about a quarterback, the more it’s proof that he is not the guy. 

 

 

[Ronin]

1 hour ago, LSHMEAB said:

That's exactly where I'm at. The ridiculous plays he's able to make combined with a league that caters to QB's have given me the slightest bit of hope. I use the Trubisky model quite a bit because I personally hated him as a prospect and am frankly a little surprised that he's been able to have some success. I still don't think he's particularly good, but he's effective enough. We all WANT Allen to succeed, but as you've clearly demonstrated, he'd be defying some serious statistical odds.

 

BTW, I just reread that piece, it's excellent, his closing paragraph, the one that follows the one that I cited, also sums it up nicely.  

 

There is no comfort in betting on a quarterback prospect who does not consistently play to his skill set. Football Outsiders' own QBASE system projected Allen with more than a 60 percent chance to bust, due in large part to his inconsistent play breeding poor results on the stat sheet. Drafting Josh Allen is a commitment to developing a skill set that has yet to prove it can develop and does not have any tangible indicators to hint toward success. The gamble on Allen is too steep a price for the slim potential of a payoff.

 

That's where I'm at, and if you want a QB like that you don't make a trade like we got in the rarest of draft opportunities to put all your eggs in one basket.  

 

As well, I disagree entirely on the whole "their/our guy" thing.  A good coach should be able to coach any number of QBs and not simply one that appeals to them, particularly not one of a "kid in a candy shop" variety where he's flashy but simply doesn't get results because his fundamentals are so far below the norm that he becomes a huge project.  

 

I mean think of what else we could  have done by drafting Edmunds with our 12th and then four picks that we otherwise used to get Allen to get some OL and a WR, and maybe even a RB to replace Shady, instead.  

 

Then get a QB This year when there aren't a half-dozen teams with a dire need in that spot.  But alas, that first entails having a big-picture draft not to mention team-building strategy.  McBeane behave like Whaley in this regard, going for the flashiest shiniest thing, again, kid-in-a-candy-shop.  

 

 

 

Edited December 30, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[Socal-805]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Yes I did and have commented on it extensively herein as to the difficulties in such analyses.  Some of us don't blindly take numbers someone throws out there to support a set conviction as you have done.

 

Ahh, OK.  NOW I understand.  

 

PFF simply throwing numbers out there.  Got it.

 

And I'm blind.

 

 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Statistical numbers are presented. But somehow the spin always has to be positive. 

 

The supporting cast is poor. But we did make the same excuses about Trent Edwards. None of these Drought ex-QBs did anything when they went to other teams outside of Fitzpatrick’s brief flurries. 

 

The more excuses you have to make about a quarterback, the more it’s proof that he is not the guy. 

 

 

Why don't you for once stop with your nonsense?  No one is saying the kid has arrived.  He obviously has more to learn and more to improve on, and any cursory view of posts around here will show that.  What people do see though is the potential to become the guy.

 

When the only thing you can do is to deliberately lie about what people say it shows your ignorance.

Just now, Socal-805 said:

 

Ahh, OK.  NOW I understand.  

 

PFF simply throwing numbers out there.  Got it.

 

And I'm blind.

 

 

 

 

Yes.  Go back and read what I and others have discussed about the difficulties in such analyses.  But you won't because you have what is called confirmation bias.  You want Allen to fail therefore anything that says he will you suck up to and anything that challenges it you won't read.  Just as well; you likely wouldn't be able to understand it anyway.

[Socal-805]

6 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Statistical numbers are presented. But somehow the spin always has to be positive. 

 

The supporting cast is poor. But we did make the same excuses about Trent Edwards. None of these Drought ex-QBs did anything when they went to other teams outside of Fitzpatrick’s brief flurries. 

 

The more excuses you have to make about a quarterback, the more it’s proof that he is not the guy. 

 

 

 

 

Well stated.

 

Re: Allen -  at least he's consistently inaccurate!  

 

 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Why don't you for once stop with your nonsense?  No one is saying the kid has arrived.  He obviously has more to learn and more to improve on, and any cursory view of posts around here will show that.  What people do see though is the potential to become the guy.

 

When the only thing you can do is to deliberately lie about what people say it shows your ignorance.

There have been numerous comments/members on this board stating the Bills have found their QB. You see all the instant defending that comes in when “negative” stories are presented about Allen. 

 

He should get 2019 to prove himself, along with this Coaching staff and FO. But Allen has not been good this year. He gets the ball into the end-zone 1.3x per game on average. The team scores 15 ppg and are bottom 3 in passing. 

 

Allen has been the same QB as he was in Wyoming. This staff is going to try and fix accuracy issues this off-season, and try to Coach him to read a defense.

 

The Bills drafted a talented project and that’s who he’s played like this season. 

Edited December 30, 2018 by Straight Hucklebuck

[Socal-805]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Why don't you for once stop with your nonsense?  No one is saying the kid has arrived.  He obviously has more to learn and more to improve on, and any cursory view of posts around here will show that.  What people do see though is the potential to become the guy.

 

When the only thing you can do is to deliberately lie about what people say it shows your ignorance.

 

 

... And STOP calling everyone who disagrees with you ignorant.

 

 

[Ronin]

11 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Yes...and I don't need to write a novella to do so  

 

Allen's TD:TO ratio is 13:19 and he's 4-6 as a starter

 

Kizer's TD:TO ratio was 16:31 and he was 0-15 as a starter 

 

Not. Even. Close.

 

Happy New Year to you as well

 

Thanks!  But 4+6 = 10 < 15.  

 

Averages my man, averages.  

 

You said that Allen's TO ratio wasn't even close,  I can go get the quote.  

 

It is relatively close when you factor in the pure luck in recovering 6 of 8 fumbles contrasted with recovering only 3 of 9.  Either way, to paint it as a non-factor like you're trying to do is ridiculous.  

 

Either way, Allen is bottom-dwelling and your argument appears to be that TOs/giveaways don't matter when I've proven to you that this team under McBeane in particular, simply can't win games unless they win the TO margin battle, even then, a positive TO margin the team wins only 65% of its games when they have a neutral or better TO margin.  

 

When they have a neutral or negative TO margin it's nearly assured that they'll lose, having lost 16 of 18 then.  They've won only 1 of 12, less than 10%, when it's negative.  

Edited December 30, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Socal-805 said:

 

 

... And STOP calling everyone who disagrees with you ignorant.

 

 

Go back and read then.  It's ignorant to argue when you have not even read what I and others have written about the potential problems with the PFF analysis.

[nedboy7]

3 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

The team is 5 - 10 and with the talent on offense, it was never going to be a competitive team. If you develop a franchise qb, you have the most important piece in being a long-term playoff team. So you think the fan base is irrational to be caring more about qb potential this year?

 

Yes I do.  You watching the game? 

It’s never about one player. 

3 hours ago, Doc said:

 

 

LOL!   If the best you can come up with is that "it's all Allen's fault because the offense is the same as last year," you shouldn't even bother talking. 

 

 

Not by you at least. 

 

I’m teaching an ant calculus. It’s easier. 

Edited December 30, 2018 by nedboy7

[VW82]

3 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Yes I did and have commented on it extensively herein as to the difficulties in such analyses.  Some of us don't blindly take numbers someone throws out there to support a set conviction as you have done.

 

Did you see the ESPN Stats & Info article I posted a few pages back? They came to a similar conclusion wrt his rate of off target throws. Interestingly, the numbers were eerily similar to my 20% theory from charting those three games (though I was including bad decisions as well; It’s unclear whether ESPN did). 

 

I thought he had numerous inaccurate throws in today’s game as well. On the whole he was obviously quite good. I’m excited to see how he progresses in year two.

[HappyDays]

On 12/29/2018 at 1:31 PM, HappyDays said:

IMO the reasons for that are, in order, Allen not reading the field properly, his surrounding cast, and then his accuracy. And I consider his accuracy well below the other two problems.

 

@jrober38 I had to come back to this after today's game. Allen was arguably less accurate today than usual. He sailed a few passes and his ball placement was off. But he finished with a 65.4% completion and a 114.9 passer rating. Why? Because he made good reads and his receivers caught the ball. Inaccuracy slightly worse but the other issues I listed were much better and it showed on the stat sheet. I think we can live with Allen's inconsistent accuracy as long as his positive traits are on as much as they were today.

[thebandit27]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

@jrober38 I had to come back to this after today's game. Allen was arguably less accurate today than usual. He sailed a few passes and his ball placement was off. But he finished with a 65.4% completion and a 114.9 passer rating. Why? Because he made good reads and his receivers caught the ball. Inaccuracy slightly worse but the other issues I listed were much better and it showed on the stat sheet. I think we can live with Allen's inconsistent accuracy as long as his positive traits are on as much as they were today.

 

lOoKeD tHe sAmE aS hE dId aT wYoMiNg

[Jrb1979]

The way he played today is the way they should build the offense around him.  Stop making him be a pocket passer. He is at his best when he runs around and is running the ball. He is never going to be a Tom Brady or Drew Brees. Nothing wrong with him playing like Vick or RG3 as that is his strength. 

[PearlHowardman]

10 minutes ago, VW82 said:

I thought he had numerous inaccurate throws in today’s game as well. On the whole he was obviously quite good. I’m excited to see how he progresses in year two.

 

If the Buffalo Bills get to play the Miami Dolphins at home for 18 games next year we can expect to see decent progress with JA. Otherwise,...

 

[DuckyBoys]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

@jrober38 I had to come back to this after today's game. Allen was arguably less accurate today than usual. He sailed a few passes and his ball placement was off. But he finished with a 65.4% completion and a 114.9 passer rating. Why? Because he made good reads and his receivers caught the ball. Inaccuracy slightly worse but the other issues I listed were much better and it showed on the stat sheet. I think we can live with Allen's inconsistent accuracy as long as his positive traits are on as much as they were today.

receivers probably played their best game today  Still basically zero rushing and the Bills put up 42 pts  Allen and Zay finish off on a high note and hopefully more to come in 2019